Parishioners in Calbourne, Newtown and Porchfield have been urged to say ‘no to the pipeline’ following a special public meeting held by the local parish council earlier this week. A meeting was held at Porchfield Village Hall on Tuesday night in which scores of local residents, Parish Councillors and Richard Quigley MP came together to discuss the controversial Solent CO2 pipeline, which is proposed to run from Fawley to the West Wight and beyond. There was standing room only. Residents were very vociferous with their comments, which councillors and Mr Quigley took note of. The overwhelming comments expressed at the meeting were a total rejection of the proposed Solent CO2 Pipeline. Isle of Wight West MP Richard Quigley made his position clear at the meeting, stating that the pipeline project is not for the benefit of the Island or the reduction in CO2, but entirely for the benefit of Exon Mobil. Mr Quigley told those gathered that he had been informed the project would take 7-9 years to complete, but stated that there was no commitment from the Government to this project. County Councillor Nick Stuart has already launched a petition to oppose the plans. As the public meeting drew to a close, the Chair advised people to respond to the initial consultation by simply saying ‘no to the pipeline’. Those gathered on Tuesday were advised not to raise exact concerns in this pre-consultation period as it would give the consultants an ‘advantage in time’ to come up with the solutions prior to the proper consultation period starting next year.
WEST WIGHT RESIDENTS URGED TO SAY ‘NO TO THE PIPELINE’ AFTER PACKED-OUT PUBLIC MEETING
- Trending
- Comments
- Latest
TOP STORIES THIS WEEK
-
DRIVER FLEES AFTER CAR HITS SIGN AND SPINS IN VENTNOR
-
MAN CHARGED WITH MURDER OVER DEADLY HOUSE FIRE THAT KILLED LUCAS SCUTT
-
MOTORCYCLE AND CARS INVOLVED IN MIDDLE ROAD SMASH NEAR TAPNELL
-
ENVIRONMENT AGENCY PLACES ISLE OF WIGHT INTO FIRST STAGE OF DROUGHT
-
MAN ACCUSED OF LUCAS SCUTT MURDER APPEARS IN COURT FOR FIRST TIME
Useful Links
External Links
That will be the ‘same’ NO , what the public says to massive building projects, to masse immigration ( see the link there) , to criminals getting weak sentences and to higher council taxes for a poor service.
I am sure it will really shake the pipe line proposers to the core, as if they aren’t expecting such and have every answer ready and waiting to appease the plebs
Boring.
Very boring.
But very true…
boring maybe bingo – but true, without exception as history backs it up
islanders have routinely opposed the enforced building of benefit hutches in the areas they live, they have demanded tougher sentences, more police on the beat, a stop to illegal immigration, no more handouts to hotel spongers and lower taxes – have they been listened to – no, not by a country mile.
so, this will be no different.
but post your opinion on x or facebook and voila, some jobsworth is on your doorstep
No, we in West Wight (and the majority in East as well) have voted for More spending on public services, and an End to austerity (as soon as possible after tory trashing of the economy).
And polls show most people want Higher taxes on the super rich (who have made billions out of the pandemic etc under the tories) to pay for well funded public services. (Check out Gary’s Economics on YouTube).
It is surely wrong that many working people have to top up their pay with benefits, which means taxpayers are subsidising businesses and shareholders.
Above all, most people care about the planet, and want action to halt the climate crisis.
what a load of drivel janet. – the only people who will pay for more public services is the majority of taxpayers, as that is where you will see the most increases – it is always the same. The gullible mugs in society bang on about taxing rich people, yet they never seem to realise that it is them that end up paying.
demanding that successful people be penalised for doing well in life, will only serve to ensure that they leave – as was the case in the 1970’s labour brain drain where harold wilson had a 95% tax rate applied above a certain level – what happened next – oh yes, three day working weeks, electricity cuts, streets full of rubbish due to more strikes and begging for a loan from the IMF – then thatcher 1979 to fix it
If the overpaid wish to leave if they are forced to pay fair taxes, I say let them go. If, perish the thought, the CEOs of all the FTSE100 companies were to fall under the same London bus, do you think the country would crumble ? It is not talent we lack in this country, just opportunity.
