“The idea is great, but the location is not. I dont see why small rural communities (who in this case seem almost entirely against the project - 30 people at the meeting I would say represented a good turnout if the village has only 100 people of all ages in it) need to have this sort of development imposed on them. At the same time large areas of nearby Gainsborough are being developed with no thought to the environment.

The better result would be for the large town developments, which have infrastructure and services that small villages lack, to be made to incorporate CHP on their sites serving say 100 houses. My Kealey would then have a much larger generation capacity, which I am sure he and the group he is part of could accomodate.

The idea that it made sense to pull down farm buildings adjoining an ancient grade 1 listed church to build this makes even less sense - where would the farmer's crop go? I dont believe it is local planning policy to allow new farm buildings or houses to be built if the landowner has him/herself chosen to pull them down.

There are plenty of friendlt demonstration sites - I am sure that other members of REG would be happy to show people around some of the primary schools that are already heated in this way.

The idea is a great one but the location poor. Charlotte - the crop is in the ground and the diversification already done. The carbon footprint of loading the woodchip into a lorry and going 8 miles down the road to a larger site in Gainsborough would surely offer the scope for a larger and more viable generation, especially as anon in Harpswell has already pointed out much larger biomass energy plants being built around the Immingham area - Drax is spending £2bn to provide enough power for the whole of Nottingham.

I agree with Lucy, that local policy should encourage the development of smaller scale CHP, but if no developments in town of say 80 or 90 houses requires it, then you have to question the logic of such a relativly large development for such a small village.”

“I think that for once it is brilliant that an individual has taken time to explore the possibilities of alternative uses of energy. In order to protect the future of the world it is essential that we become forward thinking, therefore the educational centre that this could potentially create will be of use to educators and developers alike. It is my belief that many of the negative comments that this article has created are from individuals living in homes heated by none renewable resources, and therefore are not at liberty to reject the potential benefits of this project. I say well done to a local farmer for putting so much time and effort into this project , we should take into consideration that this development could have been planned with no environmentally benefical energy scheme at all!!! Farmers have to diversify to stay farming let support them in doing so!!”

“I find it an absolute travesty when such an important development capable of changing the way our generation operates with regard to energy supply and sustainable living is prolonged due to the ill informed general public such as anon from Harpswell and Irak. Without a user friendly demonstration site such as the one in Harpswell it is likely that biomass renewable energy will fail- we cannot let this happen. It is also hugely unfair to criticise the farmer for using red diesel and polluting the environment. It is important to remember that it is farmers who have been making a loss for many years to put cheap food on the likes of Iraks plate.
Renewable energy is a hugely important issue which is being encouraged by the EU, National Government and Local Government, so why can it not be implemented at a local level? I suggest that people who will be affected by the development look at the bigger picture and think of their children and their grandchildren¿s future, and stop being narrow minded an insular.”

“Gedge you obviuosly do not live in such an idylic location as we lucky people in Harpswell, however we do not have the facilities, amenities or infrastructure to maximise the benefits of such a plant, this type of project needs to be where a much greater mass of people will benefit, West Lindsey were absolutely right to refuse planning permission on this occaision. The whole project has become an irrelevance with the building of large scale biomass plants less than 30 miles away. The reality of this situation is that the landowner was simply trying to get planning permission where it would not normally be granted on the back of a green energy project..”

“Irak - why don't you stick to facts of the article and comment on those rather than making your own up.”

“this is just an assumption but when FARMER Mr Kealey was filling up his vehicles with cheap duty free red diesel making him money did he care about the environment then,or did he step back and say no thankyou i will use the cleaner alternatives out there?i think we can all guess what he really did,filled up with red diesel said nothing and made money from it without a second thought.this is only my opinion thought so please any thoughts or suggestions feel free to add your own.”

“Yes it is a small community so a farmer wanting to secure their livelihood should be a priority to ensuring the village's long term viability.
The countryside and villages have constantly changed over the centuries as farming and other rural work has evolved. This has to continue even if it changes the village "character" - without local work Harpwell and many other similar communities will stagnate and wither.”