31:
433:
into the region, and that the positioning of the station near Durham would not be beneficial to the city's electricity supply or make the cost of electricity any cheaper for those living near the station. Critics also claimed that wherever in the region a new power station were to be built, County Durham coal would be used in it, and that despite NESCo's claims, there may be more suitable sites elsewhere. The critics claimed that Durham's functioning as a cultural, educational, administrative and tourist center, would be ultimately destroyed by heavy industrialisation.
551:
an inquiry at all. The initial legal advice to the
Government was that it was not subject, and the inquiry was convened with terms of reference that they were to consider whether a proposed new or extended station could supply sufficient electricity to meet the needs of consumers at no greater cost than any alternative source of supply. In Hurcomb's view the inquiry could not refuse consent if these conditions were met. A later decision by the Treasury Solicitor that the inquiry was, in fact, subject to the Act had the effect of paralysing decision making.
555:
District
Council would be liable for this but it was out of the question that they would be able to afford the large amount involved and the Government wished to avoid stepping in to pay themselves. If the inquiry could be persuaded to find against NESCo then no compensation would be payable and Hurcomb came under pressure from Ministers to do just that. Hurcomb argued that this would be denying compensation to those entitled to it and by April 1945 the decision on the station was still being delayed. The chairman of NESCo at the time voiced his anger in
370:
543:
acknowledged that a number of views from parts of the river would be ruined, and that the station would be visible from the
Cathedral and church, Hurcomb emphasised that the majority of the beautiful views around the city would remain. Pepler also found that from the railway station, the power station and the Cathedral could not be viewed simultaneously. The members of the inquiry initially concluded that the station should be given the go-ahead, based on the grounds that a more suitable site could not be decided upon.
1852:
1864:
1032:
1018:
567:
initially hostile, in June 1945 they agreed to drop the scheme on condition that they received a letter from
Morrison agreeing that they had satisfied the commissioners on technical grounds, thus entitling them to compensation. The Government thought the site was open to well founded objections, and even if the scheme had proceeded past the inquiry stage, they would have refused consent anyway.
445:
based entirely on assumption that the station would "destroy the
Medieval charm of the city", without taking into account the thoughts of the experts who designed the station. He also pointed out that the critics made their comments without any suggestion of an alternative, and that their campaign against the scheme had attracted publicity through a
550:
Legal and political difficulties caused a long delay in reaching a decision. An important issue was whether or not the inquiry was subject to the new Town and
Country Planning Act of 1944. NESCo from the beginning challenged the right of the Minister of Town and Planning, W. S. Morrison, to convene
520:
NESCo were represented by Craig
Henderson and Sydney Turner. The NESCo representatives argued that although the company already supplied around 85% of the North East region, a great deal more generating capacity would need to be built to meet the demand for years to come, and that the mid-Durham area
444:
of the 1930s, and Foster believed the employment the station's construction and maintenance provided would help prevent a return to those conditions. It was also seen that the station would generally improve the supply of electricity for industry. He pointed out that the criticism of the scheme was
464:
published a diagrammatic comparison of Durham
Cathedral alongside a power station typical of the design of the time, like the one planned at Kepier. This made clear that, although the cathedral was one of the largest in the country, it still would look small next to the projected power station. It
432:
were in support of the scheme, along with a number of private persons, the general reason being that it would bring a new form of employment to the city and surrounding areas. Opponents to the station however claimed that the new jobs at the power station would go to specialist technicians brought
566:
Eventually, Hurcomb put forward at a ministerial meeting a solution whereby the members of the inquiry would inform NESCo that on purely technical grounds they would have approved the scheme, but due to the opposition of
Morrison, they had decided not to proceed to a decision. Although NESCo were
554:
If
Hurcomb persisted in adhering to his terms of reference and approved the power station, but Durham Rural District Council then withheld planning consent on the grounds of the objections, NESCo would be entitled to compensation for their losses due to the delay and building on a new site. The
546:
The City of Durham Preservation Society, however, argued that with so many of Europe's finest monuments being destroyed in the Second World War, Durham and its cathedral was a gem which had survived both the war and the "industrial despoliation which had laid waste to so much of the rest of the
452:
Foster also claimed that if any other feasible site could be found, then it should be used to avoid any violation of the view. However, he warned that the interest of the county's economy should be put in front of the concerns of "those ill-informed critics, who view Durham from the railway ...