Your sense of political history is bizarre. The 3 day week in the 1970s happened under Edward Heath’s Tory government and was the result of the 1973 Oil crisis, itself a product of the Arab – Israeli war of that year. Labour got in the following year, inflation caused by the oil crisis resulted in unions getting stroppy, hence, as you say strikes and rubbish in the street. High tax rates and brain drains don’t feature in this story.
Ross – there are those of us who have cash available to us to start businesses on the island without needing to borrow anything. We are what you call “the rich”
here is a piece of advice for you
we aren’t bothering to start businesses because the greedy council want too much in business rates, the building owner wants to much for the building or is charging to much in rent. We aren’t interested in putting up with all the BS that you get from woke employees and we aren’t willing to risk high exit taxes on business sales under labours policies of envy.
It is far easier for us to simply sit on our cash, put our feet up and enjoy the sunshine. If you try anything, we decamp to another country with our money – simple.
Well said.
Yet YOU bother to answer. Truth is you don’t like what I say but cannot legitimately disagree, only with insults.
Touché
The ‘touché’ in your rebuttal suggests that Bingo made a good point. May I propose a question mark – touché? – to imply that you made the good point and are simply asking Bingo if that is not so. I wouldn’t want you to look silly, Sea-Y, you’re doing so well…
No. There is no link there. Just more xenophobic ranting. Yawn.
Quigley is like all MP’s – he will pander to the crowd to make it look like he is onside – and when exxon begin the next stage of the process, they are likely to start talking about the “community engagement process” – this is where they agree to support/fund community projects in areas where they operate.
the oil and gas companies have been doing this for decades, such as in africa, where they will drill and produce oil and at the same time, build roads, build schools, support community hospital projects etc – which gets the community onside as they are also employed and it is job done.
exxon will be dangling carrots, if they feel that the pipleline would be best routed under the ground on the island – it will happen
yes to pipeline and yes to more homes on that rundown island
It’s about time the island done their bit for the country
and moved migrants to the island.
The island is still stuck in the 1970s
It needs to diversify.
get lost luke you hand wringing do gooder
The island needs to diversify.
By moving Migrants to the island it will let the
Numpty’s who voted Reform know how wrong they were.
We are all gods children and should be able to
Integrate and get on with each other.
Peace
Luke. If you read the Koran you will find out why, with all the best will in the world, we will never ‘get on with each other’.
You must be another Reformer
We have to drastically cut CO2 emissions. Is the answer here, to close Fawley? That’s a big step.
(of course there is a link between climate change and global population movement, as someone here says. Parts of the world are becoming uninhabitable, and harvests are becoming more unpredictable. We can only slow down these issues by acting fast on the climate crisis. )
True, and these carbon capture type schemes et al do not ‘solve’ the core problem of the world burning too much fossil fuel, they actually enable the problem by ‘off-setting’ which gives the appearance of easing the problem!
no it is not the answer – fawley is the uk’s largest refinery and one that provides 20% of the uk’s refined product needs. The uk society would practically collapse overnight without the gas/butane/diesel and other products that they produce there.
CO2 emissions are about 0.04% of the atmosphere which equates to 440 parts per million. In the times of the dinosaurs, co2 emissions were 6000 parts per million, the dinosaurs, the other creatures, the birds and the plant life all thrived and none of them were driving 4 x 4’s
plants need CO2 to exist – without CO2 plants die, without plants we die, as we breathe in the oxygen the plants give out.
china is 27% of global emissions – the UK is 1% – focus your attention on the chinese
There were no carbon dioxide “emissions” in the times of the dinosaurs (dinosaurs did not burn fossil fuels), but instead you are referring to the atmospheric carbon dioxide content, which was higher, particularly in the early Jurassic, although the oxygen level was also 50% higher and this probably helped massive dinosaurs to thrive. Without plants, we would die from starvation and not from a lack of oxygen because there would still be oxygen in the atmosphere. China considers that it is entitled to have a similar level of economic and industrial development as highly developed nations, and will not reach peak carbon emissions until 2030. They think western nations have a greater responsibility because they have done most harm.
