What makes building fixed plant at Rockbeare economic now?

In Aggregate Industries' 2010 planning application to process sand and gravel from Venn Ottery and Marshbroadmoor at Blackhill, it claimed that to provide fixed plant at Rockbeare for the combined 1.8 million tonnes "would be uneconomical in terms of the investment required".

It now seems unlikely that AI would be able to use Blackhill to process material from any future quarry at Straitgate. And since fixed plant cannot be sited at Straitgate, this now only leaves Rockbeare. But with the recoverable resource no greater than 2.3Mt, and much less allowing for realistic constraints, how can it be economic for AI to build plant at Rockbeare now, when it wasn't in 2010 for 1.8Mt?

Is it because Ottery St Mary is to have the privilege of becoming AI's centre for sand and gravel production for decades to come? Or is it that AI was not being entirely straight with DCC in 2010, when it obviously suited them to haul material across Woodbury Common? If the former, then local people deserve to be informed by AI of its long-term ambitions for their environment. If the latter, then how can people be expected to trust what AI says next time in any application to quarry Straitgate Farm?

What if aggregate could be manufactured instead - using 98% waste?

Now it can. Novagg, "hailed as the world’s greenest lightweight aggregate", is made using unsorted mixed coloured waste glass combined with other industrial waste. Developed in collaboration with Imperial College, "work is now under way with several multi-national companies to put Novagg on the commercial stage in a bid to become the global ‘green’ construction material of choice".

This is just the sort of advance that makes forecasting aggregate shortfalls over the next 20 years so uncertain, and will in time reduce the need for the sort of quarry AI is planning at Straitgate Farm.

Of course, AI will know all about these advances. It will know that this is the way its industry has to move. It will know that consuming farmland on this ever more populated island is not sustainable. And, as if to prove as much, in 2010 AI bought a majority stake in a company using fly ash to make lightweight aggregate. Lytag "provides an excellent alternative to natural, quarried aggregate, being strong, light and consistent". AI's then CEO (now Chairman) said "as modern construction continues to evolve, fly-ash and Lytag are increasingly being used and specified for a range of products and projects". A new "state of the art facility" next to Drax Power Station will be finished this summer and will "displace the need for 400,000 tonnes a year of newly quarried aggregates".

So, DCC's Minerals Plan to 2031 should acknowledge the advances being made in construction materials and the long term decline of sand and gravel, not allocate more and more land for quarrying. Products such as Novagg and Lytag reduce the need for aggregate extraction, divert material from landfill and preserve the natural landscape - to not use them more widely would appear a no-brainer.

Starlings - 1000s of them

Jeff Bevan

Starling numbers have declined, so much so that the RSPB has put the species on their "red list". But a new habitat has come to the rescue. The RSPB claims "quarries really are providing a refuge and important over-wintering habitats for this familiar yet struggling bird, up and down the country". "Always looking to exploit new areas, starlings, along with other wildlife, are wising-up to the benefits that both active and restored quarries can provide".

It is reported that starlings frequent Gill Mill Quarry in Oxfordshire in their thousands. There are 20,000 at another quarry in Nottinghamshire, 10,000 at a quarry in Yorkshire, and 10,000 at Aggregate Industries’ Warmwell quarry in Dorset. But also "quarries continue to be a 'home of choice' for birds of prey", and nearer to home it is established that gulls love to visit Blackhill Quarry.

Which is all good news for starlings and other birds, and plays to the nature loving facade that quarry companies like to hide behind. It is not good news if you have to convince an airport that the threat of siting a quarry directly under its landing approach is benign.

The Head of Flight Safety at the British Airline Pilots Association explains that "the problem is when a plane strikes a very large bird, or if they are flocking, and there are multiple strikes". Therefore, in terms of birdstrike risk, along with gulls, starlings are one of the more hazardous species, and the worst birdstrike accident in history was caused when an aircraft flew through a flock of them.

So that's another job for AI's consultants: A Bird Hazard Management Plan, not only for a quarry's lifetime, but also for ever after - because, in digging out Straitgate, AI would leave a body of water and increase the risk of birds. If AI can't convince Exeter Airport and the CAA that this water would pose no additional threat of birdstrike to overflying aircraft then it's game over and it will have to look for a new site: "The aviation industry, be it the airport itself, the MOD or CAA, has never lost a public enquiry regarding an objection if an unacceptable birdstrike risk has been predicted from a development."

Does AI want to play God?

The planning shake-up means different things to different people. To Aggregate Industries, or at least its Head of Planning and Estates, "Reform of the planning system is an opportunity to harness the full potential of quarrying and other development to create a more diverse landscape".

