Representation by John Fisher
- Date submitted
- 30 September 2020
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Dear Sir/Madam I write to urge you not to grant a Development Consent Order for Sizewell C. I recognise that you are required to judge this application against existing government policy even though this will obviously be updated in due course to reflect our better understanding of both nuclear power issues and coastal processes. However this policy merely says that in principle new nuclear power stations should be built and that Sizewell could provide a suitable site. As I understand it it says nothing about the suitability of this particular site for this particular proposal. The site at Sizewell is not big enough for what is being proposed. The developer recognises this and is asking to nibble into the surrounding special landscape in various directions to try to squidge it in but even with this encroachment it is proposed to use auxiliary areas separate from the site entailing extra movement of workers and materials which couldn’t be mitigated against. The proposal to build a new access across Sizewell Belts is unacceptable and the only suitable place for road or rail access is close to the existing route into the site. Also the hard sea defences would be likely to have a severe adverse impact on other places along the coast. With the claim to provide jobs we need to question why a business would do this when their purpose in life is to make money by increasing their sales or reducing their costs. One way they can reduce costs is by building a bigger and more automated factory or whatever and close down smaller units to eliminate jobs and this is what is happening here. It would of course bring some workers into the area especially on a temporary basis but if the project doesn’t go ahead other people would move into the same dwellings and very likely in this age of working from home bring their own jobs with them. This extra demand for housing is likely to increase rents and house prices for local people. I also question whether the project is as low carbon as is bing claimed. The sheer size of this proposal would have an adverse impact on the environment and tourism over a wide area and having too much of the country’s electricity coming from one location would make us vulnerable to storm damage, etc.