Representation by Dr Kate Thompson
- Date submitted
- 26 September 2020
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I am concerned to raise the following issues about the Sizewell C application for planning: 1. The power station is planned for a site that is at risk of rises of sea level and flooding (especially with the ongoing impact of climate change) so is the wrong site to choose. I am also aware that the site is not of the recommended size for a reactor of this type. 2. This is an area of Britain with a unique ecology, home to rare species of birds and plants in need of conservation. The use of this site puts these things at risk, particularly in terms of the conservation of marsh harriers. During the build there will be disruption and dust causing damage that EDF have not adequately accounted for, as well as an impact on the minsmere sluice that could be unpredictable and environmentally taxing. The construction requires 3 million litres of potable water and it is unclear from where this will be found. So far, the enviromental impact assessment provided by EDF is sketchy and provides no grounds for reassurance on these issues . 3. A number of other projects (Scottish Power, National Grid) are also being planned and there is no coordination between them to minimise environmental impact (e.g. coordinating transport) and quality of life for local residents. 4. The environment of this special areas will be under severe strain from traffic, pollution and a significant inflow of people and goods - 6000 workers coming into the area and 2400 living on worker campuses - Eastbridge will be unrecognisable. The proposals do not make fully clear how this is going to be accommodated, and planning for extra roads will not start until some years after the impact is already being felt. This will be really diffiuclt for local residents. 5. The situation with regard to transport is a particular problem - the numbers of HGVs that are planned are going to be the same as those that were mooted for the Road-Led proposals EDF proposed early in the process and which were rejected by all statutory consultees in consultations. The new roads they have propoesd will not be built for 2-3 years making it impossible to move around for local residents, but the new roads also drive through an area of significant natural beauty, carving out the area around Pretty Road, a country lane that I have loved since childhood. EDF does not seem interested in designing a better road proposal, perhaps with roads that would have a legacy value for local residents after construction, and be less destructive to areas of natural beauty. 6. Perhaps most ironically, a project that has attempted to push forward using the argument that it is less environmentally damaging, has been shown to require at least 6 years (perhaps longer) before the gains to CO2 emissions it creates will offset the additional CO2 from its construction - a truly questionable degree of benefit. 7. The costs associated with construction are also unclear - I have learned today that the sister project - Hinkley Point - is now the most expensive object on planet earth. Again given all the areas of uncertaintly above, should these costings be examined in light of the potential for ballooning costs. 8. I wish to endorse the Relevant Representation submitted by the organisation: Stop Sizewell C. I would also like to endorse those organisations who are raising additional enviromental concerns given the importance of preserving coastal ecosystems and recognising the fragility of our planet more generally. 9. Finally, I wish to state that the Sizewell C application is too complex and multifaceted to be considered in a digital examination process. This is the planning process that would benefit from detailed consideration in a live hearing.