Has AI assumed the role of the Creator? Isn't quarrying about supplying the construction industry and making money? In the same vein he adds:

Policy recognition that the landscape and its habitats are not natural but have evolved from land management practices would take the emphasis away from preservation and allow the full potential of government, developers, landowners and conservation bodies to be properly harnessed for the creation of a more diverse and resilient landscape.

It is the same view he puts forward in another article:

The ‘natural’ environment we enjoy in the UK is anything but natural. It is the result of largely unregulated development and land management over thousands of years.

Landscapes not natural? They are a good deal more natural than a quarry with excavators ripping out the life and guts of the land, or the industrial development that inevitably seems to follow. Landscapes may have been influenced by land management, but has he forgotten his school lessons on weathering and tectonic plates? It is alarming that a cement giant wants to be at the right hand of landscape creation; all too predictable that it wants attitudes to shift from preservation. There's more:

Diverting resources from ever more onerous investigation, recording and mitigation into the creation of new landforms and habitats would be far more productive. 

Forget those "onerous" checks then - just start digging to create new landforms and habitats. And as if that's not enough, AI has something to say on interaction with local people too:

Those who have engaged with local communities know that genuine and open consultation can lead to positive outcomes for both community and applicant... In return for more control over the planning process, local communities will need to assume the responsibility to guide and approve rather than just oppose. Applicants need to invest more time in helping communities to do just that.

That's alright then. With AI helping us to approve its plans and with "positive outcomes" for the community, we should obviously welcome it to Ottery St Mary to remodel our landscape and our habitats. In a different article, complaining about the "mind boggling amount of bureaucracy" involved in running a quarry, the same spokesman is quoted as saying:

We need a flexible, light touch system as these separate regulations lead to uncertainty for owners and investors who back the sector.

This may be, but in digging test pits at Straitgate Farm for example, AI had to be reminded to follow the regulations. And how thorough are the stretched authorities in enforcing the rules anyway? If there's to be any "light touch" then let it be upon the planet.

It is disturbing for mere mortals to hear such views on landscape reorganisation and light touch regulation being touted by Aggregate Industries. Disturbing, but hardly surprising.

Straitgate Farm, Straight-gate Farm, Great Street Gate Farm... Straitgate Quarry?

There's an 1801 map of the area that we were kindly pointed towards at the British Library's Online Gallery. It's a surveyor's draft for the Ordnance Survey map of 1807. Although the field boundaries are not accurate (there was no intention to publish them on the final map), it is still interesting to see it overlaid on today's Google Earth. The field boundaries are recorded on the tithe map of 1843.

It is also interesting to see field names, listed here on a Schedule for Great Street Gate Farm in 1870.

These emotive maps of the past, giving a flavour of what the area looked like up to 200 years ago, won't mean anything to a hungry Swiss Aggregates Giant - it doesn't care about our local history. But Holcim and Aggregate Industries ought to move with the times and progress to a more sustainable and environmentally acceptable business model, using increased proportions of recycled and secondary aggregates for example, before gouging out and scarring our beautiful and historic land.

Anyone who bought a house near Straitgate Farm "have only themselves to blame"

An Ottery St Mary Town Councillor has repeatedly claimed that residents around Straitgate "must have known all about [the threat of quarrying] when they purchased their properties". Would they really "have known full well that [AI] owned the land and one day would extract minerals from it"?

It may have been common knowledge to some local people, particularly farmers, that Straitgate Farm was owned by AI, but to others and those moving into the area from further afield it was not.

A prospective house purchaser would normally instruct a solicitor to ensure good title and to uncover any issues that might affect the enjoyment of their property. A conveyancing solicitor is expected to advise their client that the Local Authority Search is performed only against the property they are purchasing, not against adjoining land or the wider area, and that they should therefore contact or visit the local authority to ascertain what plans there might be for the locality. Indeed, a solicitor who does not advise a client of the limitations of the local search can be held liable for negligence.

A solicitor would not necessarily be expected to make enquiries, or advise the purchaser to make enquiries, of the Mineral Planning Authority, unless forewarned in pre-contract documentation, even for a property next to open farmland.

If a buyer had received such advice from their solicitor and visited EDDC, would they then have found out about Straitgate Farm from the Local Plan? Not necessarily. Since 2004 Straitgate has not been in DCC's Minerals Local Plan. Before that it was highlighted as a Mineral Consultation Area. Prior to 1979 the area again had no designation.

Could a buyer have made their own enquiries? Of course, but with all manner of things on their mind when moving house and with a solicitor to ensure the property is unencumbered, they might be forgiven for not suspecting that a nearby dairy farm could be harbouring a future sand and gravel quarry, or that English China Clays had bought the below surface rights of the surrounding land.

