Southampton Waters/Dibden Bay-Development

Question 1

When did Fawley Oil refinery open?

Answer 1

1951

Question 2

Environmental impacts of Fawley Oil Refinery?

Answer 2

• Effluent – Liquid water 30 degreesand hard clams breed more and consume more algae, leaving less for other species
• Metal pollution – metals as well as phosphates are emitted
• Oil spills – 1 October 1989 ship offloading oil spilt 20T of oil into water/Beaches, saltmarsh and 800 birds affected
• Runoff from farmland is high in nitrates and phosphates causes the Solent to become eutrophic with algal blooms – it encourages the growth of algae and waterweeds which produced toxins that kill off plants and sunlight is blocked out (eutrophication).

Question 3

Why was Dibden Bay built and when?

Answer 3

In 2001 Associated British Ports (ABP) announced plan to build a container port next to Southampton water

Question 4

Why didn’t the Didben bay proposal go ahead?

Answer 4

In 2004 the Transport Secretary announced the scheme would not go ahead as the environmental effects would be worse than economic benefits

Question 5

Why was Dibden Bay proposed?

Answer 5

They wanted to do this as Southampton could not compete with other Uk ports like Felixstowe and so would go into decline

Question 6

Economic, social and environmental impacts of Dibden Bay?

Answer 6

• £700 million costs
• 3000 jobs would be created
• Dibden is a SSSI with 50,000 wading birds
• Local homes would lose their views
• Traffic would increase in the New Forest
• Increased fuels spills would be a risk to the ecosystem

Question 7

Economic stakeholders in the Dibden Bay proposal

Answer 7

• Associated British Ports
• Southampton City Council
• General Workers’ Union
• Confederation of British Industry Transport

Question 8

Reasons for economic Stakeholders

Answer 8

National need for more container capacity.
+It is placed well for transatlantic container traffic.
+More jobs (e.g. short-term) and long-term when the port is fully operational.
+Increased efficiency.
+Beneficial knock-on effect in marine industries.
+Positive multiplier effects.

Question 9

Environmental stakeholders in the Dibden Bay proposal that oppose

Answer 9

•Council for Natural Parks, English Nature and RSVB.

Question 10

Reasons for environmental stakeholders to oppose

Answer 10

• Threat to designated environmental areas.
• More environmental damage would be necessary to accommodate the container ships.
• Risk of an increased oil spills.
• Proximity to the New Forest National Park.
• Habitat loss.
• Visual impact on the landscape

Question 11

Local stakeholders that oppose the proposal

Answer 11

• Hampshire County Council
• Local parish councils
• New Forest District Council
• Local residents

Question 12

Reasons for locals stakeholders to oppose the proposal

Answer 12

• Traffic congestion due to 50% increase in associated road traffic.
• Transport links are inadequate.
• Urbanisation of a rural area.
• Impacts on quality of life for local residents: air, noise, water and light pollution.
• Port expansion in the east coast ports.