Representation by John M Filmer
- Date submitted
- 26 September 2020
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I wish to raise the following issues of concern about EDF’s proposals for Sizewell C: Is EDF’s proposal for Sizewell C the right option? No! ? Wrong technology: o Proposed Nuclear Reactor already outdated? o Renewable Energy from other technologies cheaper and greener. o Hydrogen powered vehicle development (opposed to battery powered) would reduce the demand for electricity. (There is now a large consensus of expert opinion that battery powered vehicles are not deliverable on world-wide, or even UK-wide, scale required to replace fossil fuel.) ? Wrong place: o Located on a Suffolk coastline threatened by erosion. o Surrounded by a designated AONB, including RSBP Minsmere. o Inadequate transport links (proved by EDF’s transport strategy). o Construction will severely damage local tourism industry. ? Wrong company: o No history to support any belief EDF can deliver – all projects of this type and technology are massively overbudget and/or massively late. The EDF proposal: ? Public consultations: o Have EDF satisfactorily addressed all of the concerns raised? Or even most of them? No. ? EDF’s Pledges: o Many are not credible or deliverable. EDF MUST become criminally and financially responsible to deliver fully on all of their pledges throughout the lifespan of Sizewell C. o Pledge 2, local employment – laudable intent, but the numbers do not make sense. At best, numbers are stated out of context. ? Transport Strategy – poor and constantly changing: o Pledge 4 – Transport - EDF claim “at least 40% of construction materials by rail and sea” – so up to 60% of many 100000s tonnes of materials will be delivered by road. A solution for EDF’s shareholders, but not for Suffolk. o New Link Road - disaster for local residents, destroying/bisecting large areas of farmland. Significant amount of commercial/HGV traffic already using the B1122 feeding the industrial estates in Leiston – improve this road, compensate/relocate impacted resident – cheaper, much better for the environment. Insist EDF document the cost and full environmental impact of the link road solution. o The A12 – Stratford St Andrew/Farnham bypass -EDF imply (inaccurately) they are funding this. The proposed bypass is another environmental disaster. Improve existing road, relocate/compensate residents. o The A12 – other areas - what about Little Glemham, Woodbridge, Martlesham? These places will not cope with EDF’s road-based transport strategy, yet no improvements are being considered. Severe impact on all of east Suffolk, blighting residents and tourism. ? Environment o “There will a net gain in land for wildlife created from the project” – no. EDF are simply recategorizing farmland to suit their sales pitch. Does this claim allow for farmland destroyed by link roads and bypasses? o “The carbon emissions during construction will be offset within 6-8 months of Sizewell’s operation (assuming it replaces a gas plant)” – this claim needs to be supported by facts and figures, it’s meaningless as written. I fully endorse the Relevant Representation submitted by Stop Sizewell C. I consider the Sizewell C application to be totally unsuitable for a digital examination process.