408:
NESCo argued that they thought the power station would enhance the city's attractions, with people coming to see the power station itself. At the least, they tried to assure the public that if built, the station would take as little away from the city as possible. An official statement from the
542:
in July 1944, in which the Bishop and Dean of Durham, and Warden of the Durham Colleges, had given the misleading impression that the proposed station would ruin views from the railway line, an idea compounded by the publication a few days later of a photograph taken from the proposed site. He
297:
in London, and so the designs of the Kepier station were considered to have been of a very high architectural quality. NESCo claimed that the design of the station would be considered "a credit to the whole district". The main station building was to be 135 feet (41 m) in height.
317:. New sidings would have been required to reach the site from the railway line, which would have required cutting into the hillside above Kepier. Upon arriving at the station, coal would have been discharged from the wagons 135 feet (41 m) above the station and transported via a
413:"Consultants of every kind will be employed in connection with the construction, and the City Corporation can rest assured that every precaution will be taken both in the design and the working of the station to cause as little harm as possible to the amenities of the City."
268:
plan by NESCo, and the scheme had a projected cost of £3,500,000. The site was chosen in the mid-Durham area to be close to the coal supplies. It also needed to be a short distance from the River Wear, downstream of Durham, and on solid foundations. Mine workings in
587:
made clear in the House of Commons that NESCo had begun extending their existing power stations by installing additional generating plant at sites other than Kepier, sufficing the demand for electricity, and meaning no station was needed at Kepier.
472:
Although geographically located 1 mile (1.6 km) north east and 100 feet (30 m) lower, it was thought that Kepier power station would dominate any view into which it entered and that it would enter into most of the views in the city. A
532:
model of the station, city and surroundings was used in the inquiry. It was accompanied by a certificate of essentiality, issued by the Electricity Commissioners. Photographs of the city were also shown with the power station superimposed.
220:. A number of people supported the scheme as it would help meet the increasing demand for electricity and provide much needed jobs in the post-depression, post-war economy of Britain. The station, which had been designed by architect
1831:
280:
The estimated build time for the station was around four years, and once completed the station was expected to employ around 300 people. In June 1944, NESCo formally submitted their plans for consent of construction.
385:
raised no objections, and it was not until October 1943 and onwards that the Ministry of Town and Country Planning began to increasingly warn of the opposition that was bound to arise against the scheme.
763:
481:"As the traveller by train approaches Kepier and Durham from the North there would meet his eye in the foreground this vast power station. Kepier, a local beauty spot, and the picturesque remains of
436:
At a meeting of Durham County Council on 26 July 1944, J.W. Foster, chairman of the Finance Committee of the council, spoke in favour of the proposals, claiming they would fulfill the Government's
397:. They were also opposed by The City of Durham Preservation Society (now the City of Durham Trust) which had been founded two years earlier. At the time the station had been given the go ahead by
521:
was the best place to erect a new station. Henderson claimed the only real opposition to the scheme was that it would interfere with the amenities of Durham. John Hacking, chief engineer of the
350:
from the precipitators would also have built up, and NESCo claimed they would have spread this on land to the west of the station, and mixed it with soil to produce a 14 feet (4.3 m) high
1065:
790:
485:, a building of much historic interest, would be blotted out, the Castle and Cathedral beyond would be dwarfed by an incongruous mass of concrete buildings ill sorting with the landscape."
1750:
346:
would be produced by the station per week. NESCo intended to sell this on to local construction companies as a construction material and believed there was a ready market for this.
361:. It was said that there would be provision to prevent excessive amounts of steam leaving the cooling towers, with no haze coming from the towers on 95% of days of the year.
