Representation by Thomas Sheppard
- Date submitted
- 30 September 2020
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I wish to raise the following issues of concern about Sizewell C. 1. I would like to first discuss where the site Selection I strongly believe that the proposed site for Sizewell C has not taken into account the risk from rising sea levels; which could cause problems with flooding and coastal erosion. it will also have an adverse impact on adjacent internationally designated sites of ecological importance and sites of amenity, cultural heritage and landscape value. Site could become an island containing 5 nuclear reactors and then, later, the problem of storing radioactive waste. I also object to the problems of decommissioning, and the likelihood of the taxpayer of having to pay for that process. I also, believe, that given climate change and the real possibility of global instability that we should be concentrating on local. renewable sources of energy; such as hydro-electricity, win etc than on highly complex centralised sources of power generation. 2. Community, Economic and social impacts I believe the project would have Unacceptable impacts on local communities; for instance; an increase in traffic, an increase in noise levels and light pollution. Tourism may lose up to £40m a year and 400 jobs. EDF surveys suggest 29% of visitors could be deterred. EDF expects local people to fill 90% of lower-skilled, lower-paid roles in “Site Support”, the more permanent jobs will not involve local people. Pressure on health, social and emergency services, impacts on vulnerable people. 3. Transport Road based transport plan not sustainable; enormous and adverse impact on local communities and the visitor economy. HGV numbers are as high as those under “Road-Led” proposals rejected by all statutory consultees in consultations Delay in the construction of new road infrastructure means villages would endure 2-3 years of increased traffic New roads would sever communities, damage the rural footpath system and divide farmland. Rat-running and disruption not adequately considered. Alternative relief road routes with legacy value not adequately assessed by EDF 4. Environment and Landscape Flooding. Unclear effect on Minsmere Sluice Development would result in pollution from light, noise and traffic Dust management for spoil heaps and stockpiles inadequate Impact of the proposed borrow pits and landfill not fully addressed. Irreparable harm to Minsmere - a flagship destination of international importance and significance. Impacts on Marsh Harriers threaten integrity of Special Protection Area Uncertainty re drainage and supply of 3 million litres of potable water for the construction period and beyond. Abstraction of water compounds risks to the environment and to protected species. Risks to groundwater levels and surrounding habitats and ecology Flood risk due to the loss of flood storage from the development site Catastrophic impact on landscape character because of locality, design and scale; construction severs the AONB Impossible to compensate for landscape and ecological damage Won’t offset CO2 from construction for at least 6 years. 5. Marine and Coastal processes Ecological and flood risk impacts on coastal processes from hard coastal defence feature HCDF. No complete design of HCDF available Rates of erosion and recession episodic and unpredictable Impacts of Beach Landing Facility on coastal processes Impacts on marine ecology 6. Application Wording of Explanatory Memorandum and Planning Statement.