19th February 2011, 06:41 PM
Quite a few quarry works are small as they're likely to get quarry consent for small land parcels at a time and cannot garuntee that they'll get the next land parcel they apply for. I too have done an evaluation where the land parcel become nonviable. I actually sympathised with them given the nature of the archaeology present and the curator's demands which I regarded as OTT. My sympathy toward aggregate firms does not flow readily.
I have also heard PMs explicitly state that they're going to milk them for all they're worth because the aggregate firm has to pay for it and seen the hourly rates charged bumped up to improve the profit margin. I know that prices are set flexibly, but I can't help but think that if all the other statutory elements (environmental protection consultants, geologists etc) are also using quarries as cash cows some deposits must quickly become nonviable.
I have also heard PMs explicitly state that they're going to milk them for all they're worth because the aggregate firm has to pay for it and seen the hourly rates charged bumped up to improve the profit margin. I know that prices are set flexibly, but I can't help but think that if all the other statutory elements (environmental protection consultants, geologists etc) are also using quarries as cash cows some deposits must quickly become nonviable.