417:
NESCo also argued that they had chosen the site to protect the city's amenities, in that it was outside the city boundary, partially surrounded by higher ground, and in the
465:
was argued that as long as the two structures were viewed simultaneously, the visual juxtaposition would be detrimental to the cathedral. Somewhat ironically, Gibberd's
440:
on Employment Policy, and its policy on the rehabilitation of depressed areas. At the outbreak of war, the north of the country had still not fully recovered from the
332:. The view at the time was that the remaining dust that would leave the chimneys would not have caused "any appreciable pollution", and the waste gasses, consisting of
1058:
547:
County". Pepler supported the view that Durham was more suited as an administrative, shopping, and tourist centre, than it was for large-scale industrial development.
525:, backed NESCo because if the scheme were declined, and consent and new arrangements had to be made, they would have no new plant in operation until after 1948.
579:
payment of £6,650 from the Ministry of Town and Country Planning for the expenditure incurred to that point. The site itself was inherited by the nationalised
501:
to conduct a joint local hearing chaired by an outsider was turned down by the Government due to much greater means being needed, the Government agreed that a
1051:
1899:
575:
Ultimately, the decision of the inquiry went against NESCo and those in support of the station, and the company dropped their plans. NESCo received an
1806:
798:
69:
1894:
1889:
1855:
309:(MW) of electricity. The coal was to be taken from mines in County Durham, and transported to the station by the Durham goods branch of the
212:(NESCo) in 1944, it was never realised as the scheme faced stiff opposition from those who claimed it would obstruct views of the historic
324:
The coal burnt would have had an estimated ash content of between 14% and 22%, and so at a cost of £160,000, the company were to install
429:
513:
appointed George Pepler and C.G. Morley New. The key opponents of the scheme were the City of Durham Preservation Society, chaired by
989:
273:
restricted the number of possible sites which could meet the requirement for solid foundations. The site also required good road and
506:
1449:
441:
328:, to remove 97% of the dust from the smoke and waste gasses from combustion, before leaving the two 350 feet (110 m) high
859:
1811:
241:
209:
165:
120:
505:
should be opened. A public inquiry into the plans was opened in December 1944, with the hearing lasting for three days. The
820:
1420:
401:
and the planning authority, but the Trust believed the station's tall chimneys and cooling towers would dwarf the nearby
30:
421:
of prevailing winds. They also said that much could be done architecturally to fit the station into its surroundings.
1904:
905:
740:
1499:
1187:
1143:
498:
1821:
1399:
336:, were thought not to "cause any injury or harm to the inhabitants of the city, to buildings or to vegetation."
1287:
584:
232:
the plans were not approved and instead NESCo installed additional capacity at their existing power stations.
580:
469:
would later be voted the third worst eyesore in Britain in 2003. It was demolished between 2014 and 2020.
1292:
1158:
1153:
1148:
1328:
1282:
1262:
560:
325:
1277:
1232:
522:
510:
495:
454:
1791:
1771:
1710:
1685:
1680:
1362:
1302:
1272:
1217:
1766:
1690:
1675:
1599:
1247:
1242:
1222:
1197:
1117:
294:
261:
189:
1776:
1700:
1695:
1404:
1383:
1074:
1043:
583:
in 1948 and they eventually sold it. On 9 October 1945, Minister of Town and Country Planning
1715:
1578:
1544:
1367:
1297:
1227:
1212:
1122:
1112:
767:
466:
425:
1614:
1609:
1307:
1257:
897:
390:
217:
8:
1646:
1594:
1323:
1252:
1207:
1192:
393:, an urban planner from Durham, who thought that the station would intrude on the city's
290:
221:
563:, wrote to Hurcomb asking if anything could be done to bring the inquiry to a decision.
457:
later referred to the development as "vital to the well being of the County of Durham".
