New Forest councillors expect more proposals to expand docks (From Daily Echo)

I am 100% in favour of Dibden Bay.
.
It should already have been built and all the projections by ABP have been proved right.
.
It's a joke it was stopped based upon flimsy environmental grounds. It's just reclaimed private land that is nothing special at all.
.
GET IT BUILT

Common wrote:
I am 100% in favour of Dibden Bay.
.
It should already have been built and all the projections by ABP have been proved right.
.
It's a joke it was stopped based upon flimsy environmental grounds. It's just reclaimed private land that is nothing special at all.
.
GET IT BUILT

I agree, and wouldn't it be good to have an accurate discussion here based on sound economic principles and an understand of commercial strategy rather than the conditions of the present day? But it hasn't happened yet so expect factual innacuracy, useless political dogma, exaggeration, scaremongering, an indecipherable ramble from Ron Manager (aka Goard), shrub hugging from people who think this is somehow in the New Forest, and finally a dyslexic steer from the president of the Southampton Marine Mollusc Lovers and Anti Dredge Society (guess who)

I agree that Dibden Bay should be developed.

If you looked from Southampton Water you would see ESSO Fawley, various chemical plants and marine industrial jetties and workshops upto Hythe Marina. Dibden was a bay and is now scrubland, hardly an area of outstanding natural beauty.

If people do not want Dibden I recommend that they buy British goods and not shop at Argos, IKEA, B&Q..... or anything with Made in China on it. If you have bought anything with Made in China on it, you are contributing to the need for Dibden Bay, simple.

The port is an economic generator for South Hampshire pumping a large ammount of money in to our region. Dibden Bay is the only area left for port expansion.

Get it built, give Southampton residents some of their city centre waterfront back!

Sotonianman wrote:
I agree that Dibden Bay should be developed. If you looked from Southampton Water you would see ESSO Fawley, various chemical plants and marine industrial jetties and workshops upto Hythe Marina. Dibden was a bay and is now scrubland, hardly an area of outstanding natural beauty. If people do not want Dibden I recommend that they buy British goods and not shop at Argos, IKEA, B&Q..... or anything with Made in China on it. If you have bought anything with Made in China on it, you are contributing to the need for Dibden Bay, simple. The port is an economic generator for South Hampshire pumping a large ammount of money in to our region. Dibden Bay is the only area left for port expansion.

The Esso refinery at Fawley was opened in 1951 by Clement Attlee, but before it's construction, the are was woodland and agricultural land, part of the Cadland estate.
Then came the various chemical plants.
In the late 50's and early 60's they employed thousands of workers, but with automation and computerisation, the workforce has more than halved since then, and in some cases, the companies have closed down.
What else has been built there?
An industrial incinerator which The Echo has recently informed us, could well take nuclear waste, which was not exactly greeted with glee by Southampton residents, but it is just another industry that moved to, what was once, a green field site.
If ABP build on Dibden Bay the job situation will be similar to that experienced when ESSO built at Fawley.
An immediate influx of workers for construction, but once up and running, the work-force steadily decreases.
In the 50's, the refinery was not computerised nor was there a great deal of automation, but as it became available it was introduced with inevitable consequences.
Now, nearly 60 years later, ABP would not have to wait to learn about automation and computerisation, because it is already here.
There would probably be more jobs created if Dibden Bay were incorporated into the New Forest Park. I have yet to hear of an automated Park Warden that was computer operated!

timjim wrote:
Get it built, give Southampton residents some of their city centre waterfront back!

How long has Southampton City Centre been located on the waterfront?

Why do you want waterfront back, when others appear to be wanting the jobs that it apparently provides?

When these jobs are local, why then would people want to spend extra time travelling to Dibden Bay?

Southampton has already claimed and renamed Eastleigh Airport, and has now set its sights on incorporating Dibden Bay into Southampton as well!

What next? Romsey? Winchester? Hamble?

fao Linesman. Why do you only mention industrial sites? Far more land has been taken and used for housing and amenities and you don't even mention them at all despite there being closer to what you regard as the new forest. Surely they too were once "green". So was your own house come to think of it .So what's your point?

Common wrote:
I am 100% in favour of Dibden Bay.
.
It should already have been built and all the projections by ABP have been proved right.
.
It's a joke it was stopped based upon flimsy environmental grounds. It's just reclaimed private land that is nothing special at all.
.
GET IT BUILT

Absolutely, couldn't agree more. Aren't we struggling enough in this town? We need the jobs, we need the industry back.

Common wrote:
I am 100% in favour of Dibden Bay.
.
It should already have been built and all the projections by ABP have been proved right.
.
It's a joke it was stopped based upon flimsy environmental grounds. It's just reclaimed private land that is nothing special at all.
.
GET IT BUILT

error common not off abp projections have proven right, some have some have not.
some environmental grounds are flimsy, but the marine ones are not, unless you want a dirty smelly river, whitch in turn will drive away the passenger ships.

new forest if they want to stop any new attempt or new planning, the answer there is to put a compulsory purchase order on the land.

abp knows that the future ships are going to get bigger, bigger than the emma, and she dont come up here, they could not make the channel wide enough for her to come up here just in case some thing do go wrong. what is not general known is that in the pass containers ships have been diverted to the container port on the east coast felixstowe, because theres been a very strong west to east wind, its ok if your running with the wind or going head on into the wind. the problem is when the ship has to run broad side to the wind. theres all ready been containers ships that have been grounded down at the entrance to southampton water.
its not quay side space that the dock needs for containers, has container ships are going to get bigger (this will also mean there be less container ships) its room where to put these containers. its even a bigger problem when they come back to southampton empty. empty containers have been building up ever since the 80's because our export is very little to what it use to be.

Southy says "its not quay side space that the dock needs for containers, has container ships are going to get bigger (this will also mean there be less container ships) its room where to put these containers"
Agreed up to a point Southy but it needs both, not one or the other. They must both grow. Also your point about wind is misleading. There are more wind problems in Felixstowe than in Southampton- Ben Doone has already pointed this out on other occasions. And every port has problems - Antwerp is far worse than Southampton and Felisxstowe and is more successful than both of them combined so why do you keep trying to imply that DP business analysts don't actually know their own cost models? Do you suggest they get the Southampton Socialist Party in as consultants? (I can imagine DP slapping their foreheads and thinking "Oh no - if only we'd remembered what Southy said about ship sizes!")

Linesman wrote:

Sotonianman wrote:
I agree that Dibden Bay should be developed. If you looked from Southampton Water you would see ESSO Fawley, various chemical plants and marine industrial jetties and workshops upto Hythe Marina. Dibden was a bay and is now scrubland, hardly an area of outstanding natural beauty. If people do not want Dibden I recommend that they buy British goods and not shop at Argos, IKEA, B&Q..... or anything with Made in China on it. If you have bought anything with Made in China on it, you are contributing to the need for Dibden Bay, simple. The port is an economic generator for South Hampshire pumping a large ammount of money in to our region. Dibden Bay is the only area left for port expansion.

The Esso refinery at Fawley was opened in 1951 by Clement Attlee, but before it's construction, the are was woodland and agricultural land, part of the Cadland estate.
Then came the various chemical plants.
In the late 50's and early 60's they employed thousands of workers, but with automation and computerisation, the workforce has more than halved since then, and in some cases, the companies have closed down.
What else has been built there?
An industrial incinerator which The Echo has recently informed us, could well take nuclear waste, which was not exactly greeted with glee by Southampton residents, but it is just another industry that moved to, what was once, a green field site.
If ABP build on Dibden Bay the job situation will be similar to that experienced when ESSO built at Fawley.
An immediate influx of workers for construction, but once up and running, the work-force steadily decreases.
In the 50's, the refinery was not computerised nor was there a great deal of automation, but as it became available it was introduced with inevitable consequences.
Now, nearly 60 years later, ABP would not have to wait to learn about automation and computerisation, because it is already here.
There would probably be more jobs created if Dibden Bay were incorporated into the New Forest Park. I have yet to hear of an automated Park Warden that was computer operated!

