logo
#

Latest news with #TerryJermy

British Sugar given £7.5m to cut carbon emissions at Wissington site
British Sugar given £7.5m to cut carbon emissions at Wissington site

BBC News

time4 days ago

  • Business
  • BBC News

British Sugar given £7.5m to cut carbon emissions at Wissington site

British Sugar has been given £7.5m in funding to help overhaul crop drying processes with the aim of cutting carbon emissions by 25%. The company, which operates a factory in Wissington, Norfolk, plans to use the money to install emission-cutting technology including heat pumps and carbon capture. The government funding is part of a £37m project to revolutionise the on-site drying process with gas dryers replaced by steam dryers to save 193,000 MWh a year in energy usage. Terry Jermy, Labour MP for South West Norfolk, said: "This is excellent news as British Sugar is a pillar of our country and region with regards to production and innovation." The company needs to clean, shred, boil and process the beet crop into different grades of sugar for food and confectionary manufacturers. Phil McNaughton, head of decarbonisation at British Sugar, said the project would "not be possible" without the funding. He said the change was a "significant milestone" in the company's aim of achieving a net zero operation."We look forward to working together with the government in the future to utilise new technologies and continue decarbonising our operations."In recent years British Sugar has also invested in an evaporation plant at the Wissington factory. It was awarded the money as part of the Industrial Energy Transformation Fund. The government hopes the investment will help to cut carbon emissions and improve the efficiency of operations while supporting local jobs and economic growth. Follow Norfolk news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.

RAF base investigated over toxic chemical fears
RAF base investigated over toxic chemical fears

Yahoo

time28-04-2025

  • Health
  • Yahoo

RAF base investigated over toxic chemical fears

An RAF base is under investigation over fears toxic "forever chemicals" could be leaching into nearby drinking water sources and nature sites. RAF Marham in Norfolk is among three locations facing a Ministry of Defence (MoD) probe into whether PFAS - a group of synthetic chemicals - was leaking into the environment. The base near King's Lynn was identified as a high-risk pollution threat by the Environment Agency (EA), according to the Local Democracy Reporting Service. However, Anglian Water said there had been no breaches in drinking water. MP Terry Jermy said: "This is a matter that should be taken with the utmost concern and severity, and I fully expect the government to take action." RAF Marham is close to drinking water safeguard zones and several protected nature reserves. PFAS are known as "forever chemicals" because they can take thousands of years to break down. They have been linked to serious health conditions and major environmental harm. PFAS have been found in some firefighting foams, which were used extensively at military bases for decades – including at RAF Marham. Certain forever chemicals are banned from firefighting foam, with a fuller ban expected by 2030. An investigation by Watershed and the Guardian revealed high levels of PFAS in drinking water sources near several RAF bases, including at RAF Mildenhall in Suffolk. Jermy, Labour MP for South West Norfolk, said: "This is a historic issue that clearly needs an immediate and thorough inquiry. "If nothing is done to tackle forever chemicals, generations of communities' health, environment and economy will suffer as a result." A government spokeswoman insisted there was no evidence that public drinking water contained unsafe levels of PFAS. The official added that "MOD investigations remain ongoing" and the government is working with the EA to assess its sites. An EA spokesman said: "The global science on PFAS is evolving rapidly and we are undertaking a multi-year programme to better understand sources of PFAS pollution in England." Anglian Water is responsible for detecting PFAS in drinking water said to date, there had been no breaches. The firm has joined other water companies in urging the government to take action to stop PFAS from being used in manufacturing processes. "Currently, there is no ban or restriction," the spokeswoman said, adding: "It cannot be eradicated by water treatment." Follow Norfolk news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X. RAF Marham stealth jets to police Nato skies 'Forever chemicals' contaminated water supply Report recommends blood treatment over toxic water row

RAF Marham investigated over toxic chemical fears
RAF Marham investigated over toxic chemical fears

BBC News

time28-04-2025

  • Health
  • BBC News

RAF Marham investigated over toxic chemical fears

An RAF base is under investigation over fears toxic "forever chemicals" could be leaching into nearby drinking water sources and nature Marham in Norfolk is among three locations facing a Ministry of Defence (MOD) probe into whether PFAS - a group of synthetic chemicals - was leaking into the base near King's Lynn was identified as a high-risk pollution threat by the Environment Agency (EA), according to the Local Democracy Reporting Anglian Water said there had been no breaches in drinking water. MP Terry Jermy said: "This is a matter that should be taken with the utmost concern and severity, and I fully expect the government to take action." RAF Marham is close to drinking water safeguard zones and several protected nature are known as "forever chemicals" because they can take thousands of years to break down. They have been linked to serious health conditions and major environmental have been found in some firefighting foams, which were used extensively at military bases for decades – including at RAF forever chemicals are banned from firefighting foam, with a fuller ban expected by investigation by Watershed and the Guardian revealed high levels of PFAS in drinking water sources near several RAF bases, including at RAF Mildenhall in Suffolk. Jermy, Labour MP for South West Norfolk, said: "This is a historic issue that clearly needs an immediate and thorough inquiry."If nothing is done to tackle forever chemicals, generations of communities' health, environment and economy will suffer as a result." A government spokeswoman insisted there was no evidence that public drinking water contained unsafe levels of official added that "MOD investigations remain ongoing" and the government is working with the EA to assess its EA spokesman said: "The global science on PFAS is evolving rapidly and we are undertaking a multi-year programme to better understand sources of PFAS pollution in England."Anglian Water is responsible for detecting PFAS in drinking water said to date, there had been no firm has joined other water companies in urging the government to take action to stop PFAS from being used in manufacturing processes."Currently, there is no ban or restriction," the spokeswoman said, adding: "It cannot be eradicated by water treatment." Follow Norfolk news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.