Generally, a prospective buyer cannot hope to know the owner, the intentions of that owner, or the permissibility of those intentions, for every piece of nearby land before they buy a house. The number of house purchasers in the area in recent years unaware of the quarry threat have demonstrated as much. Just as people living along the HS2 route have found out, home ownership can be a 'can of worms'. In their case they can at least attempt to claim compensation if their property is blighted; people living next to a sand and gravel quarry foisted upon them by Aggregate Industries cannot.

A good news story from DCC

Following our earlier post, DCC's Minerals Officer has notified us of a press release closer to home from Devon Wildlife Trust, showing that, despite the National Trust's unsuccessful proposals for quarries in Shropshire, restoration of a former quarry can indeed be successful. So, for balance:

Devon Wildlife Trust have acquired the recently-restored Meeth Quarry near Hatherleigh for management as a nature reserve. The mineral operator, Imerys, had restored the site in accordance with their planning permission prior to putting it on the market, with the restoration having biodiversity as its main aim as illustrated by the approved plans.

Fly ash - adding it to cement and china clay waste could save the Pebble Beds

Fintan264

The Devon Stone Federation advised DCC, Local Aggregate Assessment (LAA, 5.15), that as an alternative to the "qualities of the Pebble Beds resource" china clay waste has a number of issues including "increased water demand and proportion of cement required in concrete". However, as posted earlier, this did not stop china clay waste being used in the construction of the Olympic Park or One Coleman Street in London.

What the Devon Stone Federation, whose five quarrying members include AI, failed to mention was that any extra cement required can be offset cost effectively with 'fly ash'. Fly ash was not referred to in DCC's otherwise comprehensive LAA, yet it "has been in common use as a cementitious component in concrete in the UK for several decades". The construction of One Coleman Street used "30-40% fly ash in place of Portland cement" to reduce its environmental impact.

Fly ash is a residue from coal-fired power stations. Worldwide, more than 65% of fly ash produced from power stations is disposed of in landfills and ash ponds. However, "as a very fine, inert and lightweight material, fly ash is ideal when used in the concrete mix as a substitute for cement". "As well as reducing the amount of water required in the mixture, fly ash can limit demand for natural resources. Studies conducted by the UKQAA and partnership bodies have shown that fly ash can be included in the concrete mix at rates of up to 80% of the cement content, significantly reducing the need for both natural aggregates and water, while reducing the concrete’s carbon footprint. While [each tonne of] cement creates approximately one tonne of carbon in the manufacturing process and contains 913kg/tonne of embodied carbon, fly ash contains 4kg/tonne".

Cement production worldwide "produces more than 5% of mankind's carbon dioxide emissions" - more than the entire aviation industry; using fly ash at Coleman Street alone saved 500 tonnes of CO2. AI itself does not produce cement, it sources it from UK producers and a Holcim plant overseas. AI does however supply fly ash, and it is used in 25% of Holcim's cement output.

So, DCC should recognise (at least for concrete applications, which is where two thirds of sand and gravel end up) that with the help of cement additives there are sustainable, environmental, economic and viable alternatives to the Pebble Beds piled up all across Cornwall and Devon, that should be used before plundering more virgin resource. It may not be in the Devon Stone Federation's interests to promote the use of waste china clay aggregates, but surely it must be in the interest of the county, its people and the environment, and this should be reflected in Devon's mineral policies.

Would a 4000 signature petition help?

The National Trust had wanted to buy Lea Quarry North at Wenlock Edge, a SSSI in Shropshire, from Aggregate Industries to "provide diverse opportunities for people, heritage, biodiversity, tourism and the economy". It was sold instead to Edge Renewables, who "chip wood from sustainably managed forests for renewable energy biomass incinerators". The National Trust opposed the retrospective planning application from Edge Renewables, as did Natural England, Shropshire Hills AONB and over 4000 others by way of petition. However, planning officers recommended approval and yesterday councillors voted to grant permission to the renewable energy business. The petition made no difference at all.

2012 - "the lowest year for aggregates and concrete sales since 1965"

That's according to the Mineral Products Association, the trade association representing 90% of aggregates production in the UK. The MPA sales survey results showed a fall of 9% in aggregates, cement and ready mixed concrete markets in 2012. Road construction fell by 44% in the first nine months of 2012 compared with the same period of 2011. How foolhardy then, following the lowest aggregates sales since 1965 - ironically the year that all our problems started when English China Clays bought Straitgate Farm, that AI is still pushing ahead for a brand new sand and gravel quarry.