Not quite true. The original refinery was built for AGWI (later ESSO) in 1922. It was expanded in 1951.

Dibden Bay was reclaimed by ABP's predecessors in the '60s for the purpose of Docks expansion.

ship sizes is a fact, they are going to get bigger, southampton container port is only going to become a feeder port according to an EU directive.
the number of berths on the quay dont need to grow with the amount of space needed for containers what we got now could take 3 ships the size of the emma. and has ships in the future are going to be even bigger, they too will not come up here. has it is there are days when no container ships are in port. i belive over the next 4 days its going to be a bit busy with 7 containers ships coming in and out.
the wind is not misleading here the wind effects the ship movement coming in and out at the entrance, in felixstowe the wind effects the cranes and not the ship, wind has all ways been a problem when it comes to lifting in to the air and not just cranes, where a ship if it heads in to the wind there is more and better control over the ship. need to remember ships the larger they are the more speed is needed to keep steerage way. if you head a ship into the wind this means you can go slower and still keep steerage way. the worse condition you can have with a ship leaving port. is a cross wind and an out going tide, in coming tide if coming into port.
i do agree with ben on the loading and unloading of ships with cranes, we have lost fewer days than felixstowe when it comes to this, but ben did not say how many ships had to be diverted because of the wind this number adds up more than felixstowe. a northley wind effects shipping in and out off felixstowe but that same wind effects southampton with the loading and unloading. and the westerly wind is the opposite

ecuk268 wrote:

Linesman wrote:

Sotonianman wrote:
I agree that Dibden Bay should be developed. If you looked from Southampton Water you would see ESSO Fawley, various chemical plants and marine industrial jetties and workshops upto Hythe Marina. Dibden was a bay and is now scrubland, hardly an area of outstanding natural beauty. If people do not want Dibden I recommend that they buy British goods and not shop at Argos, IKEA, B&Q..... or anything with Made in China on it. If you have bought anything with Made in China on it, you are contributing to the need for Dibden Bay, simple. The port is an economic generator for South Hampshire pumping a large ammount of money in to our region. Dibden Bay is the only area left for port expansion.

The Esso refinery at Fawley was opened in 1951 by Clement Attlee, but before it's construction, the are was woodland and agricultural land, part of the Cadland estate.
Then came the various chemical plants.
In the late 50's and early 60's they employed thousands of workers, but with automation and computerisation, the workforce has more than halved since then, and in some cases, the companies have closed down.
What else has been built there?
An industrial incinerator which The Echo has recently informed us, could well take nuclear waste, which was not exactly greeted with glee by Southampton residents, but it is just another industry that moved to, what was once, a green field site.
If ABP build on Dibden Bay the job situation will be similar to that experienced when ESSO built at Fawley.
An immediate influx of workers for construction, but once up and running, the work-force steadily decreases.
In the 50's, the refinery was not computerised nor was there a great deal of automation, but as it became available it was introduced with inevitable consequences.
Now, nearly 60 years later, ABP would not have to wait to learn about automation and computerisation, because it is already here.
There would probably be more jobs created if Dibden Bay were incorporated into the New Forest Park. I have yet to hear of an automated Park Warden that was computer operated!

Not quite true. The original refinery was built for AGWI (later ESSO) in 1922. It was expanded in 1951.

Dibden Bay was reclaimed by ABP's predecessors in the '60s for the purpose of Docks expansion.

agwi in 1922 had storages tanks it was in the late 30's when a small cracker unit was built there, it was a very crude cracker unit, has there was not many cars about then a full refinery was not needed, just a unit to make raw basic fuel for surplus.
60's thats close enough for me. was not dock expansion, but for dock related business.

Linesman wrote:

Sotonianman wrote: I agree that Dibden Bay should be developed. If you looked from Southampton Water you would see ESSO Fawley, various chemical plants and marine industrial jetties and workshops upto Hythe Marina. Dibden was a bay and is now scrubland, hardly an area of outstanding natural beauty. If people do not want Dibden I recommend that they buy British goods and not shop at Argos, IKEA, B&Q..... or anything with Made in China on it. If you have bought anything with Made in China on it, you are contributing to the need for Dibden Bay, simple. The port is an economic generator for South Hampshire pumping a large ammount of money in to our region. Dibden Bay is the only area left for port expansion.

The Esso refinery at Fawley was opened in 1951 by Clement Attlee, but before it's construction, the are was woodland and agricultural land, part of the Cadland estate. Then came the various chemical plants. In the late 50's and early 60's they employed thousands of workers, but with automation and computerisation, the workforce has more than halved since then, and in some cases, the companies have closed down. What else has been built there? An industrial incinerator which The Echo has recently informed us, could well take nuclear waste, which was not exactly greeted with glee by Southampton residents, but it is just another industry that moved to, what was once, a green field site. If ABP build on Dibden Bay the job situation will be similar to that experienced when ESSO built at Fawley. An immediate influx of workers for construction, but once up and running, the work-force steadily decreases. In the 50's, the refinery was not computerised nor was there a great deal of automation, but as it became available it was introduced with inevitable consequences. Now, nearly 60 years later, ABP would not have to wait to learn about automation and computerisation, because it is already here. There would probably be more jobs created if Dibden Bay were incorporated into the New Forest Park. I have yet to hear of an automated Park Warden that was computer operated!

Linesman
There is no denying that automation is endemic in all industrie. Some may call this progress.
However ports generally provide relatively well paid jobs and a stable economic environment. Not too many industries of note have survived in the S Hants region for 170 years or more
Also, port activity, as Andy of Locksheath has mentioned before, funnels back into the local economy (the multiplier effect).
I have to question your comment that more jobs would result if Dibden Bay was incorporated into the New Forest National Park. The land is featureless (and full of protected species as we are often led to believe) and unlikely to support many, if any, Park Wardens. (How much are these guys paid btw?)
Also I am sure I read elsehere that some of the camping sites in the NFNP are being closed down so presumably any leisure job opportunities have alreadyreduced
I have no idea whether the initial construction phase will benefit local companies. History is against this. Look at big construction projects in the UK's past, eg canals/railways/port
s/motorways, all undertaken by mainly Irish navigators.
Channel Tunnel/2012 Olympics involve mainly E European labour because they are relatively cheap and work hard.(same as the Indians in Dubai)
Maybe this will change by the time Dibden is developed, possibly 10 yrs hence, but who knows?
As I have consisently said, let's keep an open mind!!

If I was a parent of a school leaver on Waterside I'd be so grateful to Linesman for his careers advice. ......"You don't want to be an engineer, a driver, an electrician, a rigger, a manager, a builder, a train driver, a caterer, a fireman or a port worker. No, you want to be an Ice cream man or a car park attendant!"
"Oh, and if you don't like it you can leave home and sod off to Felixstowe because your jobs are spoiling the view for these pensioners".

The land is featureless (and full of protected species as we are often led to believe) and unlikely to support many.

ben not quiet true, if your looking at the picture and saying that when this picture was taken. that might of been the case. this picture must be close to 30 years old.
there is loads of trees on this ground now. a lot more than this picture shows.
so echo can we have an up to date picture off this ground.