Could I just point out, in case it applies to anyone out there, that you can down vote and opinion, but you cant really down vote a fact (without appearing a bit of a muppet). You do know there’s a difference ?
Also, there were no birds in the “times of the dinosaurs” because birds actually evolved from dinosaurs.
Firstly, the “public” will have no say as to whether this goes ahead or not. The decision will be made by the Secretary of State no matter how much posturing is done by Stuart and Quigley. Of course people like Stuart do not have a clue. He doesn’t want CO2 emissions like all the greenies, but he doesn’t want Carbon Capture projects to go ahead either. Bonkers – absolutely bonkers!
exactly simmo – these clowns have no answers, just knee jerk reaction rhetoric. without oil and gas, we effectively go back to horse and cart, as well as open fires to cook and heat. Solar and wind power cannot cut it for baseload electric and they cannot create all the products you have in your home, as they come from hydrocarbons.
eg – phone screen, phone electronics, plastic phone case – all derived from hydrocarbons, either in construction, or made from hydrocarbon derivatives or hydrocarbons used in the heavy plant machinery that dug up the minerals and metals in another country to make the phones
You will have noticed that there are Council elections in just over 8 months time ?
The problem is that you all want to drive your cars and enjoy the benefits of the oil industry but you prefer to put your heads in the sand when a solution is proposed to the problem it creates in terms of pollution. This pipeline is necessary to reduce emissions and contribute to stopping global warming, and it is a fairly simple solution to the problem. By saying no, you are effectively saying “let the world burn”. Clearly, this pipeline is not “entirely for the benefit of Exxon Mobil” because we all live on this planet and we need to reduce emissions to combat global warming. I’m sorry but you all need to come up with another solution rather than just objecting on a NIMBY basis. It is only a pipeline and it has a positive purpose.
What a pity this report didn’t cover the content of the Exxon presentation, if there were one. Did they say anything about the unspecified reservoir somewhere out in the Channel? Did they mention the lifetime of the pipeline (bearing in mind that Fawley must have a fairly early closure date)? Did they say what other options had been considered?
If carbon capture and storage is viable (big question) this project or an equivalent will happen whether locals object or not. Let’s hope our shiny new government does its research. Mr Quigley could usefully encourage that.
So where was the publicity for this meeting? I live closer to one of the proposed routes than people in Calbourne, Newtown or Porchfield Village and was not aware of this meeting.
What is the problem as long as it is in West Wight do we care.
As Blott says in Blott on the Landscape (an excellent BBC adaptation of Tom Sharpe’s novel) ‘we must keep green our motherland soil’. The book was about the construction of a motorway through a beautiful tract of English landscape, and Blott, who we think was eastern European, hence his turn of phrase, was very much opposed to it. Although the book/series was a comedy there is nothing funny about this pipeline cutting a swathe across our beautiful Island, and of course, no need for it!
*by the way nice cover shot of the EAST Wight, although still lovely, as is the West Wight for now!
How exactly will it “cut a swathe” across our island, a trench will be dug and the pipe laid then covered and within a year you will never know it is there.
I’m a green, the last of the left wing in UK politics. The constant need by the right to fill their boots and the pockets of their mates will allow this project to go ahead.
If you look at all the other ‘carbon’ capture projects around the world, they DO NOT work and they create more climate change emissions. Scientists first started to discuss climate change over 100 years ago. It was in 1969 that they came to the consensus that it was happening and we were the cause. The ‘ice age’ story from the 70’s was not from the scientists. It was from an oil ran publication. Oil companies can not be trusted to clean up the mess they made. All they want to do is keep drilling. They have to be stopped. The oil companies lie all the time.
I’m getting the impression you don’t like oil companies. Given that just about everyone who has looked seriously at this agrees that fossil fuels will be a part of the energy equation for at least 25-40 years, who, exactly, do you think is best placed to clear up the mess if not the oil companies themselves ? The Salvation Army ?
We now have 2 MP’s so the answer should be a NO NO
The other one is too busy having a bromance with James Cleverly.