Plan for Norfolk megafarm rejected by councillors over environmental concerns
Plan for Norfolk megafarm rejected by councillors over environmental concerns

The Guardian

time03-04-2025

  • Business
  • The Guardian

Plan for Norfolk megafarm rejected by councillors over environmental concerns

A megafarm which would have produced almost one million chickens and pigs at any one time has been blocked by councillors in Norfolk over climate change and environmental concerns. Councillors on King's Lynn and West Norfolk borough council unanimously rejected an application to build what would have been one of the largest industrial poultry and pig units in Europe. More than 12,000 objections were lodged against the farm near the villages of Methwold and Feltwell, and 42,000 people signed a petition against it. Objections came from a local campaign group, NGOs including WWF, Sustain, FeedBack, and the RSPB, as well as the new Labour MP for South West Norfolk, Terry Jermy, and five parish councils. Jermy told the planning meeting on Thursday the intensive farm would threaten local jobs at established farms and businesses, including the vegetarian food giant Quorn, which has a manufacturing site in Methwold. Jake White, head of legal advocacy at WWF UK, told councillors the NGO estimated that the factory farm's two sites would produce almost 90,000 tonnes of CO2 per year. Over a 20-year life span the greenhouse gas emissions from the industrial style farms would be more than 1m tonnes, he said. Cranswick plc, which provides chicken and poultry to leading British supermarkets, wants to build one of the UK's largest industrial farms by expanding an existing site to rear 870,000 chickens and 14,000 pigs at any one time. In a briefing document submitted in the days before the planning meeting, the company said it wanted to modernise for a growing market, creating more British food to higher welfare standards through the redevelopment of existing farms. King's Lynn and West Norfolk borough council was recommended to reject the application on ecology and climate change grounds by its officers. In a 200-page report, planning officers said the applicant 'fails to demonstrate that the development would not result in significant adverse effects on [environmentally] protected sites'. There was also 'insufficient environmental information to enable the council to reach a view' on its impact on the environment and climate change, the report added. A council lawyer said the company had not provided information on all the likely carbon emissions from the industrial farm and it would be unlawful for councillors to approve the application. There are also concerns about air pollution and the impact on a water depleted area. The Environmental Law Foundation said the farm would need more water than its abstraction licence allowed. Cranswick said the new site was needed to keep up with demand from supermarkets. Barry Lock, managing director for Cranswick in East Anglia, denied claims that the company had plans to export poultry and pork. He said 96% of the food they produce was for British customers. Lock cited food security and increased jobs for people. He said approving the megafarm would reduce carbon emissions because it would reduce the need for imports of meat from abroad.

Planning permission for Norfolk traveller site refused by council
Planning permission for Norfolk traveller site refused by council

BBC News

time18-03-2025

  • BBC News

Planning permission for Norfolk traveller site refused by council

Planning permission for a new Gypsy and traveller site in a county has been refused by a council. King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council turned down the proposed development on Station Road, West Dereham, Norfolk, which would have created space for 10 static caravans and 10 touring applicant said the scheme would make a "valuable contribution" to the identified need for more Gypsy and traveller pitches in the Friday the authority ruled the density of the development would cause harm to the area's "rural locality". More than 100 objections were recorded against the plan, with concerns raised over the scale of the site and increased traffic. Among those opposing the development was Terry Jermy, the Labour MP for South West Norfolk, and West Dereham Parish Council. Some objectors raised that planning permission for a similar scheme had been made in 2024 and was turned down. Rural location The King's Lynn Internal Drainage Board opposed the development because of concerns over how waste water generated from the site would be managed. The agent for the applicant, SJM Planning, said the risk of flooding on the site was "low" and that the land was not located within an environmentally sensitive area. King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council previously identified a need for 100 new pitches for Gypsy and travellers, 76 of those are expected to be needed in the next five years. SJM Planning said the site was within three miles of a number of schools and that road access to nearby towns was good via the A10 and A134. The council's planners raised concerns about where residents of the site would access schools, doctors and employment opportunities. The authority said planning permission was refused on the grounds that the area was very rural with a "clear lack of services and infrastructure within the locality".The scale of the site was also described as "unduly prominent, intense and incongruous" and if approved would be "causing harm to the environment". Follow Norfolk news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store