I really enjoy how Southy makes every single thing he says up on this forum.
.
I bet he argues with himself in the confides of his padded cell.

The Wickham Man wrote:
If I was a parent of a school leaver on Waterside I'd be so grateful to Linesman for his careers advice. ......"You don't want to be an engineer, a driver, an electrician, a rigger, a manager, a builder, a train driver, a caterer, a fireman or a port worker. No, you want to be an Ice cream man or a car park attendant!" "Oh, and if you don't like it you can leave home and sod off to Felixstowe because your jobs are spoiling the view for these pensioners".

I think another important consideration is the future of Esso Fawley.
I was talking to a fairly senior Exxon manager recently who told me that Exxon have built 2 brand new refineries in India which produce refined product at a much cheaper rate than Europe.
So assuming this is all correct and assuming the requirement for refined products will reduce anyway, as other energy sources kick in, who's to say that the petro chemical industry on the Waterside (which is a massive economic generator) will be alive and kicking 10 yrs hence?
Perhaps Linesman is right. Park warden jobs may well be the way forward

southy wrote:
The land is featureless (and full of protected species as we are often led to believe) and unlikely to support many. ben not quiet true, if your looking at the picture and saying that when this picture was taken. that might of been the case. this picture must be close to 30 years old. there is loads of trees on this ground now. a lot more than this picture shows. so echo can we have an up to date picture off this ground.

Peter
Have just looked at the latest satellite pictures for the Waterside. Frankly can't see much difference so, if what you say is correct, the trees must be of a special dwarf variety.
The only real tree line of note, apart from those clustered around the original shoreline by the road, are those on the new shoreline adjacent to Marchwood Military Port, as shown on the western end of the Echo photo.
In my view the Echo photo is probably fairly recent (ie within last 2 yrs or so)

its an old picture ben, look a long the water line. even google maps is showing an old picture, that white boat in the picture has been gone now for at lest 5 years. cant remember when that was towed over there, but it was a long time ago now. in this picture its showing when it was still floating, on google its showing when it was sunk. witch is a shame really it look like if it was once a fine looking boat.
but there is loads of young willows. scattered all over the place.

Common wrote:
I really enjoy how Southy makes every single thing he says up on this forum.
.
I bet he argues with himself in the confides of his padded cell.

"I bet he argues with himself in the confides of his padded cell."

Yeah. Likely plays Scrabble against himself to pass the time. Always loses because he cheats.

sw=plan-site (hilarious, says it all!)

ben interesting in what you said about the refinery
""Exxon manager recently who told me that Exxon have built 2 brand new refineries in India which produce refined product at a much cheaper rate than Europe.""
had heard some thing like that years ago. you think there soon might be a scale down in operations there. and the place ending up how it started just storage tanks.

The Wickham Man wrote:

Common wrote:
I am 100% in favour of Dibden Bay.
.
It should already have been built and all the projections by ABP have been proved right.
.
It's a joke it was stopped based upon flimsy environmental grounds. It's just reclaimed private land that is nothing special at all.
.
GET IT BUILT

I agree, and wouldn't it be good to have an accurate discussion here based on sound economic principles and an understand of commercial strategy rather than the conditions of the present day? But it hasn't happened yet so expect factual innacuracy, useless political dogma, exaggeration, scaremongering, an indecipherable ramble from Ron Manager (aka Goard), shrub hugging from people who think this is somehow in the New Forest, and finally a dyslexic steer from the president of the Southampton Marine Mollusc Lovers and Anti Dredge Society (guess who)

" ( guess who ) ".

There is no guess-work involved. His ancestory can be traced back to Canute.

When faced with compelling, rational, factual, reasoned debate he inevitably reaches into his capacious Fib Cupboard to grab a handful of impossible-to-valida
te anectodal twaddle to bolster his flim-flam silly nonsense.

When he reads the Echo 10 years from now he'll be reading a fulsome account of the opening ceremony of the new Dibden Bay Dock Facility.

I know it's not very constructive to look at the past but ABP once had more than enough riverside land on the Southampton side - with excellent rail and road connections.
However, they deliberately chose to become property speculators, selling off large areas for housing and other uses, banking several millions in the process.
Not much forward planning there then?
DB is one of the last "green" patches of land on that side of Southampton Water and together with it's foreshore are internationally significant for their wildlife and ecology. Incorporation into the NF National Park is by far the better use for this parcel of land.
Letting the unscrupulous money-grabbing ABP get their own way after another "we will do what we want or leave altogether" blackmail tantrum is a position that should be vigorously resisted.

Clausentum. You if you got nothing contructive to say. Please be quiet and learn.
We here at the UKIP office's, do very much enjoy a good read of some off the debates, More so with people like Andy of Lock Heath, Ben boome, Southy and a few other.s, Those sort of people are very informative.
And before you post again. People would listen more to Southy than your self. The reason being is when Southy is not dead on with facts, He is very close to the mark, Andy of Locks Heath had said simular things about Southy in the pass.

Ben Doone wrote:

The Wickham Man wrote: If I was a parent of a school leaver on Waterside I'd be so grateful to Linesman for his careers advice. ......"You don't want to be an engineer, a driver, an electrician, a rigger, a manager, a builder, a train driver, a caterer, a fireman or a port worker. No, you want to be an Ice cream man or a car park attendant!" "Oh, and if you don't like it you can leave home and sod off to Felixstowe because your jobs are spoiling the view for these pensioners".

I think another important consideration is the future of Esso Fawley. I was talking to a fairly senior Exxon manager recently who told me that Exxon have built 2 brand new refineries in India which produce refined product at a much cheaper rate than Europe. So assuming this is all correct and assuming the requirement for refined products will reduce anyway, as other energy sources kick in, who's to say that the petro chemical industry on the Waterside (which is a massive economic generator) will be alive and kicking 10 yrs hence? Perhaps Linesman is right. Park warden jobs may well be the way forward

Absolute nonsense! Exxonmobil have zero, (that's nothing!) refinery capacity in India. Whoever you were talking with was telling lies! The only refining capacity XOM have near India is in Saudi Arabia and that is a joint venture with SABIC the state owned oil company. Pure conjecture!

forest hump wrote:

Ben Doone wrote:

The Wickham Man wrote: If I was a parent of a school leaver on Waterside I'd be so grateful to Linesman for his careers advice. ......"You don't want to be an engineer, a driver, an electrician, a rigger, a manager, a builder, a train driver, a caterer, a fireman or a port worker. No, you want to be an Ice cream man or a car park attendant!" "Oh, and if you don't like it you can leave home and sod off to Felixstowe because your jobs are spoiling the view for these pensioners".

I think another important consideration is the future of Esso Fawley. I was talking to a fairly senior Exxon manager recently who told me that Exxon have built 2 brand new refineries in India which produce refined product at a much cheaper rate than Europe. So assuming this is all correct and assuming the requirement for refined products will reduce anyway, as other energy sources kick in, who's to say that the petro chemical industry on the Waterside (which is a massive economic generator) will be alive and kicking 10 yrs hence? Perhaps Linesman is right. Park warden jobs may well be the way forward

Absolute nonsense! Exxonmobil have zero, (that's nothing!) refinery capacity in India. Whoever you were talking with was telling lies! The only refining capacity XOM have near India is in Saudi Arabia and that is a joint venture with SABIC the state owned oil company. Pure conjecture!