Grading analysis results from Straitgate

Grading analysis results have been supplied by Aggregate Industries following its recent activity at Straitgate Farm. The test pits had an average of 9.3% silt, 28.0% sand and 62.7% gravel. The six boreholes across the site had an average of 14.6% silt, 32.5% sand and 52.9% gravel.

Any questions relating to the grading results can be directed to AI's Head of Geological Services. Contact us for his details.

Secondary vs. Primary

The left pile: secondary aggregate - a by-product from china clay (kaolin) operations dumped for over 250 years as waste in huge amounts across Cornwall and Devon; the right pile: primary aggregate - a finite virgin resource sitting under Straitgate Farm. Two different materials we are told; different properties - physically, chemically, economically.

Whilst DCC in its Local Aggregate Assessment said "Devon has the capacity to support increased production of secondary... aggregates", it also said that "limited spatial occurrence" and "technical requirements" may constrain their use.

In evidence to the Competition Commission, however, Aggregate Industries said that whilst "in Cornwall and Devon alone there was about 600 million tonnes of secondary aggregates already available with about 40 million tonnes more being generated a year", its customers were "increasingly able, willing and prepared to use secondary and recycled aggregates". AI added "secondary and recycled aggregates now accounted for between 25 and 30 per cent of the current market and were a substitute for primary aggregates in the vast majority of cases. AI used secondary aggregates in its own production of [ready mix concrete] and other products."

The aggregates levy, currently £2 per tonne, was introduced by the government in 2002 not only to "address the environmental costs associated with quarrying" but also to support "the use of alternative materials such as recycled materials and certain waste products". Encouraging local use of secondary aggregate would have the advantage of extending reserves of sand and gravel whilst also reducing the 'mountains' of tipped waste across Cornwall and Devon. Is Devon's Mineral Planning Authority doing enough to achieve this?

Admittedly, not all china clay waste is suitable - nine tonnes of waste are generated for every tonne of china clay produced - but for the right quality of granite fraction (stent) there has been a "long history of satisfactory use in ready mixed concrete over much of Cornwall and Devon". In addition "An assessment of the specifications and standards available demonstrates that there are a significant number of applications available for the use of China Clay waste derived aggregates. While many secondary materials are used in low value applications such as fill, China Clay waste derived aggregates are suitable for a number of higher value applications including use in concrete and bitumen bound products."

Furthermore, it's now finding applications elsewhere. In 2006 the construction of One Coleman Street, a prestigious commercial building in London, was "the first major use of china clay stent coarse aggregate outside the locality of its production in the South-West" and "demonstrated the feasibility of using 100% secondary coarse aggregates in a large scale project remote from the source of aggregate". The stent aggregate concrete "cost a little more" due to the "transportation and testing costs" but this was partially offset by the stent being "exempt from the UK aggregates levy" and "if used more often for future projects there would be less need for extensive testing". The project won the 2007 Concrete Centre Award for Sustainability. AI will know about it since it supplied the aggregate. It will also know about the construction of the Olympic Park, where it supplied "secondary aggregates arising from the production of China Clay".

So, if the economics can work supplying London, why not Devon?

With existing supply agreements coming to an end, "IMERYS Minerals Ltd are actively developing the growth of their secondary aggregates (china clay waste) products from Cornwall and are currently seeking partners to realise the full potential of the materials in the markets they serve". With its new Minerals Plan, maybe DCC should work with Cornwall to facilitate and encourage this. And how about Devon's own levy too, on primary aggregate extracted from the Budleigh Salterton Pebble Beds?!

Construction industry ‘faces 10 more years of pain’

Construction output in the three months to November was "down 9.8%" on the same period in 2011. Furthermore the BBC reports on an industry lobby group that "doesn't anticipate the industry returning to its former levels until at least 2022". Something DCC should bear in mind when forecasting aggregate shortfalls for the years ahead.

Can Straitgate produce a ROI of 8% for Holcim?

Naturally, the question of financial return is central to whether Aggregate Industries and parent Holcim ultimately take Straitgate forward to a planning application. We have argued before that the commercial viability of a quarry here can only be marginal at best, and is a factor not yet assessed by DCC despite the NPPF saying "Pursuing sustainable development requires careful attention to viability and costs in plan-making and decision-taking. Plans should be deliverable." Holcim is now however working to a new financial benchmark.

A summary of the initial hearing held with AI on 16 May 2012 for the Competition Commission makes clear that "Holcim had recently publicly announced a new cost-cutting plan in order to improve the group’s profitability. Holcim needed to achieve an overall return on investment (after tax) of 8 per cent, while AI’s operations were only currently achieving a 2.7 per cent return (before tax)."

