6 comments

• Comment Link Sunday, 13 October 2024 14:32 posted by ELAINE HILES

  I understood that this battery storage proposal had been rejected. What a waste of tax payers money! How much did these leaflets cost? How many trees had to be cut down. Honestly, NO NO NO I do not want this energy source anywhere near me. Have you consulted the epileptic society the pylons are strategically placed on roads not near residential buildings and if they are, I have heard of many instances where the health of the family living nearby is seriously affected. The health implications are catastrophic if you propose a megastore. This eco nonsense has to be stopped. I suggest you employ a few people to cut the grass and overhanging trees and bushes and make it safer to drive on the roads. NO NO NO ABSOLUTELY NO.
• Comment Link Saturday, 12 October 2024 18:06 posted by Mr Jamie pittman

  We have already lost 100 acres of green belt to the studios,and a French recycling centre in that area,and a mexican outfit taking gravel extraction ,shepperton is being over run and swamped by industrial development.storage batteries can be very dangerous to our community by way of pollution.what shepperton needs is a bank and a toilet for the locals,not a business that may fall into foreign hands again, this area is made up of villages and should stay that way. I can’t even believe spelthorne may consider more industrial development unless they are desperate for the business rates..answer we don’t want or need this it will not benefit or community.
• Comment Link Sunday, 06 October 2024 08:21 posted by David Smith

  I am shocked to see this back again and much much bigger. This type of infrastructure solution needs to be in an area not at all close to residential areas. We already have the open furnace now there are proposals to flood the area with a huge number of very large battery containers, this is very close to several residential areas.
  What risk does it put these residents in ?
  What will it do to the value of the housing stock in the local area ? and what compensation will be available.
  How are we going to manager the traffic, the local roads are gridlocked most days for hours especially around rush hour and school times.
  This sort of infrastructure should have specially designed areas for it, away from residential areas and probably out of sight in excavated areas prepared especially for this just plonking them on open fields alongside residential areas seems irresponsible, dangerous and incompetent.
  I have not have enough knowledge to enter into environmental issues but on the face of it it does not sit well with me on this either.
• Comment Link Thursday, 03 October 2024 08:41 posted by Kay Taylor

  I was under the impression that the original plans hadn't gone through ! Such a relief !! Then Thursday 28th September I got a leaflet through the door showing plans far worse than the original! They want to make it much bigger than original plans so it runs along side the eco park stretching from the railway line to the M3!!! That being bad enough if they made a slip road off M3 for the plan would be bad enough but an awful lot better for the residents in the area of Charlton Lane they want to use the same entrance but turning right and building road alone the railway line which runs behind residential houses Hawthorn Way!!! We were promised that the land between the eco park and railway line would be landscaped! Now they want to build a road!! It is already a flood area you cant access that way without going through flood water ! I walked over the railway bridge to check out ! The drainage runs really fast now into ditches next to bridge !!! Which was not built for the size of lorries or the amount of lorries using it now!! I walked down to where they want to run the road!! Met some construction workers who couldnt park their van where they were supposed to because of the flood water!!! There is also a lake on the site which never existed because of the excess water!!! Which is actually beautiful because we now have swans there!! But where is all the excess water go when they have to build roads and this new construction!! Upper Halliford suffers road flooding bad enough!! The entrance to houses just before windmill bridge just need slightest rain and it floods!! The estate I live on the roads all floods and our garden are now really waterlogged!! Last winter was awful!! The eco park has been bad enough all that concrete meaning less drainage! The plans for this new construction match the size of eco park!! Where is the water going to go!!! Plus!!! Speaking to the construction workers they couldn't believe that anyone could even think of building a lithium plant any where near the eco park which has an open furnace!!! Lithium is highly flammable and let's off highly toxic fumes!!! Which would not only effect upper halliford but M3 Sunbury and Charlton village!!! It's got to be stopped!!! That's without the disruption traffic down such a small road charlton lane !!
• Comment Link Tuesday, 01 October 2024 17:42 posted by John Douglass

  Battery Energy Storage System Planning Application No. 24/01112/FUL
  Date: 1/10/24
  I have received notification that a further planning application for the construction and operation of a Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) reference: 24/0111s/FUL has been received by Spelthorne Council. Comments are to be received by 16th October.
  The facility is to be located next to the “Eco-Park” within a densely populated residential area.
  I would like to raise awareness of the significant hazards of locating such a facility within a residential area. The following two quotations serve to illustrate the issues; firstly an extract from Keighley News relating to the proposed “Dobby Rocks” application for a BESS (19th August, 2024) and secondly from Baker Risk management consultants who specialise in BESS technology.
  