And by the way!! get the Dibden Bay development built. Dual the A-326: Improve the rail links and get some proper infrastructure into the Waterside. Environmental site? absolute nonsense. It used to be a bog until it was reclaimed. QED

ecuk268 wrote:

Linesman wrote:

Sotonianman wrote: I agree that Dibden Bay should be developed. If you looked from Southampton Water you would see ESSO Fawley, various chemical plants and marine industrial jetties and workshops upto Hythe Marina. Dibden was a bay and is now scrubland, hardly an area of outstanding natural beauty. If people do not want Dibden I recommend that they buy British goods and not shop at Argos, IKEA, B&Q..... or anything with Made in China on it. If you have bought anything with Made in China on it, you are contributing to the need for Dibden Bay, simple. The port is an economic generator for South Hampshire pumping a large ammount of money in to our region. Dibden Bay is the only area left for port expansion.

The Esso refinery at Fawley was opened in 1951 by Clement Attlee, but before it's construction, the are was woodland and agricultural land, part of the Cadland estate. Then came the various chemical plants. In the late 50's and early 60's they employed thousands of workers, but with automation and computerisation, the workforce has more than halved since then, and in some cases, the companies have closed down. What else has been built there? An industrial incinerator which The Echo has recently informed us, could well take nuclear waste, which was not exactly greeted with glee by Southampton residents, but it is just another industry that moved to, what was once, a green field site. If ABP build on Dibden Bay the job situation will be similar to that experienced when ESSO built at Fawley. An immediate influx of workers for construction, but once up and running, the work-force steadily decreases. In the 50's, the refinery was not computerised nor was there a great deal of automation, but as it became available it was introduced with inevitable consequences. Now, nearly 60 years later, ABP would not have to wait to learn about automation and computerisation, because it is already here. There would probably be more jobs created if Dibden Bay were incorporated into the New Forest Park. I have yet to hear of an automated Park Warden that was computer operated!

Not quite true. The original refinery was built for AGWI (later ESSO) in 1922. It was expanded in 1951. Dibden Bay was reclaimed by ABP's predecessors in the '60s for the purpose of Docks expansion.

Sorry, but true. The original AGWI site was purchased by Esso and expanded into a new Refinery, opened in 1951. Of course Esso (S.O) was a corruption of its original American name, Standard Oil of New Jersey. AGWI was never a derivative of Exxon (Esso).

Paul Linford wrote:
Clausentum. You if you got nothing contructive to say. Please be quiet and learn.
We here at the UKIP office's, do very much enjoy a good read of some off the debates, More so with people like Andy of Lock Heath, Ben boome, Southy and a few other.s, Those sort of people are very informative.
And before you post again. People would listen more to Southy than your self. The reason being is when Southy is not dead on with facts, He is very close to the mark, Andy of Locks Heath had said simular things about Southy in the pass.

Oh, I said that to clausentum once - but I must admit I was wrong to do so. Comes up with some very witty and telling one-liners.
Although I admit I'm rubbish at spelling I've got to say your grammer and punctuation is diabolical - are there any in your party who can do any better?

Ben Doone wrote:

The Wickham Man wrote:
If I was a parent of a school leaver on Waterside I'd be so grateful to Linesman for his careers advice. ......"You don't want to be an engineer, a driver, an electrician, a rigger, a manager, a builder, a train driver, a caterer, a fireman or a port worker. No, you want to be an Ice cream man or a car park attendant!" "Oh, and if you don't like it you can leave home and sod off to Felixstowe because your jobs are spoiling the view for these pensioners".

I think another important consideration is the future of Esso Fawley.
I was talking to a fairly senior Exxon manager recently who told me that Exxon have built 2 brand new refineries in India which produce refined product at a much cheaper rate than Europe.
So assuming this is all correct and assuming the requirement for refined products will reduce anyway, as other energy sources kick in, who's to say that the petro chemical industry on the Waterside (which is a massive economic generator) will be alive and kicking 10 yrs hence?
Perhaps Linesman is right. Park warden jobs may well be the way forward

Two massive new refineries have come on line in India (or are just about to) but ExxonMobil has no interest in either of them. With Esso Fawley supplying something like 1 in 5 of every gallon of petrol in the UK, its future is fairly secure as one of the few refineries left in the country.

forest hump wrote:

forest hump wrote:

Ben Doone wrote:

The Wickham Man wrote: If I was a parent of a school leaver on Waterside I'd be so grateful to Linesman for his careers advice. ......"You don't want to be an engineer, a driver, an electrician, a rigger, a manager, a builder, a train driver, a caterer, a fireman or a port worker. No, you want to be an Ice cream man or a car park attendant!" "Oh, and if you don't like it you can leave home and sod off to Felixstowe because your jobs are spoiling the view for these pensioners".

I think another important consideration is the future of Esso Fawley. I was talking to a fairly senior Exxon manager recently who told me that Exxon have built 2 brand new refineries in India which produce refined product at a much cheaper rate than Europe. So assuming this is all correct and assuming the requirement for refined products will reduce anyway, as other energy sources kick in, who's to say that the petro chemical industry on the Waterside (which is a massive economic generator) will be alive and kicking 10 yrs hence? Perhaps Linesman is right. Park warden jobs may well be the way forward

Absolute nonsense! Exxonmobil have zero, (that's nothing!) refinery capacity in India. Whoever you were talking with was telling lies! The only refining capacity XOM have near India is in Saudi Arabia and that is a joint venture with SABIC the state owned oil company. Pure conjecture!

And by the way!! get the Dibden Bay development built. Dual the A-326: Improve the rail links and get some proper infrastructure into the Waterside. Environmental site? absolute nonsense. It used to be a bog until it was reclaimed. QED

Forest, the only thing that is true, is that two very large refineries have opened in India. Cheap labour and costs have de-stabilised the world order to a degree (how much I don't know) of oil refining capacity. This last fact was pointed out to us during a refinery state of the nation talk.

Paul Linford wrote:
Clausentum. You if you got nothing contructive to say. Please be quiet and learn.
We here at the UKIP office's, do very much enjoy a good read of some off the debates, More so with people like Andy of Lock Heath, Ben boome, Southy and a few other.s, Those sort of people are very informative.
And before you post again. People would listen more to Southy than your self. The reason being is when Southy is not dead on with facts, He is very close to the mark, Andy of Locks Heath had said simular things about Southy in the pass.

An apologist/defender of someone who has demonstrated an utter lack of credibility spanning more than a year?

Or,

"guess who" indulging in his best-joined-up-handw
riting, using an alternative username ID ?

Or,

Someone who simply cannot handle a forum open to all that is comprised of a wide variety of contributions - all of which have individual worth, merit, validity?

Sir Ad E Noid wrote:

forest hump wrote:

forest hump wrote:

Ben Doone wrote:

The Wickham Man wrote: If I was a parent of a school leaver on Waterside I'd be so grateful to Linesman for his careers advice. ......"You don't want to be an engineer, a driver, an electrician, a rigger, a manager, a builder, a train driver, a caterer, a fireman or a port worker. No, you want to be an Ice cream man or a car park attendant!" "Oh, and if you don't like it you can leave home and sod off to Felixstowe because your jobs are spoiling the view for these pensioners".

I think another important consideration is the future of Esso Fawley. I was talking to a fairly senior Exxon manager recently who told me that Exxon have built 2 brand new refineries in India which produce refined product at a much cheaper rate than Europe. So assuming this is all correct and assuming the requirement for refined products will reduce anyway, as other energy sources kick in, who's to say that the petro chemical industry on the Waterside (which is a massive economic generator) will be alive and kicking 10 yrs hence? Perhaps Linesman is right. Park warden jobs may well be the way forward

Absolute nonsense! Exxonmobil have zero, (that's nothing!) refinery capacity in India. Whoever you were talking with was telling lies! The only refining capacity XOM have near India is in Saudi Arabia and that is a joint venture with SABIC the state owned oil company. Pure conjecture!

