Parish Council Response to Peak Cluster Consultation

At the meeting of Cranage Parish Council on 17th February 2026 it was RESOLVED (24/26) to respond to the Peak Cluster consultation as follows:

Cranage Parish Council Response to the Peak Cluster Consultation Phase 1

1. Objection

Cranage Parish Council formally objects to the proposed high-pressure CO₂ pipeline associated with the Peak Cluster Carbon Capture and Storage Project passing through the Parish of Cranage.

The Parish Council’s objection is based on the following principal grounds:

1.1 Proximity to Residential Areas

The proposed route passes in close proximity to established residential areas within both Cranage and Holmes Chapel. The Parish Council considers that the siting of a high-pressure CO₂ pipeline so near to built-up areas presents unacceptable risk to public safety, due to the risk of a breach or leak.

The current alignment effectively encircles Holmes Chapel on two sides and lies unacceptably close to residential areas within Cranage. The Parish Council does not consider this to represent prudent infrastructure planning.

1.2 Ground Conditions and Geological Concerns

The local geology is predominantly sand-based. Sandy soils are inherently mobile and susceptible to movement and shifting. The Parish Council is concerned that this ground composition may not be appropriate for long-term high-pressure pipeline infrastructure and may increase the risk of stress, subsidence, or failure over time.

The Parish Council therefore questions whether the ground conditions in Cranage are suitable for infrastructure of this nature and whether full geo-hazard modelling has been undertaken.

1.3 Impact on Community Assets and Sensitive Habitats

The proposed route impacts areas identified as high and medium distinctive habitat, as shown on the attached distinctive habitat map. These areas are of ecological importance and should be avoided.

In addition, the route currently intersects community playing pitches, which are heavily used and are valued community assets supporting local football teams and recreational use. The Parish Council strongly objects to any proposal that would compromise or damage these facilities.

There is also concern regarding the potential destruction or fragmentation of established wildlife corridors. These corridors are essential for biodiversity and ecological connectivity and must be preserved.  See attached wildlife corridor map.

1.4 Concerns Regarding the Net Zero Claim

The Parish Council notes that the project is presented as a “Net Zero” initiative. However, the Council questions whether the proposal genuinely achieves this objective, as it appears to relocate and store CO₂ rather than eliminate emissions at source. There are concerns that the long-term environmental implications of offshore storage, including cap rock integrity and potential rupture (e.g. through seismic activity), have not been sufficiently addressed.

2. Objection to Above Ground Installation (AGI)

Cranage Parish Council also objects to the installation of any Above Ground Installation (AGI) within the Parish.

The Parish Council has serious concerns regarding:

2.1 Safety

AGIs represent locations where the pipeline transitions above ground, which may increase the risk of gas escape. The Parish Council seeks detailed assurances regarding safety, including evidence from comparable operational sites, risk modelling, and incident statistics.

2.2 Scale and Visual Impact

There is insufficient clarity regarding the size, appearance, and operational footprint of any proposed AGI. Descriptions provided during webinars (e.g. “small, innocuous gravelled compound”) appear inconsistent with publicly available information on similar infrastructure.

The Parish Council considers that the scale and dimensions of any AGI must be clearly defined before meaningful consultation can occur. Any such installation should be located well away from built-up residential areas.

2.3 Expansion Zone Concerns

There is concern that the infrastructure is designed to accommodate future expansion, yet the full scale of that expansion has not been specified. The Parish Council cannot support open-ended development without defined limits.

3. Mitigation Measures Required Should Consent Be Granted

In the event that the project proceeds despite the Parish Council’s objection, the Council would request the following mitigation measures:

1.     Installation of additional Emergency Shut-Off Valves (ESVs) within the Parish boundary to minimise the volume of CO₂ released in the event of a breach, particularly given local ground conditions.

2.     Re-routing of the pipeline to the south of Holmes Chapel, further from residential areas, and preferably downwind of Cranage and Holmes Chapel (taking account of prevailing westerly and north-westerly winds), in order to reduce risk to life in the event of a leak.

3.     Avoidance of all identified high and medium distinctive habitat areas, as shown on the enclosed ecological constraints map.

4.     Avoidance of community playing pitches and recreational land, recognising their value as heavily used and irreplaceable community assets.

5.     Preservation of established wildlife corridors, with appropriate buffer zones to prevent fragmentation of habitats (see attached map).

6.     Clear limitations on future expansion, with defined parameters regarding capacity and infrastructure scale to prevent incremental intensification without further consultation.

4. Questions and Clarifications Required

The Parish Council requests responses to the following questions:

1.     Has full geo-hazard modelling been undertaken for the Cranage section of the route, given the sandy and potentially mobile soil conditions?

2.     Will emergency services be provided with detailed site-specific emergency response procedures?

3.     Will residents within the consultation zone be provided with clear emergency response guidance in the event of a CO₂ leak?

4.     Is odourisation of the CO₂ an option to aid leak detection at ground level?

5.     What leak detection systems will be deployed locally?

6.     What are the estimated detection and response times in the event of a leak?

7.     What is the volume capacity of CO₂ contained within each section of pipeline between Emergency Shut-Off Valves in the Cranage area?

8.     Can the pipeline be routed further away from Holmes Chapel and Cranage residential areas?

9.     Has modelling been undertaken to assess the implications of prevailing wind direction on dispersal patterns in the event of a leak?

10.  What guarantees can be provided regarding the long-term integrity of the offshore storage site, particularly the impermeable cap rock, including in the event of seismic activity?

11.  What noise, vibration, or other forms of pollution would be generated by the pipeline or any AGI?

12.  What is the projected total cost of the project to the UK taxpayer?

13.  What is the anticipated operational lifespan of the offshore storage site, and what occurs once capacity is reached?

14.  Can we see the risk assessments prepared by Peak Cluster for the areas around the pipeline, at various distances from the line's position and around the aboveground infrastructure.

15.  How many incidents involving CO2 escape are expected to occur along the length of the pipeline over a defined period and their strategy and resources for tackling them?

16.  What is the expected effect on property prices for those properties close to the line and what compensation will be expected as a result?