  Extract from Keighley News:
  Opposition to plans for Cullingworth battery storage site:
  "Amberside Energy Ltd is behind the scheme, proposed for green belt land to the south-east of Cullingworth.
  The 200-megawatts system would be connected to the electricity grid via an underground cable, linking up to Bradford West substation.
  According to the company, the project – known as Dobby Rocks – would "enhance grid resilience against outages and disruptions", with the capacity to store enough energy to power around 650,000 homes for two hours.
  ………..
  A similar battery energy storage system (BESS) site in Liverpool set on fire four years ago, and took 5.5 million gallons of water and 59 hours to extinguish. The site at Liverpool had only four containers, which is a fraction of the size of the proposed installation at Dobby Rocks, and was not situated between two residential developments within a few metres of a landfill site discharging methane gas."
  Campaigners are backed by Bingley Rural district councillor Paul Sullivan, who says it would be "sheer folly" to locate the installation near homes.
  He adds: "These batteries have a proven track record of flammability.
  Therefore it is sheer folly to have them anywhere near families – in this case hundreds of them – especially with the added hazard of being within spitting distance of methane pipes emitting from a disused tip!
  The proposed site is about two-and-a-half miles from Bradford West substation, which it is alleged to be 'near', and there's virtually nothing but fields there. If necessary, the council should compulsorily purchase a field or two at the furthest point from any housing. We are not Luddites or NIMBYs, so if our 'green and pleasant ward' must have these batteries for the supposed greater good, we absolutely insist on them being nowhere near people."
  
  Extract from Baker Risk management consultants (experts in the field of BESS technology):
  “The BESS industry is still in its infancy, and policy creation is ongoing.
  An important concept when talking about lithium-ion batteries and their associated risks is “thermal runaway.” Physical damage to a lithium-ion battery cell, degradation due to extreme temperatures, ageing, or poor battery maintenance are among the many potential causes of thermal runaway. Once triggered, thermal runaway is a chain reaction within the battery that leads to an uncontrollable, self-heating state that can result in a violent ejection of gas, shrapnel, smoke, fire,
  Although any industrial fire is bad, lithium-ion battery fires are especially dangerous and possess unique attributes that make them very difficult to extinguish
  Due to the risk of thermal runaway and the combustible gases this process generates, fires and explosions should be viewed as entirely possible and planned for appropriately".
  (end of quotations)
  
  The principle of the system is that the BESS would connect to the National Grid and serve to store electrical energy in times of surplus and re-distribute when supply is depleted. However, given that this facility connects to a National Grid there is no need to locate this facility in an urban area, it could just as easily connect to the grid in unpopulated areas well away from residential properties to fulfil the same function. Furthermore, being connected to the National Grid it cannot be argued that there is any “local benefit”. The only apparent driving force is that the developers have a financial interest in locating the facility where it is proposed.
  There is no need to subject residents of Charlton and Halliford to both the risks associated with high energy storage and the overindustrialisation of an area which has already suffered from overdevelopment by the Eco-Park.
  Given the above opinion from Baker Risk consultants, an independent and expert source, and the above case history it would be foolhardy and dangerous in the extreme to locate such a facility next to residential properties. I would therefore urge readers to raise objection to this application on grounds of unacceptable risk to public safety.
• Comment Link Sunday, 29 September 2024 08:44 posted by Julia Gilson

  I have just come back from holiday to a letter saying they have put in another planning application for the battery storage system (BESS( at the same site!)
  Can we just ask them to refer to previous objections or do we have to redo them? Clearly they are relying on protest fatigue…