And by the way!! get the Dibden Bay development built. Dual the A-326: Improve the rail links and get some proper infrastructure into the Waterside. Environmental site? absolute nonsense. It used to be a bog until it was reclaimed. QED

Forest, the only thing that is true, is that two very large refineries have opened in India. Cheap labour and costs have de-stabilised the world order to a degree (how much I don't know) of oil refining capacity. This last fact was pointed out to us during a refinery state of the nation talk.

Sir, I do not deny that extra downstream capacity has recently come online in India. The point I am making is: Ben Doone is wrong in his statement. Whoever the " fairly senior Manager" thinks he is, is totally wrong.

Thanks to the posters who have commented on the Indian refinery challenges.
Apologies if my info doesn't appear to be spot on. Will check sources and report back
Whilst not an expert on UK Oil Refining hasn't there been a few refineries shut in the Uk in recent years? Certainly the projected container facility on the Thames at Thurrock was originally an old Oil Refinery

Forest, Correct, Regards.

Ben, India - yes, Exxon - no. Best check your contacts. I think you are correct on Thames Refinery. If I remember correctly, last planning application stated that major container company had purchased site to expand, hence no need for DB, for the time being. I think that time being, looks to be fast running out.

freefinker wrote:
I know it's not very constructive to look at the past but ABP once had more than enough riverside land on the Southampton side - with excellent rail and road connections. However, they deliberately chose to become property speculators, selling off large areas for housing and other uses, banking several millions in the process. Not much forward planning there then? DB is one of the last "green" patches of land on that side of Southampton Water and together with it's foreshore are internationally significant for their wildlife and ecology. Incorporation into the NF National Park is by far the better use for this parcel of land. Letting the unscrupulous money-grabbing ABP get their own way after another "we will do what we want or leave altogether" blackmail tantrum is a position that should be vigorously resisted.

Freefinker
Of course ABP opened themselves up to subsequent criticism for selling off land at Ocean Village and I guess with hindsight they now regret the land sale. However you should note that the sale was prior to the repeal of the National Dock Labour Act which hung like a millstone around all those UK ports who were saddled with the high costs of this legislation. If you take a snapshot of all Uk ports most were selling off pieces of port estate with shallow berths close to town centres, so ABP were, rightly or wrongly, following the industry norm.
However I think around 30 or so acres were sold off to create Ocean Village. I would suggest that far more operational land has been subsequently been created by the building of 3 multi deck car parks (around 30 acres?), extension of the container terminal towards 208/9 berths, the purchase of land from the railway at Redbridge and Southern Water at Millbrook, probably 70 acres?.
I have to say I struggle with your description of Dibden Bay as 'Internationally Significant for Wildlife and Ecology' on the basis this seems to be a fairly recent observation ie subsequent to the BTDB infilling in the area in the 1960's.
You may correct me but don't remember too many people promoting the ecological significance of the Bay prior to the area being created specifically for port development.
I also struggle with understanding the term 'unscrupulous and money grabbing'. Like it or not all commercial concerns can have this accusation levelled at them. Not many large companies are philanthropic.
Finally have ABP actually said they will 'leave altogether' if they don't get their own way. Why would they want to leave a very successful port operation? They didnt after the recent defeat over the previous Dibden application

Sir Ad E Noid wrote:
Forest, Correct, Regards. Ben, India - yes, Exxon - no. Best check your contacts. I think you are correct on Thames Refinery. If I remember correctly, last planning application stated that major container company had purchased site to expand, hence no need for DB, for the time being. I think that time being, looks to be fast running out.

Gents, with respect: I think the old Canvey Island site is a prime site for redevelopment. The only downside v's Dibden is they do not have the infrastructure to support the operation. Dibden would be a perfect fit. Providing the road/rail system is upgraded.

forest hump wrote:

Sir Ad E Noid wrote: Forest, Correct, Regards. Ben, India - yes, Exxon - no. Best check your contacts. I think you are correct on Thames Refinery. If I remember correctly, last planning application stated that major container company had purchased site to expand, hence no need for DB, for the time being. I think that time being, looks to be fast running out.

Gents, with respect: I think the old Canvey Island site is a prime site for redevelopment. The only downside v's Dibden is they do not have the infrastructure to support the operation. Dibden would be a perfect fit. Providing the road/rail system is upgraded.

Forest, sadly, I agree.

Sir Ad E Noid wrote:

forest hump wrote:

Sir Ad E Noid wrote: Forest, Correct, Regards. Ben, India - yes, Exxon - no. Best check your contacts. I think you are correct on Thames Refinery. If I remember correctly, last planning application stated that major container company had purchased site to expand, hence no need for DB, for the time being. I think that time being, looks to be fast running out.

Gents, with respect: I think the old Canvey Island site is a prime site for redevelopment. The only downside v's Dibden is they do not have the infrastructure to support the operation. Dibden would be a perfect fit. Providing the road/rail system is upgraded.

Forest, sadly, I agree.

I really believe that ABP could provide a huge boost to the Waterside area. Subject to improved road and rail improvements which would relive the current nightmare onthe A-326. This would have zero impact on the "so called" heritage area. Please people, let common sense prevail. Forget all of this trendy environmental/global warming/greenish claptrap. QED

What a pleasant change to have Waterside residents joining debate with rational intelligent contributions. When we recognise that we all benefit from a vibrant economy along both shores of the Water we can then join forces in the call for better infrastructure as Forest Hump and A D noid have stated. If Hythe Marina residents had their way the rest of Waterside could rot away so long as they could pull up the drawbridge on their little private reclaimed enclave. And they won't get such a gullible public enquiry inspector next time.

heck i go away to a meeting and you lot get busy, ok first things first, and one driving the a35/6 all traffic going though the roundabout at redbridge, they left the taffic lights on doppy sods

pl take no notice of clausentum best thing with is just to ignore him.

clausentum, you wish but keep going. you drop your self in it big time.

ben very true on the oil refinery's going off line, when they built the refinery's back in the late 40's to early 60's they only gave them a 50 to 70 year life expectancy. and whats not going to help all those old refinery's are those new compact designs, that work at very much higher pressure and a hotter temp. and only take up 1/4 the space and be able to do every thing that an old refinery can do. the days at the fawley just might be numbered. its just a question of wait and see.
the bay back then when they started to infill it in they did not know any better back then, since they stop filling in the bay, we have learned a lot of new stuff how nature works, at the time we did not know what damage we was doing but now days we know better. we have learned a lot in the last 20 years and we are still learning.

like i said before its not quay side the docks need they got plenty of that, what is need is space to put those returning empty containers, or they could tell the shipping lines to take the emptys away.

southy wrote:
heck i go away to a meeting and you lot get busy, ok first things first, and one driving the a35/6 all traffic going though the roundabout at redbridge, they left the taffic lights on doppy sods

pl take no notice of clausentum best thing with is just to ignore him.

clausentum, you wish but keep going. you drop your self in it big time.

ben very true on the oil refinery's going off line, when they built the refinery's back in the late 40's to early 60's they only gave them a 50 to 70 year life expectancy. and whats not going to help all those old refinery's are those new compact designs, that work at very much higher pressure and a hotter temp. and only take up 1/4 the space and be able to do every thing that an old refinery can do. the days at the fawley just might be numbered. its just a question of wait and see.
the bay back then when they started to infill it in they did not know any better back then, since they stop filling in the bay, we have learned a lot of new stuff how nature works, at the time we did not know what damage we was doing but now days we know better. we have learned a lot in the last 20 years and we are still learning.

like i said before its not quay side the docks need they got plenty of that, what is need is space to put those returning empty containers, or they could tell the shipping lines to take the emptys away.