Yet "there had also been significant increases in the production costs, particularly for fuel and energy, for these products. Increased taxation such as the aggregates levy and carbon taxes had also raised costs." In December Holcim announced it was "to accelerate a restructuring program and write off 410 million Swiss francs of fixed assets in Europe". 

Investigations by AI and its consultants will uncover more about Straitgate's commercial potential, but here's a list of some of the other costs that AI will need to consider, over and above operating costs, before breaking the ground at Straitgate Farm once again:

Cost of preliminary work: surveys, consultants, boreholes, test pits, material testing

Cost of planning permissions and appeals; legal costs; professional fees

Cost of public relations: exhibitions, local liaison

Cost of site infrastructure: weighbridge, offices, etc.

Cost of access modifications: road modifications, land purchase required for access

Cost of a 15 mile round trip for each load of as-dug material transported to Blackhill, if permitted. If not

Cost of moving and constructing new plant at Rockbeare if permitted

Cost of acceptable standoffs from homes thereby reducing the recoverable resource

Cost of protecting the setting of the listed Straitgate Farmhouse thereby reducing the resource

Cost of restricting excavation to 1m above highest water table as enforced elsewhere

Cost of downstream flooding mitigation - in perpetuity

Cost of preserving stream flows to wetland habitats in Ancient Woodland - in perpetuity

Cost of protecting private water supplies

Cost of restoration (if it were to ever get that far)

Cost of a community fund for local projects in compensation to local people

Less of course what AI can sell the site for afterwards, which could be significant if industrial development were to be permitted, or not, as in the case of Foxenhole where 38 acres sold for £300k last year - no more than the going rate for farmland.

Would Holcim accept a lower return in order to maintain local sales control? Would a Swiss-based multinational care? In the end the limited resource and the cost burdens may well undermine the commercial rationale for proceeding, particularly if Holcim's 8% target is to be met. 

DCC is overstating the 'recoverable' resource at Straitgate by more than 50%

We have long argued that the resource figure for Straitgate with which DCC went out to Public Consultation, up to 3.6 million tonnes (Mt) giving an expected lifetime for the site of about 10 years, was inaccurate and misleading. English China Clays' "Report on the reserves of Pebble Beds at Straitgate Farm", December 1990, and appendix, substantiates this claim.

DCC would have long had a copy of this report. We however have only just seen it, kindly supplied by Aggregate Industries (see note below). The report analyses results from 24 boreholes drilled across the site in 1990. Only limited geological information existed beforehand, and subsequent resource calculations are based upon this data. 

From the report it is clear that 2.311Mt is the maximum resource figure at Straitgate that DCC should have consulted upon, as this is the net tonnage recoverable above the water table from "sub area A" (section 5.3). There was no reason for DCC to ever think Straitgate could be quarried below the water table, particularly considering airport safeguarding, and in fact at Blackhill "to protect the hydrology of the area it [was] proposed to cease excavation at 1 metre above the maximum level of the water table". Would the hydrology and the receptors around Straitgate Farm deserve any less protection?

And even 2.3Mt is based on a number of assumptions, some of which are now unrealistic:

A "working margin of 5 metres behind the tree screen and 15 metres around Straitgate Farmhouse and access" [BGS recommends 250m stand-offs]; A "working margin of 15 metres" from the A30 [unrealistic]; "Water levels are based on July readings" [the water table is up to 1.4m higher in winter]; "No allowances have been made for face angles or haul roads".

Reducing the depth of deposit by say 1m for the seasonal movement in the water table could cut the resource by c.0.4Mt. Restricting excavation to "1 metre above the maximum level of the water table" as at Blackhill loses another c.0.4Mt. Sensible stand-offs from properties, another c.0.2Mt. So even 2.3Mt can quickly become c.1.3Mt. Of that, gravel (the component of value) makes up about 70%.

And remember, DCC was originally talking about 8Mt at Straitgate, even though it had been known for many years that the eastern half of the site was "geologically more complex". Here, the Pebble Beds are not only covered with a deep outcrop of sandstone, but a large portion of them is also underwater.

So if we are going to talk about destroying a farm and violating the East Devon landscape, creating something like the photograph above, let's consult on the correct figures so that local people know exactly what's involved and are able to make an informed response. We should then consider how little economically recoverable sand and gravel there actually is at Straitgate Farm, and debate whether that's a price worth paying for the loss of so much.

Note: In relation to ECC's report, AI wishes to point out that "it covers the first detailed borehole exploration and resource analysis in 1990 and that the estimates quoted therein do not reflect modern planning conditions or economic expectations - a finite, modern resource calculation will be undertaken following receipt of all expert opinions into hydro-geology, landscape, noise, ecology etc etc probably this time next year (ie as most studies need a full set of seasons to be valid)."

