In a newsletter sent to the local community earlier this week, the EPA announced that after discussions with ITC Limited and the Shire of Esperance, a decision had been made to move the location of the stockpile from the Port’s reclaimed landsite to the south of shed three.

This was previously earmarked to be the location of Esperance’s long-awaited desalination plant, but the EPA has committed to finding an alternative site on Port ground for the plant.

However, the location at site three is in close proximity to the Esperance Power Station, a location that has caused great concern to Esperance Power Station manager John Ovenden.

“Esperance Power Station Pty Ltd are gravely concerned at the risk to the Power Station and the electrical power supply to the entire Esperance region caused by the proposed proximity of combustible material near the air intakes of the aero-derivative gas turbines,” Mr Ovenden said.

“We actually stripped some filters from the turbines on Wednesday, and they were absolutely blocked with grain.

“We’re prepared to accept that because the grain terminal was there first, and as soon as the grain is out of the trucks it is covered straight away.

“Can you imagine the effect an uncovered pile of woodchips would have?

“It would be ten times worse.”

An EPA spokesperson said no final decision has been made on the location of the woodchip pile, and that discussion had taken place between EPA and Esperance Power Station to the extent needed.

However, Mr Ovenden disputed that, saying he had objected strongly to the move the first time he was notified of the EPA’s intent.

“They contacted me initially and I told them such a move would be absolutely unacceptable.

“After that point, they have scheduled two meetings with me to discuss the matter, and have cancelled both meeting on short notice.

“The may think they have adequately discussed the matter with me but I certainly do not.

“If the woodchips were stored in a shed I would not have a problem, but the system they are proposing cannot be allowed to go ahead for the sake of the Esperance power supply.”

In a newsletter sent to the local community earlier this week, the EPA announced that after discussions with ITC Limited and the Shire of Esperance, a decision had been made to move the location of the stockpile from the Port’s reclaimed landsite to the south of shed three.

This was previously earmarked to be the location of Esperance’s long-awaited desalination plant, but the EPA has committed to finding an alternative site on Port ground for the plant.

However, the location at site three is in close proximity to the Esperance Power Station, a location that has caused great concern to Esperance Power Station manager John Ovenden.

“Esperance Power Station Pty Ltd are gravely concerned at the risk to the Power Station and the electrical power supply to the entire Esperance region caused by the proposed proximity of combustible material near the air intakes of the aero-derivative gas turbines,” Mr Ovenden said.

“We actually stripped some filters from the turbines on Wednesday, and they were absolutely blocked with grain.

“We’re prepared to accept that because the grain terminal was there first, and as soon as the grain is out of the trucks it is covered straight away.

“Can you imagine the effect an uncovered pile of woodchips would have?

“It would be ten times worse.”

An EPA spokesperson said no final decision has been made on the location of the woodchip pile, and that discussion had taken place between EPA and Esperance Power Station to the extent needed.

However, Mr Ovenden disputed that, saying he had objected strongly to the move the first time he was notified of the EPA’s intent.

“They contacted me initially and I told them such a move would be absolutely unacceptable.

“After that point, they have scheduled two meetings with me to discuss the matter, and have cancelled both meeting on short notice.

“The may think they have adequately discussed the matter with me but I certainly do not.

“If the woodchips were stored in a shed I would not have a problem, but the system they are proposing cannot be allowed to go ahead for the sake of the Esperance power supply.”