369:
1826:
1796:
1786:
1705:
1630:
1604:
1573:
1267:
1078:
240:
After several years of preliminary planning, surveying sites and drawing up plans, the
205:
147:
1863:
1816:
1202:
901:
794:
736:
728:
Power in Trust: The Environmental History Of The Central Electricity Generating Board
461:
398:
402:
374:
213:
1558:
1237:
959:
891:
732:
726:
670:
628:
482:
382:
343:
257:
201:
831:
1781:
1023:
514:
502:
333:
329:
229:
1883:
1867:
1731:
1484:
1454:
1086:
1037:
474:
358:
318:
310:
270:
224:, would have been operational by the late 1940s and would have generated 150
84:
71:
928:
1515:
1138:
1347:
437:
245:
174:
1660:
1434:
529:
340:
249:
193:
1529:
576:
538:
351:
314:
373:
It was thought that the power station would interfere with views of
260:, and in early 1944 publicly announced their plans to build a large
1836:
1749:
1470:
936:
418:
306:
265:
225:
1097:
1031:
994:
864:
394:
347:
302:
274:
1073:
453:
passing from one more fortunate district to another." Durham MP
301:
The station would have burned between 1,500 and 2,000 tonnes of
253:
197:
56:
536:
During the hearing, Hurcomb pointed out a letter published in
357:
The station would have featured six 170 feet (52 m) high
1801:
629:"Some notes on the proposed power station at Kepier, Durham"
1172:
135:
446:
289:
The station's site plans and elevations were designed by
1832:
Pre-nationalisation North East electric power companies
509:
appointed Hurcomb as the chairman of the inquiry. The
256:, 0.75 miles (1.21 km) north east of the city of
893:
Skylines: Understanding And Molding Urban Silhouettes
1013:
1881:
1807:Newcastle and District Electric Lighting Company
1856:Category:Power stations in North East England
1059:
635:. 36–37. Durham: Durham University: 6–7. 1944
321:over six arches down to the station itself.
1900:Buildings and structures in Durham, England
1066:
1052:
885:
883:
854:
852:
720:
718:
716:
200:, 0.75 miles (1.21 km) north east of
830:. October 2005. p. 3. Archived from
714:
712:
710:
708:
706:
704:
702:
700:
698:
696:
494:After the suggestion by the head of the
381:When the plans were first announced the
368:
364:
880:
849:
788:
664:
662:
660:
658:
656:
654:
652:
650:
623:
621:
477:reader summarised these ideas in 1944:
264:on the site. The station was part of a
166:Related media on Commons
1882:
724:
693:
619:
617:
615:
613:
611:
609:
607:
605:
603:
601:
1812:North Eastern Electric Supply Company
1537:
1047:
889:
668:
507:Ministry of Town and Country Planning
242:North Eastern Electric Supply Company
228:of electricity. However, following a
210:North Eastern Electric Supply Company
121:North Eastern Electric Supply Company
16:Cancelled power station in Kepier, UK
1895:Power stations in North East England
1890:Coal-fired power stations in England
1631:North Eastern Energy Recovery Centre
782:
756:
647:
559:, and Frank Tribe, secretary of the
313:railway, which terminated at nearby
929:"Windfarms top list of UK eyesores"
791:"So Sharp when it came to planning"
598:
389:The plans were strongly opposed by
244:(NESCo) bought the site of a large
13:
35:The proposed site in December 2009
14:
1916:
1862:
1851:
1850:
1748:
1030:
1016:
127:Thermal power station
29:
1822:Northern Engineering Industries
995:Parliamentary Debates (Hansard)
990:"Petrol (Stocks and Rationing)"
982:
952:
940:. London: BBC. 13 November 2003
865:Parliamentary Debates (Hansard)
921:
813:
789:Simpson, David (21 May 2008).
528:A 11.8 kilograms (26 lb)
339:Between 350 and 450 tonnes of
1:
1405:Whitetail Clean Energy Wilton
633:The Durham University Journal
591:
581:British Electricity Authority
293:. He had previously designed
235:
7:
671:"Power Station Controversy"
326:electrostatic precipitators
10:
1921:
570:
561:Ministry of Fuel and Power
489:
1845:
1792:L J Couves & Partners
1757:
1746:
1724:
1668:
1659:
1639:
1623:
1587:
1566:
1557:
1528:
1508:
1492:
1483:
1463:
1442:
1433:
1413:
1392:
1376:
1355:
1346:
1316:
1180:
1171:
1131:
1105:
1096:
1085:
523:Central Electricity Board
511:Electricity Commissioners
496:Ministry of War Transport
305:per week, to produce 150
284:
248:, over both sides of the
171:
161:
156:
146:
141:
131:
126:
116:
108:
100:
63:
52:
44:
40:
28:
23:
1905:Cancelled power stations
1772:Charles Algernon Parsons
1767:CA Parsons & Company
262:coal-fired power station
190:coal-fired power station
1600:Derwenthaugh Coke Works
1223:Derwenthaugh Coke Works
860:"Power Station, Durham"
295:Battersea Power Station
148:Nameplate capacity
1777:Charles Hesterman Merz
1075:Electricity generation
675:The Electrical Journal
487:
467:Didcot A power station
415:
378:
109:Construction cost
1113:Biomass Energy Centre
964:The Electrical Review
898:John Wiley & Sons
890:Attoe, Wayne (1981).