AI's conundrum

Labels have now been assigned to categorise previous posts on this blog, and are sorted in the sidebar by frequency. Unsurprisingly the labels Exeter Airport and birdstrike are near the top.

Aggregate Industries is busily performing tests on its gravel, but what is it doing to reassure Exeter Airport that, if it quarries Straitgate, it isn't going to leave behind a large body of water directly beneath its flight path, attracting birds and increasing the risk of birdstrikes? After the wettest year on record for England, it's hard to imagine how a quarried void at Straitgate could not fill up with water, or how gulls or other birds would not be attracted to such water, as at "Seagull Pond" at Blackhill Quarry.

Gulls at Blackhill Quarry

So it may be that AI cannot provide the airport with that reassurance. After all, in order to replace the groundwater storage being removed at Straitgate, the Environment Agency (EA) would want provision made to store water run-off to prevent flooding downstream. This was the condition made by the Devon River Authority at the time of the 1967 planning application: a 49 acre lake and overflow weirs for "balancing flood flows".

The conundrum for AI is that if it were to dig a hole at Straitgate, the EA would want a body of water, the Airport would not, and the company would have difficulty stopping one forming anyway. Therefore for AI to proceed any further, it needs to know how it would overcome this seemingly insoluble predicament and give the answer to DCC, whose Minerals Plan could be found unsound if it continued to insist on Straitgate Farm being a Preferred Site when there's clearly such a big question mark hanging over its deliverability.

From the Airport's perspective, whilst last year was the safest year on record for air travel, it is understandable that it is protective of its airspace. Birdstrike incidents are recorded for each airport in the UK and the data is publicly available. DCC has been warned that "Under the Air Navigation Law, it is a criminal offence to endanger an aircraft or its occupants by any means". Birdstrike incidents can sometimes have terrible consequences.

Just for fun because it's Xmas...

Merry Christmas and a Happy quarry-free New Year

Update

Aggregate Industries has kept us informed of its investigations at Straitgate Farm. Grading analyses (deriving silt, sand and gravel proportions) have now been performed on the raw material removed from the test pits. Results have been supplied and "continue to confirm the quality". Further physical and chemical tests have been arranged. Piezometers have been installed in the six boreholes, and data-loggers are expected to be fitted early in the new year to start recording groundwater levels. AI has commissioned AMEC to act as its hydrogeological consultants.

Two more quarries that didn't get restored back to farmland

Two more novel uses for old quarries - a 15MW solar energy 'farm' with 62500 panels, and a round-the-clock testing ground for articulated dump trucks. Not perhaps the restoration plans that local people had either hoped for or expected. Not farmland. Not nature trails. But Aggregate Industries is not a charity. If it quarried Straitgate, who could blame it for wanting to persuade DCC in the future that the county no longer needed the woodland clearing with picnic area, or footpaths with education boards, detailed on the imaginative and colourful plans used to win permission way back in 2014. Who could blame it for arguing that what Ottery really needed was, for example, an aggregate recycling centre on the old Straitgate Quarry site? Would the company listen to local people? Did it listen to "Objectors [who] had pleaded to AI to abandon its [78 metre] wind turbine proposals for Hulands Quarry"?

AI calls for more road spending

Just as a turkey might sponsor a campaign calling for a rethink on how we celebrate Christmas, Aggregate Industries is sponsoring a CBI report calling on government to support greater private investment in the road network. Lobbying like this should surprise no-one, but the tab for increased road investment, and the aggregate it requires, would have to be picked up by somebody, and if not directly by the state then in higher charges for road users. The CBI is proposing a similar model to that used in the water and rail industries, but is privatisation, profits and road tolling really the answer? We know where water charges and rail fares have gone.

AI's chief executive officer, Alain Bourguignon, writes in the report's foreword "By transferring the management and maintenance of essential road infrastructure to long-term investment vehicles, we could see far better planning, procurement and design of the assets, leading to far better outcomes for all stakeholders." And far better business for AI of course. It's a "no-brainer" according to AI's blog - just not for the communities next to any one of its asphalt, concrete or quarry operations.

AI's flow meters will need to be securely fixed

This watercourse feeds into the top of Cadhay Bog. It is fed by water from Straitgate, carried by culvert under the intervening field. The photo on the left shows the water flowing out of the culvert towards the road. Over the past few years the water has undercut the road and eroded a four feet deep trench through the pebbled subsoil. Aggregate Industries' hydrogeology consultants will be putting flow meters into watercourses originating from Straitgate in due course - the meters will have to be firmly anchored. This watercourse is recorded on the Environment Agency's Historic Flood Map, and has exceeded its capacity twice this year in July and November. It was the Cadhay Bog watercourse that flooded 50 properties at Thorne Farm Way in 2008, prompting the EA to build a flood defence scheme, completed this year, but which makes no allowance for extra run-off caused by removing all the gravel and its water retaining properties at Straitgate Farm.

