A bitter row over plans to build a large power plant on the edge of an airfield has taken a new twist.
Developers wanting to put up an anaerobic digester (AD) at Ellough, near Beccles, are briefing local parishes and residents ahead of filing new plans, just weeks after the local council rejected their initial proposals.
But the revised scheme has already come under fresh fire from locals, who say the site which developers wish to use - which already has an AD - is not suitable.
People and businesses in the area have complained of the smells given off by the existing AD, which they say will be worse if a second one is built.
The proposal has also prompted strong concerns from aviation experts and those using nearby Beccles Aerodrome.
They warn the emissions from the plant could destabilise aircraft on their final approach to the runway and could even cause crashes.
Parachuters who use the airfield have also said the gas from the site could cause accidents by collapsing their canopies.
But developers insist their plans are safe and they are working with residents to eliminate any impact on the area.
AD plants use organic waste and crops – such as manure or maize – to create biomethane that can be used to produce power.
Around a decade ago, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said such schemes should be an important part of the government's strategy to increase energy from waste.
Supporters say they are environmentally friendly because they reduce fossil fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions.
But critics argue they are often unsuitably situated, in quiet rural areas.
A row over a similar scheme in Bressingham near Diss finally ended last year, when South Norfolk Council rejected the plans after a dispute which had lasted for seven years.
In a recent council meeting about the Ellough plant, Beccles mayor Barry Darch said he was "surprised" that the applicant had resubmitted plans after their first attempt was so strongly opposed.
Councillor Graham Catchpole said the new AD would be a "disaster".
The proposal, which councillors voted unanimously in favour of, was to make an initial objection to the applicant and after considering the revised plan, to consider a response to the plans.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here