Heck. However big the cloud of pixie dust that escapes from your backside, you cannot escape from the "c" word.

Credibility.

It's something like wot you don't have, matey!

clausentum wrote:

southy wrote:
heck i go away to a meeting and you lot get busy, ok first things first, and one driving the a35/6 all traffic going though the roundabout at redbridge, they left the taffic lights on doppy sods

pl take no notice of clausentum best thing with is just to ignore him.

clausentum, you wish but keep going. you drop your self in it big time.

ben very true on the oil refinery's going off line, when they built the refinery's back in the late 40's to early 60's they only gave them a 50 to 70 year life expectancy. and whats not going to help all those old refinery's are those new compact designs, that work at very much higher pressure and a hotter temp. and only take up 1/4 the space and be able to do every thing that an old refinery can do. the days at the fawley just might be numbered. its just a question of wait and see.
the bay back then when they started to infill it in they did not know any better back then, since they stop filling in the bay, we have learned a lot of new stuff how nature works, at the time we did not know what damage we was doing but now days we know better. we have learned a lot in the last 20 years and we are still learning.

like i said before its not quay side the docks need they got plenty of that, what is need is space to put those returning empty containers, or they could tell the shipping lines to take the emptys away.

Heck. However big the cloud of pixie dust that escapes from your backside, you cannot escape from the "c" word.

Credibility.

It's something like wot you don't have, matey!

Empty vessels make most noise.

southy wrote:
heck i go away to a meeting and you lot get busy, ok first things first, and one driving the a35/6 all traffic going though the roundabout at redbridge, they left the taffic lights on doppy sods pl take no notice of clausentum best thing with is just to ignore him. clausentum, you wish but keep going. you drop your self in it big time. ben very true on the oil refinery's going off line, when they built the refinery's back in the late 40's to early 60's they only gave them a 50 to 70 year life expectancy. and whats not going to help all those old refinery's are those new compact designs, that work at very much higher pressure and a hotter temp. and only take up 1/4 the space and be able to do every thing that an old refinery can do. the days at the fawley just might be numbered. its just a question of wait and see. the bay back then when they started to infill it in they did not know any better back then, since they stop filling in the bay, we have learned a lot of new stuff how nature works, at the time we did not know what damage we was doing but now days we know better. we have learned a lot in the last 20 years and we are still learning. like i said before its not quay side the docks need they got plenty of that, what is need is space to put those returning empty containers, or they could tell the shipping lines to take the emptys away.

Southy, you cannot just crank up the temperatures and pressures of operating units to make them smaller! Basic Chemistry and Physics laws prevail. You are either Ill informed or in a daydream. If anything, the units of today v's the 1950's are much bigger but much more efficient and less energy intensive

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote:
heck i go away to a meeting and you lot get busy, ok first things first, and one driving the a35/6 all traffic going though the roundabout at redbridge, they left the taffic lights on doppy sods pl take no notice of clausentum best thing with is just to ignore him. clausentum, you wish but keep going. you drop your self in it big time. ben very true on the oil refinery's going off line, when they built the refinery's back in the late 40's to early 60's they only gave them a 50 to 70 year life expectancy. and whats not going to help all those old refinery's are those new compact designs, that work at very much higher pressure and a hotter temp. and only take up 1/4 the space and be able to do every thing that an old refinery can do. the days at the fawley just might be numbered. its just a question of wait and see. the bay back then when they started to infill it in they did not know any better back then, since they stop filling in the bay, we have learned a lot of new stuff how nature works, at the time we did not know what damage we was doing but now days we know better. we have learned a lot in the last 20 years and we are still learning. like i said before its not quay side the docks need they got plenty of that, what is need is space to put those returning empty containers, or they could tell the shipping lines to take the emptys away.

Southy, you cannot just crank up the temperatures and pressures of operating units to make them smaller! Basic Chemistry and Physics laws prevail. You are either Ill informed or in a daydream. If anything, the units of today v's the 1950's are much bigger but much more efficient and less energy intensive

In the fairytale mind of the deluded, simple logic is unheard of. On the other hand why upset someone who misunderstands life around them by pointing out their errors. Ignorance is bliss.

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote:
heck i go away to a meeting and you lot get busy, ok first things first, and one driving the a35/6 all traffic going though the roundabout at redbridge, they left the taffic lights on doppy sods pl take no notice of clausentum best thing with is just to ignore him. clausentum, you wish but keep going. you drop your self in it big time. ben very true on the oil refinery's going off line, when they built the refinery's back in the late 40's to early 60's they only gave them a 50 to 70 year life expectancy. and whats not going to help all those old refinery's are those new compact designs, that work at very much higher pressure and a hotter temp. and only take up 1/4 the space and be able to do every thing that an old refinery can do. the days at the fawley just might be numbered. its just a question of wait and see. the bay back then when they started to infill it in they did not know any better back then, since they stop filling in the bay, we have learned a lot of new stuff how nature works, at the time we did not know what damage we was doing but now days we know better. we have learned a lot in the last 20 years and we are still learning. like i said before its not quay side the docks need they got plenty of that, what is need is space to put those returning empty containers, or they could tell the shipping lines to take the emptys away.

Southy, you cannot just crank up the temperatures and pressures of operating units to make them smaller! Basic Chemistry and Physics laws prevail. You are either Ill informed or in a daydream. If anything, the units of today v's the 1950's are much bigger but much more efficient and less energy intensive

forest hump. i seen those new plants, and was on one has part of the crew building one, and most people have seen a picture or a film of one on tv. but may not relise what they are.
the residifinder plant in fawley. is a cracker unit and a polymer unit all in one, and is only 1/3 of the size of the cracker unit. and this was built in the refinery in 89 and 90 came on line in 91.
linsey oil refinery uses one of those new plants to produce all of there refine fuels for the market. the new refinerys are very much smaller than the 1950's style, even the metals that are used are different.
think you need to do some catching up forest things have changed a great deal.

southy wrote:

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote: heck i go away to a meeting and you lot get busy, ok first things first, and one driving the a35/6 all traffic going though the roundabout at redbridge, they left the taffic lights on doppy sods pl take no notice of clausentum best thing with is just to ignore him. clausentum, you wish but keep going. you drop your self in it big time. ben very true on the oil refinery's going off line, when they built the refinery's back in the late 40's to early 60's they only gave them a 50 to 70 year life expectancy. and whats not going to help all those old refinery's are those new compact designs, that work at very much higher pressure and a hotter temp. and only take up 1/4 the space and be able to do every thing that an old refinery can do. the days at the fawley just might be numbered. its just a question of wait and see. the bay back then when they started to infill it in they did not know any better back then, since they stop filling in the bay, we have learned a lot of new stuff how nature works, at the time we did not know what damage we was doing but now days we know better. we have learned a lot in the last 20 years and we are still learning. like i said before its not quay side the docks need they got plenty of that, what is need is space to put those returning empty containers, or they could tell the shipping lines to take the emptys away.

Southy, you cannot just crank up the temperatures and pressures of operating units to make them smaller! Basic Chemistry and Physics laws prevail. You are either Ill informed or in a daydream. If anything, the units of today v's the 1950's are much bigger but much more efficient and less energy intensive

forest hump. i seen those new plants, and was on one has part of the crew building one, and most people have seen a picture or a film of one on tv. but may not relise what they are. the residifinder plant in fawley. is a cracker unit and a polymer unit all in one, and is only 1/3 of the size of the cracker unit. and this was built in the refinery in 89 and 90 came on line in 91. linsey oil refinery uses one of those new plants to produce all of there refine fuels for the market. the new refinerys are very much smaller than the 1950's style, even the metals that are used are different. think you need to do some catching up forest things have changed a great deal.

