Rival rendering plant against Southern Proteins application
The owner of a rendering plant in the Washdyke area has criticised a rival’s application for a new operation, imploring it to be declined.
Wallace Group operations manager Manfredo Hintze’s submission on Southern Proteins’ application for air discharge consents for a proposed rendering plantnear Timaru asked Environment Canterbury-appointed independent hearings panel of John Iseli and Gina Solomon to reject the application.
Wallace owns South Canterbury ByProducts (SCBP), which has a rendering plant in Aorangi Rd, Washdyke, that began operating in 2009.
‘‘We are concerned the application will result in significant odour effects,’’ Hintze’s submission said.
‘‘It appears the applicant has underestimated both the likely odour that will arise and the extent of the effects.’’
During submission hearings, several people from the area said the odour from the SCBP plant was already bad.
Hintze admitted odour issues were ‘‘already a sensitive matter in the Washdyke area’’ and ‘‘something that the Wallace Group has grappled with’’.
‘‘We are concerned the applicant has not properly considered the cumulative effects of the application in combination with existing air discharge sources in Washdyke.
‘‘This is a concern in and of itself ... as local residents may not be able to distinguish between odour sources and mistakenly identify the SCBP Plant as the source of any additional odour.’’
On the hearing’s first day, odour expert Roger Cudmore submitted, on behalf of SPL, that there should be no odour issues from the proposed plant.
Hintze claimed SPL was being overly optimistic. ‘‘No rendering plant and its operation is perfect at all times, so there are times and events which for diverse reasons will discharge more or higher concentration of odours.
‘‘SPL’s application is ignoring this practical reality, and it is assuming a perfect run.’’
Hintze was particularly concerned about the location of SPL’s proposed plant, as well as its proposed biofilter system. ‘‘SPL does not appear to have a ‘plan B’ if their proposed system is not sufficient to manage the odour.’’
Hintze acknowledged that SCBP’s plant had odour issues in 2017, but ‘‘this was not representative of our normal operations and we have not had another acute odour incident since that time’’.
‘‘However, it illustrates the complexities in managing odour and the impact that raw
‘‘It appears the applicant has underestimated both the likely odour that will arise and the extent of the effects.’’ Manfredo Hintze
materials can have, particularly if the material is sourced from further away.’’
Hintze also noted that SPL’s proposed plant did not have a proper ‘‘buffer zone’’, compared to SCBP, which has a buffer zone around its plant of at least 500 metres radius.
‘‘Washdyke shows ... odour can travel that far and be detected at long distances. The proposed SPL plant biofilter will emit odours and the lack of buffer capacity due to proximity to the site boundary and close distance to commercial and residential areas will risk constant odour complaints.’’
In response, Cudmore said SPL’s odour control systems would not be reliant on a buffer zone.
The hearing concluded on Tuesday.