W rexham R esidents A gainst P ower S cheme

1. WrexhamResidentsAgainstPowerScheme The Wrexham Power Limited Proposals

2. Topics covered • What is the proposal • Approval Process • Timescale • Who are Wrexham Power • How these schemes are financed • Why the scheme is the wrong one • What is happening to stop this

3. What do Wrexham Power Propose: (assume known) • 1200MWe Gas fired Power station to East of Wrexham Industrial Estate • Gas connection • Electrical Connection at 400kV to National Grid Legacy substation South West of Wrexham

4. Site Plan

5. Gas Connection

6. Electrical Connection Options

7. Consent Process • Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP): • Planning Act 2008 • Statement of Community Consultation (SoCC) • Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) • Apply for a Development Consent Order (DCO) • Considered by Planning Inspectorate (PINS) • Approval by the Secretary of State Energy & Climate Change: Edward Davey

8. Process to date • Meetings with WCBC 2010 • Announcement June 2012 • Informal (Stage 1) Consultation • Public Exhibitions • Stage 1 feedback • Scop-ing report to, and opinion, from Dept Energy and Climate Change (DECC) • Landowners approached for access

9. Future timescale • Pre-Application Consultation Imminent • Application for DCO Mid/late 2013 • Acceptance by PI (that application +28 days meets standards) • Pre examination + 3 months • Examination + 6 months • Decision 2014? • Post decision opportunity for legal action • Construction completed 2018?

10. Who are Wrexham Power ? slide 1 • Joint venture between Glenfinnan and St Modwen • Use ambiguously word “Re-generation” • WPL have Assets of £10,000 debts of £100,000 • Company No: 06762265  • Subsidiary of “Skelton Group Investments Ltd” (Assets £850k, debts of £3m) • Parent company is: Glenfinnan Properties • Glenfinnan Properties inc.Bermuda, (0049457) • Same Birmingham address for St Modwen and Skelton Group.  • Business: “Buying & Selling of Own Real Estate”

11. Who are Wrexham Power ? slide 2 St Modwen have a property portfolio of £1bn, debts £0.5bn Skelton Group Investments (06228947) : 32.5% St Modwen Co. (00349201) 50% Directors: Daniel Chapman, 17.5% Rupert Wood Advisors:  Atkins – engineering design and environmental consultants Savills – town planning and property consultants Local Dialogue – community and stakeholder relations Pinsent Mason – legal advisers

12. How these schemes are typically financed • Borrow funds typically over 80% • Secure contracts: • Build • Operate • Supply gas • Sell electricity • Obtain consents • Re-finance / sell and make a (significant) profit • Note: “fracking” developments could become more viable and beneficial for WPL

14. Wrong Scheme • Wrong for • UK • Wales • Wrexham • Industrial Estate

15. Wrong for UK • Other locations provide opportunity without even more pylons • Imbalance of: • generation in North • use in South • Creates losses • Creates re-inforcement costs • already an issue for National Grid • We pay for above in electricity bills

16. Better locations within the UK eg: Closure opportunities

17. No strategic need for size of scheme here Source: National Grid 2011 NETS Seven Year Statement: Chapter 7 – Transmission System Performance page 88

18. Wrong for Wales • Wales already a net exporter of power • Eg: Connahs Quay 1400MW = ½ Wales needs • Many new schemes already coming on stream causing National Grid re-inforcement: • Wylfa • Offshore wind, • links to Scotland and Ireland • Ad hoc proliferation of Pylons is damaging tourism - a critical “industry” in North Wales

19. Why Wrong for Wrexham • No shortage of electricity locally • Wrong for Wrexham e.g.power lines • Effect on property values or saleability • Deter people moving to area • Concerns regarding health • Negative impact on tourism, • Plassey • local hotels and pubs, • Erddig, • Wrexham Tourism • Partners we want?

20. Scottish Power Manweb: spare 132kVcapacity • Wrexham Source: Scottish Power Distribution Long term development statement 2011/12 to 2015/16 http://www.sppowersystems.co.uk/lt_statements/statements/SPM%20LTDS%202011_summary.pdf

21. Scottish Power Manweb: spare 33kVcapacity • Wrexham Source: Scottish Power Distribution Long term development statement 2011/12 to 2015/16 http://www.sppowersystems.co.uk/lt_statements/statements/SPM%20LTDS%202011_summary.pdf

22. Partners we want? • Background, experience, taxes? • Aggressive approach to land owners • Threats of CPO (do not have such rights) • Qusetionable data • Claimed to contact landowners directly. • Claimed to consult with Bangor on Dee. • Made no reference to pylons, implied little impact • Claim “Carbon capture”: pipe to Irish sea: intention? • Claim improved electricity supply reliability: demonstrably untrue • Claims for thermal energy sales: implausible • Claim “CHP ready” a misnomer • Many breaches proposed of Industry (Holford ) Rules • Describe area as old landfill sites, yet SSIs, Special Landscape area, Ancient Semi Natural Woodland, Wildlife sites of County Importance

23. Pylons

26. Wrong project for Industrial Estate • Claimed benefits implausible because of size • Wasted rare opportunity for low carbon high efficiency CHP or even sustainable biomass • Genuine benefits could be delivered with a smaller scheme • (with no impact of 400kV pylons)

27. Untrue Untrue

28. Proposals unlikely to deliver claimed benefits to the Industrial Estate • Claim: Reliable Electrical Supply • Claim: Lower cost energy • Electricity / Heat / Gas • But: • New substation? & nothing wrong today! • Agreed principles with Scottish Power and National Grid? (NG concern re re-inforcement) • Agreed thermal requirements of customers? • Contractual proposals for energy supply? • Technical proposal designed to extract heat? • Infrastructure planned for heat?

29. WPL say re: Industrial Estate

30. WPL on the Industrial Estate

31. The reality: Industrial Estate

32. WPL claim scheme is CHP ready • No such thing as “CHP ready” • Combined Heat & Power (CHP) co-generates electricity with production of heat. • CHP: up to 90% efficiency with low CO2 • WPL proposal wastes such an opportunity • Heat sales would have be massive to be genuinely CHP and 1200MW of electricity. • Director of CHPA: “greenwash”

33. Objection grounds • The need for the project • No strategic need for this size of scheme here • Better locations within the UK • Proposals are unlikely to deliver claimed benefits to the Industrial Estate • Better options could deliver genuine benefits without pylons

34. WRAPS • Wrexham Residents Against Power Scheme • Rapidly growing numbers of concerned people and businesses • Property • Tourism • Visual impact • Ensure effectiveness in: • Objections • Publicity • Obtaining and spending funding • Obtaining advice and legal representation • Referendum under 1972 Local Government Act? • Hugh James legal advisors • Work with CHPA / CLA / others to follow

35. Conclusion • Speculative property development • Questionable integrity of developer • Heavy handed tactics with land owners • Wrong scheme for the Industrial Estate, Wrexham, Wales and UK • Un-necessary blight on value of property and land • Could get worse if encourages “Fracking” • WPL should be encouraged to re-think scheme.