Representation by Amanda Gaylard
- Date submitted
- 30 September 2020
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Lack of evidence on the impact on European Protected Sites Lack of detail on coastal defence design making it difficult to determine impacts on coastal processes and the communities of plants and animals living in this coastal zone Underestimation of importance of marsh harrier foraging areas available and the quality of the mitigation areas for foraging Little assessment of impact of noise and lighting on bats and birds The hydrological impacts on water quality and chemistry on protected sites The loss of SSSI (Site of special Scientific Interest) at Sizewell Belts The overall impact on the nationally important population of barbastelle bats The loss of hibernation sites and disturbance of natterjack toads The overall impact of biodiversity loss across the development site Environmental concerns. It will cause considerable further visual and environmental damage to the Area of Outstanding Beauty and the Suffolk Heritage Coast. RSPB is concerned about damage to the internationally important Minsmere nature reserve. It is a Site of Special Scientific Interest, a Special Area of Conservation, a Special Protection Area and Ramsar site. Nuclear waste. If built it will add materially to the nuclear waste problem. My understanding is that the waste will be stored at the proposed station. There are currently major difficulties at Sellafield the government’s national reprocessing centre, which has also accepted waste from other countries to reprocess. The concrete storage areas are already leaking. These problems remain unresolved and are likely to get worse. There is real concern that in due course radiation waste will escape into the Irish Sea. The contamination problems impose difficulties for future communities – for at least thousands of years, maybe tens of thousands of years into the future. This should not be a problem that we as a nation impose on our successors. I agree with the concerns around this nuclear energy is not environmentally sound and we are storing up huge problems for future generations. Economics of Sizewell C. My understanding is that the economics of new nuclear power stations still do not (almost certainly cannot) properly allow for the true cost of decommissioning nuclear power stations and tackling the nuclear waste problem. Setting aside the issue of the cost of decommissioning, the numbers just do not stack up and Sizewell C is just not economically viable. I agree withthe views of the RSPB and SWT · ‘The RSPB and Suffolk Wildlife Trust (SWT) say that Sizewell C must not go ahead. · The charities have not seen the evidence that Sizewell C can be built without detrimentally impacting internationally and nationally important landscapes, habitats, animals and plants on the Suffolk coast, at RSPB Minsmere nature reserve, Sizewell Belts Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), and beyond. · Without this evidence, the charities have been forced to conclude that the build must not go ahead given its anticipated harmful impacts on the environment. · Both organisations also highlighted concerns about the timing of proceeding with this decision, amid a public health crisis, which is likely to impact public scrutiny of plans.