The EnviroCheck maps are copyright © 2012 Landmark Information Group drawing from sources which themselves are protected under Crown Copyright (Ordnance Survey, Environment Agency, British Geological Survey, and other public authorities) or under copyrights owned by private enterprises. You are kindly requested to use these maps solely for activities relating to the Straitgate Action Group, as other uses may not fall under the licence granted.

Webcast viewing figures tell the story

Thank you to Roger Giles, County Councillor for Ottery St Mary Rural, for providing us with DCC's webcast viewing figures for 2012. The special meeting of the Development Management Committee on 26 April, the purpose of which was to receive representations from local communities on sites being consulted upon by DCC for future sand and gravel supply in East and Mid Devon, was the third most watched webcast. The issue of minerals and particularly where they are extracted is demonstrably important to the people of Devon.

Could DCC ever call an end to ‘Mineral Madness’?

Whilst DCC's Local Aggregate Assessment (LAA) seems a more balanced document than many of the past, with a comprehensive overview of Devon's aggregates market, in the end actions and allocations of Preferred Sites will speak louder than words. Nevertheless there are signs, possibly, that DCC has listened to the representations made at the meeting on 26 April and in the public  consultation on the issue of need. In the LAA for example:

• Devon has the capacity to support increased production of secondary and recycled aggregates
• there is potential for increased substitution between the different types of aggregate, including the use of crushed rock fractions instead of sand and gravel
• during the later part of the period to 2031 covered by the LAA, some of the sand and gravel supply previously delivered from Devon will be met from Somerset
• indicating a potential need for this Plan to provide for further sand and gravel resources if the minimum landbank of seven years is to be maintained to 2031, subject to monitoring through future iterations of the LAA (our emphasis)
• A more appropriate method is the use of a weighted ten year average, with greater emphasis given to the figures in later years than those earlier in the ten year period

On the flip-side, the LAA points out that:

• [the] Minerals Plan will need to consider the relationship between the location of the reserves making up the landbank and the spatial pattern of working to be pursued
• it would be unwise to assume that full substitution of one resource by another is feasible, or always desirable, as technical requirements may constrain this
• Information from the minerals industry [Devon Stone Federation (2012)] highlights the particular qualities of the Pebble Beds resource

So whilst DCC's position may have shifted, it might only be towards a more balanced discussion, and it remains to be seen how the Council will support increased substitution by secondary, recycled and crushed rock fines, and allow for this in its forecast shortfall for sand and gravel. It is nonetheless a welcome indication of local people having some small influence in Devon's corridors of power, but not enough to become complacent. The irreparable loss of Devon farmland is at stake, and DCC has a long way to go before it embarks on a campaign on behalf of its electorate, as Staffordshire County Council did in 2010 by calling to end "Mineral Madness", prompting a "new allocation system [resulting in] ten million tonnes less quarrying over the next decade across the county".

For AI it's all or nothing

The Head of Geological Services at Aggregate Industries explained to a number of people at a meeting today why, in his view, Straitgate Farm is so important to his company. For AI it's all or nothing. All if it wins permission, because in the decades following on from Straitgate, and with a foothold in the area, it will look to exploit its surrounding mineral rights. Nothing if permission fails, since any other application in the area would have a high chance of failure too. AI would instead turn its attention to Penslade, necessitating a new plant costing c.£2-3 million and losing geographical sales coverage.

AI's initial proposals for Straitgate were presented in a number of concept maps, computer models and cross sections. AI is only at the early stages of its investigations, but local people voiced their concerns, particularly about water. AI's Head of Geological Services admitted that, in his view, it was unlikely that permission would be extended at Blackhill beyond 2016, and that processing plant would more likely be moved to Rockbeare, where there are adequate water supplies and silt voids. Whilst the concept maps did show site access at the western point of the site, he thought it extremely unlikely this would transpire, recognising the more suitable location on the north side onto the old A30, if land access could be secured. He confirmed that the eastern half of the Straitgate site has been removed from AI's resource book, retrieval being uneconomic with the sand and gravel largely underwater and also covered by a thick seam of sandstone. AI has promised to supply further maps, images, drawings and information, which, permission forthcoming, will be posted here in due course.

Overall there's a lot at stake for AI, but the same could be said for the people of Ottery St Mary and West Hill - decades of quarrying here and in the surrounding area.