821:"Bulletin: Number 59"
768:Durham County Council
725:Sheail, John (1991).
669:Adams, D. B. (1944).
479:
426:Durham County Council
411:
377:from the railway line
372:
365:Criticism and support
142:Power generation
828:City of Durham Trust
424:Local trade unions,
391:Thomas Wilfred Sharp
218:East Coast Main Line
186:Kepier power station
112:£3,500,000 (planned)
24:Kepier power station
1797:Merz & McLellan
1253:Mainsforth Colliery
960:"Views on the News"
900:. pp. 32, 33.
764:"Catalogue Details"
399:Durham City Council
291:Giles Gilbert Scott
222:Giles Gilbert Scott
157:External links
81: /
1827:Northern Powergrid
1787:John Theodore Merz
1605:Newburn Steelworks
1268:Newburn Steelworks
1188:Berwick upon Tweed
1079:North East England
801:on 11 October 2012
770:. 15 February 2011
735:. pp. 33–37.
460:British architect
379:
206:North East England
1877:
1876:
1817:Northern Electric
1744:
1743:
1740:
1739:
1655:
1654:
1553:
1552:
1524:
1523:
1479:
1478:
1429:
1428:
1400:Thor Cogeneration
1342:
1341:
1203:Chopwell Colliery
1167:
1166:
998:. 16 October 1945
795:The Northern Echo
462:Frederick Gibberd
208:. Planned by the
204:, County Durham,
182:
181:
132:Primary fuel
1912:
1866:
1854:
1853:
1752:
1666:
1665:
1564:
1563:
1535:
1534:
1490:
1489:
1440:
1439:
1353:
1352:
1324:Blyth Clean Coal
1288:South Shore Road
1178:
1177:
1103:
1102:
1094:
1093:
1068:
1061:
1054:
1045:
1044:
1040:
1035:
1034:
1026:
1021:
1020:
1019:
1008:
1007:
1005:
1003:
986:
980:
979:
977:
975:
970:(1–9): 109. 1956
956:
950:
949:
947:
945:
933:
925:
919:
918:
916:
914:
887:
878:
877:
875:
873:
868:. 9 October 1945
856:
847:
846:
844:
842:
837:on 7 August 2011
836:
825:
817:
811:
810:
808:
806:
797:. Archived from
786:
780:
779:
777:
775:
760:
754:
753:
751:
749:
722:
691:
690:
688:
686:
666:
645:
644:
642:
640:
625:
442:Great Depression
409:company stated:
403:Durham Cathedral
375:Durham Cathedral
214:Durham Cathedral
188:was a cancelled
175:edit on Wikidata
96:
95:
93:
92:
91:
86:
85:54.786°N 1.562°W
82:
79:
78:
77:
74:
33:
21:
20:
1920:
1919:
1915:
1914:
1913:
1911:
1910:
1909:
1880:
1879:
1878:
1873:
1841:
1759:
1753:
1736:
1720:
1651:
1635:
1619:
1583:
1549:
1520:
1504:
1475:
1459:
1425:
1409:
1388:
1372:
1338:
1312:
1238:Horden Colliery
1163:
1127:
1088:
1081:
1072:
1036:
1029:
1022:
1017:
1015:
1012:
1011:
1001:
999:
988:
987:
983:
973:
971:
958:
957:
953:
943:
941:
931:
927:
926:
922:
912:
910:
908:
888:
881:
871:
869:
858:
857:
850:
840:
838:
834:
823:
819:
818:
814:
804:
802:
787:
783:
773:
771:
762:
761:
757:
747:
745:
743:
733:Clarendon Press
723:
694:
684:
682:
667:
648:
638:
636:
627:
626:
599:
594:
573:
492:
483:Kepier Hospital
428:, and even the
383:county surveyor
367:
