Developers of Northampton power plant call campaign group claims '˜irresponsible and wild'

Power plant developers looking to build a £120 million facility in Northampton have published a set of 'frequently asked questions' they claim dispels myths about the site.

Tuesday, 24th May 2016, 6:30 am
New artist's impressions of the proposed power plant in St James have been revealed, complete with an education centre.

The FAQs published by Rolton Kilbride on its website yesterday cover a range of queries from the overall look of the building - described by campaigners as “monstrous” - to the emissions coming out of the smokestack.

Project spokesman for the firm Ian Crummack, said Rolton took the move after a recent backlash against the plans, which has seen campaigners question the size of the building, its St James location and what some feel is the danger it poses to public health.

Mr Crummack said: “We understand that some members of the local community have concerns about this proposed facility and we wanted to respond.

Sign up to our daily newsletter

The i newsletter cut through the noise

New artist's impressions of the planned power plant in St James have been released.

“We’d like to help them access factual and correct information about both the facility itself and the technology that would be used here.

“We’d like to reassure local residents and businesses that every element of our proposal from air quality to traffic and technology is supported by scientific evidence and will be rigorously examined in the planning process.”

Mr Crummack went on to say there had been “irresponsible and wild claims about the facility” made by campaign groups such as No Monster Incinerator In St James.

Though several members of the St James community have voiced concerns over the potentially harmful dioxins and furans created by similar plants.

New artist's impressions of the planned power plant in St James have been released.

No Monster Incinerator In St James had also questioned the safety of the plant so close to an oil storage depot.

In terms of the dioxins and furans, the Rolton website responds: “The burning or gasification of residual waste in an energy from waste (EfW) plant makes only a very small contribution to existing background levels of dioxins in our environment.

“Data demonstrates that implementation of stringent regulations for EfW (Energy from Waste) facilities in the EU have resulted in over a 99 per cent reduction in dioxin emissions compared to emissions in 1990.”

While traces of mercury will be emitted form the smokestacks, Rolton says these will not be above the amounts already found in the “ambient air”.

It also re-asserts claims the site could not “explode” or be a significant fire risk.

However, the FAQs do concede that on cold days a plume will be visible coming from the smokestacks, which it says will be condensed water vapour rather than “smoke”.

For see the FAQs in full head to

What do you think? Does these “frequently asked questions” answer your queries about the power plant?