Mineral industry supports pond creation

RAF C-17 Globemaster flying
low over Straitgate Farm on its
way to land at Exeter Airport

Another press release from the MPA extolling the environmental credentials of its quarrying members has been issued, this time encouraging the creation of ponds. "MPA members are uniquely placed to create new clean water ponds, and existing important ponds and small lakes on restored mineral sites make a critical contribution to biodiversity."

Which is all very noble for those sites that do get restored back to nature, rather than something more industrial, but if quarrying at Straitgate Farm were ever to be given the go-ahead, the creation of ponds, which "quickly become biodiversity hotspots" attracting birdlife, would never be permitted. This photograph from last week clearly shows why. 

And with all the water issues at Straitgate Farm, both DCC and locals await details on how Aggregate Industries proposes to overcome that.

DCC publishes draft of its first Local Aggregate Assessment

DCC has today issued this comprehensive document to inform decisions on the level and location of future aggregate production. Secondary and recycled aggregates supply is discussed in some detail. DCC proposes to use a weighted 10-year rolling average in future, giving more emphasis to recent production figures, meaning the County "has a [sand and gravel] landbank of 15 years which indicates that DCC may have to make additional provision if a minimum landbank of seven years is to be maintained for its Plan period to 2031". DCC has invited a number of organisations to comment.

Did AI stick to its permitted exploration rights?

Aggregate Industries' personnel on site this week were friendly and professional, whilst being sensitive and accommodating to local peoples' concerns. Nevertheless, the simple task - relative to a full-scale quarry operation - of digging test pits still resulted in breaches, requiring intervention, of AI's permitted exploration rights - the same rights that AI reminded us of in its "To whom it may concern" letter.

There were three cases. Firstly, AI's operations were at times within the permitted limit of "50m of any part of an occupied residential building" which resulted in a heap of as-dug gravel having to be moved. AI may have had no other reasonable access to the site, but this was of no comfort to the those affected, especially when they had received no direct communication from the company before work started. Secondly, before a reminder of its permitted rights, AI planned to dig two 35 metre long trenches, substantially exceeding its allowed limit of "12 square metres in surface area" per pit. Finally, the pits "shall be filled with material from the site" but were actually refilled with as-dug sand and gravel from Venn Ottery quarry, which was a different colour and contained a high clay fraction. AI did not have the required written permission from DCC for this at the time it hauled the Venn Ottery material to Straitgate. Such permission was only received after pit-refilling had already started.

Minor transgressions, perhaps, but embarrassing for AI all the same. Based on what's been seen so far, would local people trust AI not to breach one or more of the multiple operating regulations of a full-scale quarry operation?

A few facts learnt from AI's week at Straitgate Farm

Digging test pits to assess the suitability of the gravel, and drilling boreholes to monitor groundwater levels, marks the start of a 12-18 month period of data-gathering by AI about the Straitgate Farm site. Consultants will be instructed to investigate biodiversity, highways, and hydrogeology. In 2014, AI hopes to be in a position to apply for planning permission, subject to the information collected showing no 'showstoppers'. AI is currently not interested in the Penslade site at Uffculme for sand and gravel.

Eight test pits were dug, providing almost 400 tonnes of sand and gravel to be processed in AI's plant at Blackhill. The Environment Agency visited the site to check on proceedings. No archaeology of note was found. The excavator made light work of the 6-7m deep pits, but the 6-wheel-drive haul truck frequently needed its help after becoming embedded in the wet muddy ground. The geology showed smaller pebbles than at Venn Ottery, but size distribution and the quality of the material will be assessed in due course in AI laboratories. A proportion of the sand and gravel from the test pits will be made into concrete blocks for strength analysis, and to determine the most efficient blends of gravel/sand/cement. Results are due around February 2013. There was more overburden than expected in a number of pits, up to 4 metres, or even more in places. Boreholes for six groundwater monitoring stations will have been drilled by next week, 3 more than originally planned. Data on groundwater levels will be collected over an 18 month period.

AI admits it must do better

To invade someone's neighbourhood with excavators, dumper trucks, low-loaders, HGVs, and borehole drilling rigs requires care and attention. It also needs communication, not only directly with local residents, but also with its men on the ground.

AI has agreed this week that it fell down on a number of issues, and recognises that it must do considerably better in future if it is to ever forge any sort of working relationship with local people. From this point onwards AI intends to be more open with the community. It intends to share data on, for example, groundwater levels and grading analysis results. It also intends to communicate its future plans in a more timely manner. AI recognises it has much ground to make up to repair its local image.

Cynics might think AI would say all that, now that it has embarked on its journey to win planning permission. Only time will tell exactly how open AI will be, and how much respect it will show to local people and their surroundings.