Representation by Lynn Elizabeth Beaumont
- Date submitted
- 25 September 2020
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I wish to raise the following issues of great personal concern about Sizewell C. 1. Site Selection ? I believe it is the wrong project in the wrong place o Adverse impact on adjacent internationally designated sites of ecological importance and sites of amenity, cultural heritage and landscape value which are also vital for our local tourism industry o Site is already and could become a worse “island” now containing five nuclear reactors and historically stored low- and medium- level radioactive waste o Site at risk from climate change, sea level rise and flooding and potential impact on coastal processes o Eight other uncoordinated energy projects planned for the locality which are all about to kick off at the same time with even greater combined impacts on our communities in East Suffolk 2. Community, Economic and social impacts ? Unacceptable impacts on local communities - severance, traffic, significant increases in noise, light pollution and disruption ? 6,000 workers will come and live in the area, 2,400 in a campus in a location that I also oppose and the anti-social and criminal aspects associated with Sizewell B are legendary in Leiston ? Tourism may lose up to £40m a year and 400 jobs. EDF surveys suggest 29% of visitors could be deterred but it is unclear how this will be compensated by EDF ? Pressure on local housing and especially low-cost rentals in the areas, including holiday parks ? EDF expects local people to fill 90% of lower-skilled, lower-paid roles in “Site Support” but these people and skills do not exist around here currently and no apprentice scheme of any size will be sufficiently effective in time ? Negative impacts - from traffic and losing staff - on local businesses, not least as EDF is a high payer with locally, highly competitive terms & conditions, including its pension scheme ? Increased pressure on our health, social and emergency services, impacts on vulnerable people which have only been exacerbated by the coronavirus pandemic 3. Transport ? Road-based transport plan clearly not sustainable for the delivery of over 13 million tonnes of materials; enormous and adverse impact on local communities and the visitor economy. HGV and LGV numbers are as high as those under “Road-Led” proposals rejected by all statutory consultees in consultations ? Delay in the construction of new road infrastructure means villages would endure 2-3 years of increased traffic – Kelsale and the hamlets at North and East Green will be severely impacted by the proposed SLR which only emerged under phase 3 of the consultation process, which is deeply unfair on a small parish such as Kelsale-cum-Carlton (KcC) ? The SLR would sever our community, damage our rural footpath system and divide our high-grade farmland - these relief road routes without any legacy value have not been adequately assessed by EDF ? Rat-running and disruption on village such as Kelsale-cum-Carlton not adequately considered ? Rail and sea delivery options have been largely ignored 4. Environment and Landscape ? Water supply – we simply don’t have enough potable water in East Suffolk and current plans to extend it using the well in Peasenhall are already proving insufficient and before any construction impacts from Sizewell C which will require about three million litres of potable water for the construction period etc. Abstraction of water will compound risks to the environment and to local protected species ? Development would result in pollution from light, noise, traffic and dust, and especially in KcC and Eastbridge - the dust management for spoil heaps and stockpiles is totally inadequate ? Irreparable harm to Minsmere - a flagship destination of international importance and significance. Impacts on Marsh Harriers threaten integrity of Special Protection Area ? Uncertainty re drainage and local flooding impacts on Minsmere plus risks to groundwater levels and surrounding habitats and ecology due to the loss of flood storage from the development site ? Impact of the proposed borrow pits and landfill not fully addressed ? Catastrophic impact on landscape character because of locality, design and scale; construction severs the AONB which can never be reversed as EDF suggest, therefore making it Impossible to compensate for landscape and ecological damage ? Sizewell C will not offset the CO2 involved its construction for at least 6 years once it ever starts generating 5. Marine and Coastal processes ? Ecological and flood risk impacts on coastal processes from hard coastal defence feature HCDF. No complete design of HCDF available ? Rates of erosion and recession episodic and unpredictable ? Impacts of Beach Landing Facility on coastal processes ? Impacts on marine ecology 6. Application ? Wording of Explanatory Memorandum and Planning Statement – plus how can we possibly trust a French parent company supported by a Chinese power concern backed by a communist regime over a fisty year period, minimum? I also wish to endorse the Relevant Representations submitted by our councils, namely SCC and ESC, as well as Stop Sizewell C, the RSPB, SWT and all other bodies who are seeing the truth here. I also wish to state that I consider the Sizewell C application to be totally unsuitable for a digital examination process and particularly in the midst of a continuing coronavirus pandemic – it’s far too important an issue to be dealt with in this way.