The residfiner may be smaller than the CAT but it performs a different job, upgrading heavy ends to feed the CAT. It does not produce Polymer. LOR at Immingham might have a similar unit but these upgraders do not produce fuel as you put it. They upgrade heavy ends in order to provide more valuable feedstocks. Any how we are way off topic. Get on and build Dibden Bay!

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote:

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote: heck i go away to a meeting and you lot get busy, ok first things first, and one driving the a35/6 all traffic going though the roundabout at redbridge, they left the taffic lights on doppy sods pl take no notice of clausentum best thing with is just to ignore him. clausentum, you wish but keep going. you drop your self in it big time. ben very true on the oil refinery's going off line, when they built the refinery's back in the late 40's to early 60's they only gave them a 50 to 70 year life expectancy. and whats not going to help all those old refinery's are those new compact designs, that work at very much higher pressure and a hotter temp. and only take up 1/4 the space and be able to do every thing that an old refinery can do. the days at the fawley just might be numbered. its just a question of wait and see. the bay back then when they started to infill it in they did not know any better back then, since they stop filling in the bay, we have learned a lot of new stuff how nature works, at the time we did not know what damage we was doing but now days we know better. we have learned a lot in the last 20 years and we are still learning. like i said before its not quay side the docks need they got plenty of that, what is need is space to put those returning empty containers, or they could tell the shipping lines to take the emptys away.

Southy, you cannot just crank up the temperatures and pressures of operating units to make them smaller! Basic Chemistry and Physics laws prevail. You are either Ill informed or in a daydream. If anything, the units of today v's the 1950's are much bigger but much more efficient and less energy intensive

forest hump. i seen those new plants, and was on one has part of the crew building one, and most people have seen a picture or a film of one on tv. but may not relise what they are. the residifinder plant in fawley. is a cracker unit and a polymer unit all in one, and is only 1/3 of the size of the cracker unit. and this was built in the refinery in 89 and 90 came on line in 91. linsey oil refinery uses one of those new plants to produce all of there refine fuels for the market. the new refinerys are very much smaller than the 1950's style, even the metals that are used are different. think you need to do some catching up forest things have changed a great deal.

The residfiner may be smaller than the CAT but it performs a different job, upgrading heavy ends to feed the CAT. It does not produce Polymer. LOR at Immingham might have a similar unit but these upgraders do not produce fuel as you put it. They upgrade heavy ends in order to provide more valuable feedstocks. Any how we are way off topic. Get on and build Dibden Bay!

the resid dont do that at all, its main purpose to take the sludge that is left over from plants like the cat and crack it even harder, thats why its called the residfinder. when they shut down the cat plant and polymer plant at the same time, the resid takes over and do both plants jobs at the same time. the refinery no longer stops production like it use to, when ever the cat shuts down for work to be carried out on it. before 1991 they use to stop tankers coming in a few days before the cat plant was due to shut down, so they could run down the surplus crude oil, that dont happen any more.
when they finally shut down the cat plant, its not going to be renewed, the resid plant will take over.

southy wrote:

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote:

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote: heck i go away to a meeting and you lot get busy, ok first things first, and one driving the a35/6 all traffic going though the roundabout at redbridge, they left the taffic lights on doppy sods pl take no notice of clausentum best thing with is just to ignore him. clausentum, you wish but keep going. you drop your self in it big time. ben very true on the oil refinery's going off line, when they built the refinery's back in the late 40's to early 60's they only gave them a 50 to 70 year life expectancy. and whats not going to help all those old refinery's are those new compact designs, that work at very much higher pressure and a hotter temp. and only take up 1/4 the space and be able to do every thing that an old refinery can do. the days at the fawley just might be numbered. its just a question of wait and see. the bay back then when they started to infill it in they did not know any better back then, since they stop filling in the bay, we have learned a lot of new stuff how nature works, at the time we did not know what damage we was doing but now days we know better. we have learned a lot in the last 20 years and we are still learning. like i said before its not quay side the docks need they got plenty of that, what is need is space to put those returning empty containers, or they could tell the shipping lines to take the emptys away.

Southy, you cannot just crank up the temperatures and pressures of operating units to make them smaller! Basic Chemistry and Physics laws prevail. You are either Ill informed or in a daydream. If anything, the units of today v's the 1950's are much bigger but much more efficient and less energy intensive

forest hump. i seen those new plants, and was on one has part of the crew building one, and most people have seen a picture or a film of one on tv. but may not relise what they are. the residifinder plant in fawley. is a cracker unit and a polymer unit all in one, and is only 1/3 of the size of the cracker unit. and this was built in the refinery in 89 and 90 came on line in 91. linsey oil refinery uses one of those new plants to produce all of there refine fuels for the market. the new refinerys are very much smaller than the 1950's style, even the metals that are used are different. think you need to do some catching up forest things have changed a great deal.

The residfiner may be smaller than the CAT but it performs a different job, upgrading heavy ends to feed the CAT. It does not produce Polymer. LOR at Immingham might have a similar unit but these upgraders do not produce fuel as you put it. They upgrade heavy ends in order to provide more valuable feedstocks. Any how we are way off topic. Get on and build Dibden Bay!

the resid dont do that at all, its main purpose to take the sludge that is left over from plants like the cat and crack it even harder, thats why its called the residfinder. when they shut down the cat plant and polymer plant at the same time, the resid takes over and do both plants jobs at the same time. the refinery no longer stops production like it use to, when ever the cat shuts down for work to be carried out on it. before 1991 they use to stop tankers coming in a few days before the cat plant was due to shut down, so they could run down the surplus crude oil, that dont happen any more. when they finally shut down the cat plant, its not going to be renewed, the resid plant will take over.

Southy: I respect your endeavour and tenacity. Please do not try and pretend you know how process plants work and operate. You are dealing with a person with 32 years of refinery experience! I suggest you back off, because you will not win! Still off subject: build Dibden Bay!

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote:

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote:

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote: heck i go away to a meeting and you lot get busy, ok first things first, and one driving the a35/6 all traffic going though the roundabout at redbridge, they left the taffic lights on doppy sods pl take no notice of clausentum best thing with is just to ignore him. clausentum, you wish but keep going. you drop your self in it big time. ben very true on the oil refinery's going off line, when they built the refinery's back in the late 40's to early 60's they only gave them a 50 to 70 year life expectancy. and whats not going to help all those old refinery's are those new compact designs, that work at very much higher pressure and a hotter temp. and only take up 1/4 the space and be able to do every thing that an old refinery can do. the days at the fawley just might be numbered. its just a question of wait and see. the bay back then when they started to infill it in they did not know any better back then, since they stop filling in the bay, we have learned a lot of new stuff how nature works, at the time we did not know what damage we was doing but now days we know better. we have learned a lot in the last 20 years and we are still learning. like i said before its not quay side the docks need they got plenty of that, what is need is space to put those returning empty containers, or they could tell the shipping lines to take the emptys away.

Southy, you cannot just crank up the temperatures and pressures of operating units to make them smaller! Basic Chemistry and Physics laws prevail. You are either Ill informed or in a daydream. If anything, the units of today v's the 1950's are much bigger but much more efficient and less energy intensive

forest hump. i seen those new plants, and was on one has part of the crew building one, and most people have seen a picture or a film of one on tv. but may not relise what they are. the residifinder plant in fawley. is a cracker unit and a polymer unit all in one, and is only 1/3 of the size of the cracker unit. and this was built in the refinery in 89 and 90 came on line in 91. linsey oil refinery uses one of those new plants to produce all of there refine fuels for the market. the new refinerys are very much smaller than the 1950's style, even the metals that are used are different. think you need to do some catching up forest things have changed a great deal.

