Representation by C Foster
- Date submitted
- 28 September 2020
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I have many concerns short and long term issues regarding the following aspects of the proposed development: • long term implications of nuclear waste, with unknown strategies, costs and future safety factors in management and disposal. • The basis upon which the need for nuclear reactors is based. Energy needs and costs are changing; renewables have become relatively less expensive, and their capacity greater. We could be left with massive long term costs for an outdated project. • This proposal would take too long to 'pay back’ the CO2 emissions of its construction to be an effective part of our CO2 reduction measures. • Finance for infrastructure. I believe that the nation’s infrastructure should not be subject to external influences through finance arrangements. Long term financial support cannot be guaranteed, but responsibility would remain with this country. Costs, e.g. of future accidents, malicious activity such as terrorism, military or cyber attack, cannot be calculated; therefore we would be leaving future generations with unquantifiable risks and costs to manage. • The unstable coast and the unknown future effects of climate change, including flooding and coastal erosion upon a fragile coastline. I share the view that this makes the proposed site unsuitable for large scale development, and especially for the storage of spent nuclear fuel into the next century. • The assessment is unrealistic because it does not examine the potential combined impact of this and other proposed developments in the area. • Transport. The proposals for transport of materials and workforce are already causing much concern for local residents. Too much traffic would be borne by the B1122 and A12. I have seen myself that Summer traffic to the coast is sufficient to cause congestion at junctions on the A12. The effects of thousands of additional lorries and cars would have a knock-on effect over a much wider area, and adversely affect the local economy. Investment in rail-led transportation could mitigate some of these effects, and leave some positive legacy. • Impact on the environment and landscape. This is an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, including local, national and internationally important habitats for many species of flora and fauna. How will these plans fit with a new commitment to keeping thirty percent of the land for nature? The Sandlings area is a rare resource and should be protected. I am worried by the concerns raised by groups such as the RSPB and Suffolk Wildlife Trust, and others involved in the management of the local environment, and take the view that their expert knowledge and long term view of the issues should be fully taken into account. • Impacts upon the local communities; economic, health and social. Tourism and related employment would be adversely affected, especially as much of the appeal of the area is the rural tranquillity, wildlife activities and walking the coastal and heathland pathways. These factors also support the physical and mental well-being of local residents. Pollution (air, water, noise, light) would have many adverse effects. Cost-cutting measures, such as using Hinckley Point suppliers and workforce would undermine the economic benefits for local companies and potential workers. The housing supply in a rural area would be put under greater pressure if accommodation is used for workers , and a self-contained accommodation campus would leave no housing legacy benefit as mitigation. I hope that the area in which I have lived will be protected, as well as the wider interests of the population and future generations, to whom we have a great responsibility.