287:
238:
178:
89:
87:
83:
80:
75:
72:
70:
68:
67:
59:, County Durham
36:
17:
12:
11:
5:
1918:
1908:
1907:
1902:
1897:
1892:
1875:
1874:
1872:
1871:
1859:
1846:
1843:
1842:
1840:
1839:
1834:
1829:
1824:
1819:
1814:
1809:
1804:
1799:
1794:
1789:
1784:
1782:Clarke Chapman
1779:
1774:
1769:
1763:
1761:
1755:
1754:
1747:
1745:
1742:
1741:
1738:
1737:
1735:
1734:
1728:
1726:
1722:
1721:
1719:
1718:
1713:
1711:Trimdon Grange
1708:
1703:
1698:
1693:
1688:
1686:Great Eppleton
1683:
1681:Blyth Offshore
1678:
1672:
1670:
1663:
1657:
1656:
1653:
1652:
1650:
1649:
1643:
1641:
1637:
1636:
1634:
1633:
1627:
1625:
1621:
1620:
1618:
1617:
1612:
1607:
1602:
1597:
1591:
1589:
1585:
1584:
1582:
1581:
1576:
1570:
1568:
1561:
1555:
1554:
1551:
1550:
1548:
1547:
1541:
1539:
1532:
1526:
1525:
1522:
1521:
1519:
1518:
1512:
1510:
1506:
1505:
1503:
1502:
1496:
1494:
1487:
1481:
1480:
1477:
1476:
1474:
1473:
1467:
1465:
1461:
1460:
1458:
1457:
1452:
1446:
1444:
1437:
1431:
1430:
1427:
1426:
1424:
1423:
1417:
1415:
1411:
1410:
1408:
1407:
1402:
1396:
1394:
1390:
1389:
1387:
1386:
1380:
1378:
1374:
1373:
1371:
1370:
1365:
1359:
1357:
1350:
1344:
1343:
1340:
1339:
1337:
1336:
1331:
1326:
1320:
1318:
1314:
1313:
1311:
1310:
1305:
1300:
1295:
1290:
1285:
1280:
1275:
1270:
1265:
1260:
1255:
1250:
1245:
1240:
1235:
1230:
1225:
1220:
1215:
1210:
1205:
1200:
1195:
1190:
1184:
1182:
1175:
1169:
1168:
1165:
1164:
1162:
1161:
1156:
1151:
1146:
1141:
1135:
1133:
1129:
1128:
1126:
1125:
1120:
1115:
1109:
1107:
1100:
1091:
1083:
1082:
1071:
1070:
1063:
1056:
1048:
1042:
1041:
1027:
1024:England portal
1010:
1009:
981:
951:
920:
906:
879:
848:
812:
793:. Darlington:
781:
755:
741:
692:
646:
596:
595:
593:
590:
572:
569:
515:Cyril Alington
503:public inquiry
491:
488:
430:Farmers' Union
366:
363:
359:cooling towers
334:carbon dioxide
303:low-grade coal
286:
283:
237:
234:
230:public inquiry
180:
179:
172:
169:
168:
163:
159:
158:
154:
153:
150:
144:
143:
139:
138:
133:
129:
128:
124:
123:
118:
114:
113:
110:
106:
105:
102:
98:
97:
90:54.786; -1.562
65:
61:
60:
54:
50:
49:
46:
42:
41:
38:
37:
34:
26:
25:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1917:
1906:
1903:
1901:
1898:
1896:
1893:
1891:
1888:
1887:
1885:
1870:
1869:
1868:Portal:Energy
1865:
1860:
1858:
1857:
1848:
1847:
1844:
1838:
1835:
1833:
1830:
1828:
1825:
1823:
1820:
1818:
1815:
1813:
1810:
1808:
1805:
1803:
1800:
1798:
1795:
1793:
1790:
1788:
1785:
1783:
1780:
1778:
1775:
1773:
1770:
1768:
1765:
1764:
1762:
1760:and personnel
1758:Organisations
1756:
1751:
1733:
1730:
1729:
1727:
1723:
1717:
1714:
1712:
1709:
1707:
1704:
1702:
1699:
1697:
1694:
1692:
1691:Holmside Hall
1689:
1687:
1684:
1682:
1679:
1677:
1676:Blyth Harbour
