Skip to content
FORSIDEN
Log ind Opret konto
  • Kategorier
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
  1. Debatforum
  2. Kategorier
  3. Aktiesnakken
  4. Aktiesnakken — December 2021

Aktiesnakken — December 2021

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Aktiesnakken
1.9k Indlæg 1 Posters 0 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • troldmandenT Offline
    troldmandenT Offline
    troldmanden
    wrote on sidst redigeret af
    #1854

    Det er der sådan set ikke noget odiøst i. Det kommer der til stort set alle ansøgninger. Men om der er mere kød på nogle af dem er svært som udefrastående at vurdere

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • troldmandenT Offline
      troldmandenT Offline
      troldmanden
      wrote on sidst redigeret af
      #1855

      It is Natural England’s advice, on the basis of the material supplied with the
      consultation, that there are potential likely significant effects on statutorily designated
      nature conservation sites or landscapes and further assessment is required.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • troldmandenT Offline
        troldmandenT Offline
        troldmanden
        wrote on sidst redigeret af
        #1856

        here is a concern that without a suitable
        cumulative impact assessment the overall impact
        of this proposal together with certain process
        elements of a waste tyre recycling process that is
        also proposed, and with other existing and extending
        industrial operations would not be properly
        evaluated.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • troldmandenT Offline
          troldmandenT Offline
          troldmanden
          wrote on sidst redigeret af
          #1857

          There appears an acceptance by the applicant that a
          number of separate assessments would be required
          to support an application, and to inform the decision-
          making processes and potential planning conditions.
          The point is also validly made that additional
          regulatory controls in relation to (for example)
          COMAH, Environmental Permitting, and Flood Risk
          should not be duplicated by planning controls, though
          until suitable assessments are undertaken the need
          or otherwise for planning conditions cannot

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • troldmandenT Offline
            troldmandenT Offline
            troldmanden
            wrote on sidst redigeret af
            #1858

            Spørgsmål til oversvømmelses scenarier da vandet tidligere er gået over kaj niveau https://online-applications.sunderland.gov.uk/online-applications/files/A126898E20EDD6A8A060CCE1384067BA/pdf/21_02262_SCR-DRAINAGE_COMMENTS-1160479.pdf

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • troldmandenT Offline
              troldmandenT Offline
              troldmanden
              wrote on sidst redigeret af
              #1859

              Det punkt må dog være til at imødegå

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • troldmandenT Offline
                troldmandenT Offline
                troldmanden
                wrote on sidst redigeret af
                #1860

                Godt nytår til alle. Lad 2022 være året hvor QF opnår internationalt gennembrud

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • karboldK Offline
                  karboldK Offline
                  karbold
                  wrote on sidst redigeret af
                  #1861

                  Godt nytår til jer alle 🙂

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • ReservenR Offline
                    ReservenR Offline
                    Reserven
                    wrote on sidst redigeret af
                    #1862

                    @troldmanden:<br>
                    QFs ansøgning [Planning Application] "21/02262/SCR" hhv "110/QZTRTGBB01600" ER IKKE en ansøgning om miljøgodkendelse, MEN en ansøgning om vurdering [Screening Request] af om ​en miljøvurdering/miljøgodkendelse er nødvendig. Indvendingerne går hovedsagelig på at QF skal søge om en miljøvurdering [... an EIA should be undertaken].<br>
                    EIA = Environmental Impact Assessment<br>
                    HGV = Heavy Goods Vehicle

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • ReservenR Offline
                      ReservenR Offline
                      Reserven
                      wrote on sidst redigeret af
                      #1863

                      Fra side 5 (Page 1) i ansøgningen: <i>«SLR has been instructed by Quantafuel Sunderland Limited (‘the prospective applicant’) to undertake a formal screening exercise to establish whether a proposed development would constitute ‘EIA’ development.»</i>

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • ReservenR Offline
                        ReservenR Offline
                        Reserven
                        wrote on sidst redigeret af
                        #1864

                        Planning permission in the United Kingdom: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planning_permission_in_the_United_Kingdom

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • E Offline
                          E Offline
                          Esset
                          wrote on sidst redigeret af
                          #1865

                          Nogen der ved om de producerer idag/aften

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • ReservenR Offline
                            ReservenR Offline
                            Reserven
                            wrote on sidst redigeret af
                            #1866

                            @troldmanden:<br>
                            Fra side 18 (Page 14) i Sunderland ansøgningen:<br>
                            <i>«In this respect, the plant is anticipated to be operated in excess of an annual availability of 8,000 hours.»</i><br>
                            Forstår jeg som at Sunderland bliver konstrueret for 8 000 timer/år produktion, men QF forventer at kunne producere i noget mere end 8 000 timer/år. Fordi man i England har færre feriedage end i Danmark?<br>
                            I Esbjerg og Skive skal der produceres i 8 000 timer/år:  333,33333 dage * 24 timer = 8 000 timer.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • ReservenR Offline
                              ReservenR Offline
                              Reserven
                              wrote on sidst redigeret af
                              #1867

                              @troldmanden:<br>
                              Fra side 16 (Page 12) i Sunderland ansøgningen:<br>
                              <i>«The plant is designed to process around 110,000 tonnes of plastic waste per year. Of this, it is anticipated that following initial screening, 20% to 25% of the feedstock would not be suitable for the process ..... . From the 80,000t of plastic processed, .....»</i>

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • ReservenR Offline
                                ReservenR Offline
                                Reserven
                                wrote on sidst redigeret af
                                #1868

                                75% til 80% af 110 000 tons = 82 500 - 88 000 tons. Altså op til 10% mere end de 80 000 tons/år Sunderland bliver konstrueret for at kunne processere. Så er mere end 73% av affaldet der leveres til sortering (110 000 tons * 0,73 = 80.000 tons), egnet for pyrolyse, tager Sunderland imod mindre end 110 000 tons plastaffald/år.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0

                                Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.

                                Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.

                                With your input, this post could be even better 💗

                                Tilmeld Log ind
                                Svar
                                • Svar som emne
                                Login for at svare
                                • Ældste til nyeste
                                • Nyeste til ældste
                                • Most Votes


                                • Log ind

                                • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

                                • Login or register to search.
                                Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                • First post
                                  Last post
                                0
                                • Kategorier
                                • Seneste
                                • Etiketter
                                • Populære
                                • Verden
                                • Bruger
                                • Grupper