Site icon Extractive Industries

Banks refused plans for Highthorn surface coal mine

Banks Mining Group has been refused permission for a surface coal mine near Druridge Bay, Highthorn in Northumberland because of the effects on the landscape.

Housing, Communities and Local Government Minister, Robert Jenrick said that “the proposed development is not likely to provide national, local or community benefits which clearly outweigh its likely impacts.”

Refusal: the site of Banks Mining Group’s proposed surface coal mine in Highthorn, Northumberland (Chronicle Live)

Any challenge to the decision would need to be made to the High Court within six weeks.

Banks had stated that the mine would add £87 million to the local economy and created at least 100 full-time jobs.

Environmentalists opposed the mine, claiming it would destroy an area of natural beauty, and that coal extraction was against the drive to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

In his decision, issued in a document yesterday (8 September), Mr Jenrick disagreed with a government inspector’s recommendations to approve the plans.

The Minister concluded that the “proposal would have an adverse impact on landscape character of substantial significance.”

The document covered the proposed mine’s likely impact on the environment, heritage, noise and pollution, and the effect of producing coal at the site rather than importing it.

In favour of the proposal, Mr Jenrick gave moderate weight to the economic benefits, moderate weight to the biodiversity benefits, and no more than moderate weight to the need for coal.

Against the proposal, he gave considerable weight to the harm to the character and appearance of the area and “great weight to the harm to heritage assets.”

Slight weight was given to the harm to local amenity, as was the adverse impact on tourism and recreation and the impact on agriculture.

“However, the substantial extent of the landscape harm means that the proposal is still not environmentally acceptable,” stated the document.

Banks had said that it would be cheaper and less harmful to the environment if coal were produced locally rather than importing it.

But Mr Jenrick said that there was insufficient evidence to suggest that greenhouse gases emitted by extracting coal from the proposed mine would be less than importing coal.

The document stated: “The Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector that imported coal transported some distance by ship would appear likely to result in overall higher carbon emissions than using indigenous coal.

“But he considers that the representations received from the [involved] parties do not provide sufficient evidence to reach a robust conclusion on the comparative GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions of using Highthorn coal as against imported coal.

“Furthermore, nor does the evidence clarify whether GHG emissions would be different if Highthorn coal is used for industrial purposes rather than electricity generation.”

Reuters states that Britain imported around 6.5 million tonnes of coal in 2019 more than a third of which came from Russia.

Northumberland County Council granted Banks permission in 2016 to extract 3 million tonnes of coal as well as sandstone and fireclay from the planned surface mine with restoration to agricultural and ecological uses.

The matter was referred to the government Inspector but the then Secretary of State, Sajid Javid, refused the plans in 2018.

Banks lodged a High Court appeal in 2019, altering the coal output to 2.765 million tonnes because of the reduced operating time of the mine.

Exit mobile version