Representation by John Law
- Date submitted
- 29 September 2020
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Dear Sir/Madam, I write as someone whose family home is in Suffolk. I am also the founder of [Redacted], an organisation campaigning for an effective transition to clean energy sources in the UK, as part of our contribution to tackling global warming. I believer that, done right, the Sizewell C project could be good for the country and the region, both from environmental and economic perspectives. I note that Suffolk County Council has most recently withheld its support on the basis principally of inadequate mitigations to traffic on the county's roads by EDF, arguing for greater use of rail and sea to reduce vehicle volumes. I would similarly like to see such changes implemented. I can quite see how local people are concerned at the current road-based strategy. It does, indeed, seem a shame that EDF has lost the support of many in the local area who might otherwise have been well disposed towards the project, through inadequately addressing their concerns or at least poor communication. In this connection, I have trawled through the literature on EDF's website looking to find the reason that the marine-led strategy was abandoned at Stage 3 of the process. It does appear that it was simply dropped with little explanation, on the basis of "ecological impact" that would have taken too long/been too difficult to address. An alternative suggestion I have also seen is that the North Sea was considered too rough for landing materials. I would have thought that building a jetty for the transport of aggregates, as has been done at Hinkley C (please see link below), would have had a low/minimal environmental impact; and it would have been quite possible in the North Sea, which although windy and rough at times, is far from being the North Atlantic and does not experience major swells. The jetty could have been removed once construction was complete. This probably would have lessened a good degree of the pressure on the roads, and helped to ease local opposition, had it been adopted. In summary, I believe that Sizewell C represents a good project for Britain's contribution to limiting dangerous climate change and to securing a reliable supply of energy going forward. It would also help rebuild the country's nuclear industry and be a source of high-quality employment for local people on the Suffolk coast. However, it seems that insufficient attention has been paid, or opportunities overlooked, for mitigations to the volume of material transported on the road network, by fully exploiting the potential of rail and sea delivery. This has understandably caused bad feeling to grow within the local community. It is not too late, however, for adjustments to be made to the proposed transport methods, leading to a considerable lessening of planned truck volumes on the roads. This would lead to the feeling that concerns had been listened to and addressed, allowing the project to proceed with general goodwill. Many thanks for taking this submission into consideration. Yours faithfully, Dr. John Law