Biomass plants throughout scotland

[AlanM]

TWO biomass plants are due to be built in Caithness within the next 12 to 18 months at a cost of £35 million, it was confirmed yesterday.

The combined heat and power plants will be constructed at Georgemas and Forss as part of a £300m investment package which has been launched by London-based private equity firm Invicta Capital.

http://www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/7477/_A335m_scheme_to_give_jobs_boost.html

Alan

[dhaslam]

Must be quite a job connecting the hot water pipes into existing houses.  A lot easier in  new developments and the facility really should be compulsary  for new housing estates.   Biomass CHP  or communal seasonal storage of solar heat  would have massive savings in use of fossil fuels. 

[renewablejohn]

Must be quite a job connecting the hot water pipes into existing houses.  A lot easier in  new developments and the facility really should be compulsary  for new housing estates.   Biomass CHP  or communal seasonal storage of solar heat  would have massive savings in use of fossil fuels. 

Seems to have a big budget at £35m as the CHP plants should cost no more than £15m allowing £20m to cover district heating installation. Its a pity that they have not gone the extra step and combined it with solar but then Scotland is not renown for the number of sunny days.

Hope he has more joy with funding then we have had for a project one tenth of this size.

[sleepybubble]

but then Scotland is not renown for the number of sunny days.

says who?

It seems these two are the start in a program involving a further 7 plants to be constructed across the North of Scotland, with plans to encourage local fuel growth. Interesting that the plant is also sited at a railway line to ensure the fuel is brought in using an 'enviromentally friendly' method. ie. not trucks.

Seems somebody has got their forward thinking cap on, in this privately funded endevour.

[dhaslam]

It would be very surprising if  transport by rail  used less energy.    Trains are much heavier  and  also cannot drive either to the point of pickup or the point of delivery and  so still need   trucks and machinery to load and offload.         

[sleepybubble]

It would be very surprising if  transport by rail  used less energy.    Trains are much heavier  and  also cannot drive either to the point of pickup or the point of delivery and  so still need   trucks and machinery to load and offload.         

if however it ensures the commercial viability of a train line which is also be utilised for people transport then the possibilities on cutting down on road transport are quite large. I am of course making an assumption that rail freight has got to be cheaper, without checking any figures.

[djh]

It would be very surprising if  transport by rail  used less energy.    Trains are much heavier  and  also cannot drive either to the point of pickup or the point of delivery and  so still need   trucks and machinery to load and offload.         

I don't think weight is especially important for freight is it? Air drag is much bigger then rolling resistance, I believe. And I think it is quite common for both power stations and fuel sources (coal mines) to have their own rail terminus.

But horse-drawn canal barges are probably better than trains or trucks 

[renewablejohn]

But horse-drawn canal barges are probably better than trains or trucks 

We have quoted to supply a proposed CHP plant in Burnley using the Leeds Liverpool canal but as normal it was scuppered by greed this time by British Waterways frieght charges.

[tony.]

in the past i have worked on lots of houses that had communal heating systems, while rewiring the pipes were removed from each property as they were clad in asbestos, the pipes ran the the length of the street under all the floorboards of each house, dont  know what they supplied as the tenants were decanted during the work, it would have been nice to talk to a few of the older tenants to see if they knew!

TONY