Representation by Chillesford Parish Meeting (Chillesford Parish Meeting)
- Date submitted
- 28 September 2020
- Submitted by
- Parish councils
This is the registration of interest in the Sizewell C DCO proposal by EDF from Chillesford Parish Meeting. We have responded to all stages of pre-consultation though note that only responses to stage 1 and 3 are included in EDF’s report on consultation. SZC is not a solution for net zero. By 2035, the UK’s energy landscape will be profoundly different, favouring cheaper renewables and green hydrogen. Nuclear is too inflexible to fit well with renewables. SZC will bring limited Economic Benefits to Suffolk: The economic benefits for Suffolk are limited by EDF’s intended use of the HPC supply chain. EDF’s intent to cut costs and minimise risk by redeploying the Hinkley C supply chain will mean Su?olk and Norfolk businesses may not get the chance to participate. SZC will damage Suffolk’s local economy including Tourism: The Suffolk Coast has a thriving employment economy based on family, cultural and eco-tourism. The noise, eyesores, dust, beach and footpath closures and road congestion and pollution during 10-12 years of construction will drive visitors away, with estimates that tourism could lose up to £40 million a year. SZC threatens Internationally-renowned wildlife reserves: SZC is surrounded by internationally- protected habitats, including Minsmere Reserve . Habitats for rare birds, animals and plants will be lost forever. EDF acknowledge that there will be adverse impact on Marsh Harriers. Their proposed mitigation on other species is unconvincing. The Suffolk Coast & Heaths Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty will be cut in two for over a decade. Site is at risk from flooding and coastal erosion: New analysis raises serious questions about the security of the SZC site. The report warns that sea level rises could fully or partially “island” the power stations. The EA has warned that EDF’s flood compensation proposals “may not function as intended”. There is no solution in sight for nuclear waste: The spent fuel from an EPR is exceptionally hot, so fuel from SZC would have to stay on Suffolk’s eroding coastal site for 140 years + before it could be moved. The UK has made no progress on building a “permanent” waste facility. This is a cost as well as a risk. EPRs are slow to build, expensive and impossible to accurately predict cost or completion date. SZC’s EPR reactors will be copies of those being built at Hinkley Point C (HPC), currently £2.9bn over budget and up to 15 months late. EPR builds in France (Flamanville) and Finland (Olkiluouto) are years behind schedule and multiple times overspent. Defective valves discovered at Olkiluoto now call Taishan’s operation into question and may further delay Flamanville and HPC. Nuclear is an industry in decline: The Moorside project (Toshiba, Cumbria) has collapsed. Wylfa (Hitachi, Anglesey) is now cancelled. China General Nuclear’s Hualong reactor for Bradwell has yet to pass several regulatory hurdles, but public consultations have started. Globally, the nuclear units under construction have declined for the 6th year in a row, from 68 reactors in 2013, to 46 in 2019 (10 are in China). Of these at least 27 are behind schedule. SZC cannot be justified as a means to support the UK’s economic recovery: the project is far from shovel-ready, with neither planning consent nor funding. Building a mammoth project in a protected environment must have cast-iron justification, which SZC lacks. SZC will damage Suffolk’s resilient SME-based local economy for only 900 long-term jobs. There is increasing public support for a Green Recovery, in which SZC has no place. SZC will suck resources away from innovation: Every pound invested in SZC could be spent on cheaper, faster renewables, investment in energy efficiency, storage, CCS, tidal and vital flexibility adaptations to the grid plus efficiency adaptations to our homes. EDF’s speculation that Hinkley Point C (HPC) and SZC could be used to make hydrogen is clutching at straws; big nuclear remains too expensive and hydrogen could as easily be made from renewables. At this critical time we must not only count carbon, but also time and cost of delivery.