Representation by Ian Craig
- Date submitted
- 29 September 2020
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
The dangers inherent in the building, operating and storing of spent nuclear waste mean that we cannot allow any new reactor to be built if there is any doubt about its future operation. We have this duty for our own generation, and the many that follow who will live with what could be the catastrophic errors of judgement. The half-life of uranium 235 is 700 million years. There are too many unknowns to allow us to take a risk on any aspect of this project. These are points that must be considered now, and for future generations: - • No one can effectively foresee the possible outcome of building a further nuclear reactor at the Sizewell site. The effect of climate change, long term issues for the storage of spent waste, sea level rises, unforeseen technical issues with an effectively untried reactor design and the post Covid 19 so-called “Green Future” are all matters that pose questions that neither EDF nor the Government can answer with any certainty even for the next few years. • Climate change makes the site at risk of sea level rises and flooding. • The site could be cut off from the main part of Suffolk by flooding and become an island. • We do not have the knowledge or the technology to guarantee the effective storage of spent fuel. This is made more pressing as a result of rising sea levels. • As a result of climate change, which is making Suffolk the driest part of the UK, the site cannot be guaranteed sufficient water supply for reactor cooling, the maintenance of the waste ponds or the expanded domestic requirement caused by the enlargement of the site. • The expansion of the imported workers on the site will put an unacceptable strain on local areas. This includes social, water supply/waste disposal, transport damage to the landscape and local tourism. • The damage to the areas of special nature beauty and of special interest to wildlife and birds. These are irreplaceable. • The effect on the local seabed of the work at the site and of the operation of two new reactors could be to cause damage to the coast over a wide area. • The construction of new roads will cause further pollution to a rural area and further irreplaceable loss of habitat for wild life and birds. • The proposed reactors are untested. Flamanville is due to be over ten years late and Olkiluoto is already ten years late and both are at present due to be three times over budget. We should not be using Suffolk as a test ground for effectively a new type of reactor. We are meant, post Covid 19, to be building a greener future. To build a power source that has at its heart a toxic isotope that will be with generations for over 700 million years cannot make any sense. This is a complex issue and must be given the fullest consideration. It is not suitable for the digital examination process. I endorse the Relevant Representation submitted by Stop Sizewell C, and that of RSPB.