1674:
1673:
1671:
1667:
1664:
1662:
1658:
1648:
1645:
1644:
1642:
1638:
1632:
1629:
1628:
1626:
1622:
1616:
1613:
1611:
1608:
1606:
1603:
1601:
1598:
1596:
1593:
1592:
1590:
1586:
1580:
1577:
1575:
1572:
1571:
1569:
1565:
1562:
1560:
1556:
1546:
1543:
1542:
1540:
1536:
1533:
1531:
1527:
1517:
1514:
1513:
1511:
1507:
1501:
1498:
1497:
1495:
1491:
1488:
1486:
1482:
1472:
1469:
1468:
1466:
1462:
1456:
1453:
1451:
1448:
1447:
1445:
1441:
1438:
1436:
1432:
1422:
1419:
1418:
1416:
1412:
1406:
1403:
1401:
1398:
1397:
1395:
1391:
1385:
1382:
1381:
1379:
1375:
1369:
1366:
1364:
1361:
1360:
1358:
1354:
1351:
1349:
1345:
1335:
1332:
1330:
1327:
1325:
1322:
1321:
1319:
1315:
1309:
1306:
1304:
1301:
1299:
1296:
1294:
1293:South Shields
1291:
1289:
1286:
1284:
1281:
1279:
1276:
1274:
1271:
1269:
1266:
1264:
1261:
1259:
1256:
1254:
1251:
1249:
1246:
1244:
1241:
1239:
1236:
1234:
1231:
1229:
1226:
1224:
1221:
1219:
1216:
1214:
1211:
1209:
1206:
1204:
1201:
1199:
1196:
1194:
1191:
1189:
1186:
1185:
1183:
1179:
1176:
1174:
1170:
1160:
1157:
1155:
1152:
1150:
1147:
1145:
1142:
1140:
1137:
1136:
1134:
1130:
1124:
1121:
1119:
1116:
1114:
1111:
1110:
1108:
1104:
1101:
1099:
1095:
1092:
1090:
1084:
1080:
1076:
1069:
1064:
1062:
1057:
1055:
1050:
1049:
1046:
1039:
1038:Energy portal
1033:
1028:
1025:
1014:
997:
996:
991:
985:
969:
965:
961:
955:
939:
938:
930:
924:
909:
907:0-471-27940-4
903:
899:
895:
894:
886:
884:
867:
866:
861:
855:
853:
833:
829:
822:
816:
800:
796:
792:
785:
769:
765:
759:
744:
742:0-19-854673-4
738:
734:
730:
729:
721:
719:
717:
715:
713:
711:
709:
707:
705:
703:
701:
699:
697:
681:: 63, 93, 522
680:
676:
672:
665:
663:
661:
659:
657:
655:
653:
651:
634:
630:
624:
622:
620:
618:
616:
614:
612:
610:
608:
606:
604:
602:
597:
589:
586:
582:
578:
568:
564:
562:
558:
552:
548:
544:
541:
540:
534:
531:
526:
524:
518:
516:
512:
508:
504:
500:
499:Cyril Hurcomb
497:
486:
484:
478:
476:
475:Northern Echo
470:
468:
463:
458:
456:
450:
448:
443:
439:
434:
431:
427:
422:
420:
414:
410:
406:
404:
400:
396:
392:
387:
384:
376:
371:
362:
360:
355:
353:
349:
345:
342:
337:
335:
331:
327:
322:
320:
319:conveyor belt
316:
312:
311:Leamside Line
308:
304:
299:
296:
292:
282:
278:
276:
272:
271:County Durham
267:
263:
259:
255:
251:
247:
243:
233:
231:
227:
223:
219:
215:
211:
207:
203:
199:
195:
191:
187:
176:
170:
167:
164:
160:
155:
151:
149:
145:
140:
137:
134:
130:
125:
122:
119:
115:
111:
107:
103:
99:
94:
66:
62:
58:
55:
51:
47:
43:
39:
32:
27:
22:
19:
1861:
1849:
1701:North Steads
1696:Langley Park
1595:Blaydon Burn
1516:Druridge Bay
1333:
1329:Eston Grange
1283:Philadelphia
1263:Neptune Bank
1139:BEI-Teesside
1002:16 September
1000:. Retrieved
993:
984:
