Stay informed of free updates
Just register at Agriculture Myft Digest – Delivered directly in your reception box.
Plans for a “megafarm” in Norfolk were rejected by advisers concerned by its climate impact, according to a decision to be power on petroleum and gas projects.
Cranswick, a listed FTSE 250 company, for three years sought to obtain the approval of the construction of 14 barns for 14,000 pigs and 20 chicken hangars for 714,000 birds on the site near the villages of Methwold and Feltwell.
But on Thursday, the King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough COUNCIL urban planning agents spoke against the program, citing a historic decision of the Supreme Court published last year known as “Finch”.
The advisers then voted unanimously to reject Cranswick's planning proposals at lunchtime on Thursday.
The Finch decision, based on a small petroleum project in Surrey, revealed that the climate impact of fossil combustion combustion must be taken into account by regulators during the evaluation of drilling sites.
Ecologists have hoped that the wide principle of the responsibility of the companies underlying the decision could be applied to other polluting industries, but this has not yet been fully tested.
The application of the Finch standard has been largely confined to the petroleum and gas industry. However, council planning agents said that the public benefits of agricultural development were “counterbalanced” by its potential environmental impact.
Not only has the site remained near a number of protected sites, but it would also produce greenhouse gases linked to the elimination of pork manure, but they said.
“The Landmark Finch decision requires that an evaluation is subject and a consideration is granted to downstream greenhouse gas emissions. Insufficient environmental information has been submitted to date and, as such, there is a legal risk for the Council,” said the recommendation of planning agents.
Cranswick said the company would take time to examine the decision and examine its options. “We are incredibly disappointed with today's decision. It is a bad day for the sustainable production of British meat,” he said.
Government lawyers in a high court case warned last month against a “poor application” of Finch beyond its relevance for a specific type of risk assessment for oil and gas.
The finch judgment provided that in other industries, such as steel manufacturing, it could be more difficult to prove that a project had a causal link with emissions linked to the way a product is used.
Cranswick had argued that the project would help support the self-sufficiency of Great Britain in the production of pork and chicken in the midst of international tensions on climbing.
He argued that the redevelopment proposals of two existing farms would provide an additional capacity to meet its commitment to reduce the number of chickens housed in each unit by 20%.
Global and Sustain feedback activists warned that the project could increase 6%district.
The legal advisers of the two groups had argued that the advice should consider the “direct and indirect climatic impacts of industrial cattle units” when the factory agricultural planning applications are decision, describing the Cranswick site as a “test case” for similar applications.
Lily O'Mara of Sustain said on Thursday: “Local authorities wake up to the reality of industrial agriculture … both economic and environmental.”
Terry Jermy, the Labor MP for South West Norfolk, argued against the project during the hearing on Thursday because he could contribute to “the climate crisis”.
Climate capital
Where climate change meets business, markets and politics. Explore the FT coverage here.
Are you curious to know the commitments of the environmental sustainability of the FT? Learn more about our scientific targets here