The residfiner may be smaller than the CAT but it performs a different job, upgrading heavy ends to feed the CAT. It does not produce Polymer. LOR at Immingham might have a similar unit but these upgraders do not produce fuel as you put it. They upgrade heavy ends in order to provide more valuable feedstocks. Any how we are way off topic. Get on and build Dibden Bay!

the resid dont do that at all, its main purpose to take the sludge that is left over from plants like the cat and crack it even harder, thats why its called the residfinder. when they shut down the cat plant and polymer plant at the same time, the resid takes over and do both plants jobs at the same time. the refinery no longer stops production like it use to, when ever the cat shuts down for work to be carried out on it. before 1991 they use to stop tankers coming in a few days before the cat plant was due to shut down, so they could run down the surplus crude oil, that dont happen any more. when they finally shut down the cat plant, its not going to be renewed, the resid plant will take over.

Southy: I respect your endeavour and tenacity. Please do not try and pretend you know how process plants work and operate. You are dealing with a person with 32 years of refinery experience! I suggest you back off, because you will not win! Still off subject: build Dibden Bay!

i was on the resid plant when it was built from start to finish, and we was told then what the resid can do and why it was being built, and what the plan are for the future, i been in and out the refinery at fawely ever since 76 i work on every major contract in there since then, up to 2001, even the big shut down in 85.
there's not alot you can tell me what go's on in there, i even get told what is happening in there now. where i still got loads of friends that still go in there to work.

the bay every thing that could be said about it has about been said, there is very little thats new that can be said.

southy wrote:

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote:

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote:

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote: heck i go away to a meeting and you lot get busy, ok first things first, and one driving the a35/6 all traffic going though the roundabout at redbridge, they left the taffic lights on doppy sods pl take no notice of clausentum best thing with is just to ignore him. clausentum, you wish but keep going. you drop your self in it big time. ben very true on the oil refinery's going off line, when they built the refinery's back in the late 40's to early 60's they only gave them a 50 to 70 year life expectancy. and whats not going to help all those old refinery's are those new compact designs, that work at very much higher pressure and a hotter temp. and only take up 1/4 the space and be able to do every thing that an old refinery can do. the days at the fawley just might be numbered. its just a question of wait and see. the bay back then when they started to infill it in they did not know any better back then, since they stop filling in the bay, we have learned a lot of new stuff how nature works, at the time we did not know what damage we was doing but now days we know better. we have learned a lot in the last 20 years and we are still learning. like i said before its not quay side the docks need they got plenty of that, what is need is space to put those returning empty containers, or they could tell the shipping lines to take the emptys away.

Southy, you cannot just crank up the temperatures and pressures of operating units to make them smaller! Basic Chemistry and Physics laws prevail. You are either Ill informed or in a daydream. If anything, the units of today v's the 1950's are much bigger but much more efficient and less energy intensive

forest hump. i seen those new plants, and was on one has part of the crew building one, and most people have seen a picture or a film of one on tv. but may not relise what they are. the residifinder plant in fawley. is a cracker unit and a polymer unit all in one, and is only 1/3 of the size of the cracker unit. and this was built in the refinery in 89 and 90 came on line in 91. linsey oil refinery uses one of those new plants to produce all of there refine fuels for the market. the new refinerys are very much smaller than the 1950's style, even the metals that are used are different. think you need to do some catching up forest things have changed a great deal.

The residfiner may be smaller than the CAT but it performs a different job, upgrading heavy ends to feed the CAT. It does not produce Polymer. LOR at Immingham might have a similar unit but these upgraders do not produce fuel as you put it. They upgrade heavy ends in order to provide more valuable feedstocks. Any how we are way off topic. Get on and build Dibden Bay!

the resid dont do that at all, its main purpose to take the sludge that is left over from plants like the cat and crack it even harder, thats why its called the residfinder. when they shut down the cat plant and polymer plant at the same time, the resid takes over and do both plants jobs at the same time. the refinery no longer stops production like it use to, when ever the cat shuts down for work to be carried out on it. before 1991 they use to stop tankers coming in a few days before the cat plant was due to shut down, so they could run down the surplus crude oil, that dont happen any more. when they finally shut down the cat plant, its not going to be renewed, the resid plant will take over.

Southy: I respect your endeavour and tenacity. Please do not try and pretend you know how process plants work and operate. You are dealing with a person with 32 years of refinery experience! I suggest you back off, because you will not win! Still off subject: build Dibden Bay!

i was on the resid plant when it was built from start to finish, and we was told then what the resid can do and why it was being built, and what the plan are for the future, i been in and out the refinery at fawely ever since 76 i work on every major contract in there since then, up to 2001, even the big shut down in 85. there's not alot you can tell me what go's on in there, i even get told what is happening in there now. where i still got loads of friends that still go in there to work. the bay every thing that could be said about it has about been said, there is very little thats new that can be said.

Southy, please! I know the refinery inside-out! Don't try and pretend you know it any better. As I said, I respect your ability to comment but do not overstep your limited knowledge. You are dealing with someone who has a significant experience with refining and chemical operations. Not just at Fawley, but worldwide. I would happily spend time educating other people on this subject.

how can i belive you, when you even get what the residfinder plant job wrong. (light ends and heavy ends you said, wrong plant.)

southy wrote:
how can i belive you, when you even get what the residfinder plant job wrong. (light ends and heavy ends you said, wrong plant.)

It's not even worth wasting my breath if you do not understand basic process speak.

the clue is in its name residfiner, it do what the name suggests residue the left overs, and cracks it even harder till theres only a white carbon dust. it has its own riser chamber, its own reactor chamber, its own regenerator chamber, and its own tx bubble separator chamber, the resid and cat plants are one in the same, just that the old cat plant works at atmosheric pressure, while the resid works under a much greater pressure.
we knew at the time we was cutting our own throats when we was building it, one of the things that we use to do, if there was a problem that needed to be sorted out was to wait till the cat plant was shut down and open up, to have our talks with management to sort the problem out, they can no longer do that, that is why the work force have lost a lot of things. like being paid for transport (distance money) and having it supplyed. and the risk money to. all that sort of things have gone.

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote:
how can i belive you, when you even get what the residfinder plant job wrong. (light ends and heavy ends you said, wrong plant.)

It's not even worth wasting my breath if you do not understand basic process speak.

He's an "expert" on everything. Especially invisible ice rinks.

And, he's known to ALWAYS have the last word ( what's that all about? )

clausentum wrote:

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote:
how can i belive you, when you even get what the residfinder plant job wrong. (light ends and heavy ends you said, wrong plant.)

It's not even worth wasting my breath if you do not understand basic process speak.

He's an "expert" on everything. Especially invisible ice rinks.

And, he's known to ALWAYS have the last word ( what's that all about? )

well when you work in places you learn, if your in the industry then you know about it clausentum, and when comes down to places like the refinery, you have an induction course's where they tell all they can about a plant, whats it for, what it do, how it works, why it works the dangers, ect ect ect ect. its not like an office job, where you just learn about one thing, and thats the area around you, you aft to learn about loads off things and be able to retain that information, your no good to them if you dont, and if you dont retain that information then you could become a danger not just to your self but others to.

rule in life to clausentum every one has a right to reply, whitch is down to every person the right if they chose to or not chose to reply.
and you saying what you did at the bottom, normally comes from people who dont have the answers, or dont know what they are taking about.