972:. Retrieved
967:
963:
954:
942:. Retrieved
935:
923:
911:. Retrieved
896:. New York:
892:
872:16 September
870:. Retrieved
863:
841:16 September
839:. Retrieved
832:the original
827:
815:
805:16 September
803:. Retrieved
799:the original
784:
774:16 September
772:. Retrieved
758:
746:. Retrieved
727:
685:18 September
683:. Retrieved
678:
674:
639:25 September
637:. Retrieved
632:
585:Lewis Silkin
574:
565:
556:
553:
549:
545:
537:
535:
527:
519:
493:
480:
471:
459:
455:Charles Grey
451:
435:
423:
416:
412:
407:
388:
380:
356:
338:
323:
300:
288:
279:
239:
185:
183:
18:
1716:West Durham
1278:Pandon Dene
1233:Forth Banks
1149:North Blyth
449:broadcast.
438:White Paper
246:rifle range
152:150 MW
88: /
64:Coordinates
1884:Categories
1500:Hartlepool
1363:Seal Sands
1303:Sunderland
1273:North Tees
1218:Darlington
1144:Billingham
1087:Generating
766:. Durham:
731:. Oxford:
592:References
530:Plasticine
341:bottom ash
250:River Wear
236:Background
194:River Wear
73:54°47′10″N
1640:Cancelled
1615:Whinfield
1579:Wilton 11
1509:Cancelled
1414:Cancelled
1317:Cancelled
1308:Whinfield
1248:Lynemouth
1243:Lemington
1123:Wilton 10
1118:Lynemouth
974:2 October
944:2 October
913:2 October
748:2 October
577:ex gratia
557:The Times
539:The Times
352:spoil tip
315:Gilesgate
307:megawatts
226:megawatts
216:from the
104:Cancelled
76:1°33′43″W
1837:Reyrolle
1725:Proposed
1706:Teesside
1624:Proposed
1610:Portrack
1574:Teesside
1471:Cragside
1393:Proposed
1384:Teesside
1198:Carville
1159:Tyne REP
1132:Proposed
937:BBC News
330:chimneys
277:access.
266:post-war
117:Owner(s)
53:Location
1732:Kielder
1485:Nuclear
1455:Kielder
1450:Derwent
1421:Newburn
1228:Dunston
1213:Consett
1098:Biomass
571:Outcome
490:Inquiry
395:skyline
348:Fly ash
344:clinker
192:on the
162:Commons
48:England
45:Country
1669:Active
1588:Closed
1567:Active
1545:Wilton
1538:Active
1493:Active
1464:Closed
1443:Active
1377:Closed
1368:Wilton
1356:Active
1334:Kepier
1298:Stella
1258:Manors
1181:Closed
1106:Active
904:
739:
285:Design
258:Durham
254:Kepier
202:Durham
198:Kepier
101:Status
57:Kepier
1802:Narec
1647:Blyth
1559:Waste
1435:Hydro
1208:Close
1193:Blyth
1089:sites
932:(STM)
835:(PDF)
824:(PDF)
252:, at
173:[
1661:Wind
1173:Coal
1154:Tees
1004:2011
976:2011
946:2011
915:2011
902:ISBN
874:2011
843:2011
807:2011
776:2011
750:2011
737:ISBN
687:2011
641:2011
275:rail
184:The
136:Coal
1530:Oil
1348:Gas
1077:in
968:159
679:133
447:BBC
419:lee
196:at
1886::
992:.
966:.
962:.
934:.
882:^
862:.
851:^
826:.
695:^
677:.
673:.
649:^
631:.
600:^
517:.
405:.
354:.
1067:e
1060:t
1053:v
1006:.
978:.
948:.
917:.
876:.
845:.
809:.
778:.
752:.
689:.
643:.
177:]
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
