Representation by Andrew Fordyce
- Date submitted
- 30 September 2020
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
As a resident of East Suffolk and a UK citizen, I object to the proposal to construct another nuclear power station at Sizewell. Such a scheme would cause irreparable damage to the local environment, but, more importantly - at this critical point in history - the UK should review how we secure our future energy security and back the safer, greener and more cost effective options available. Now is the moment for the UK to invest in diverse renewable energy solutions and infrastructure - and in the development of new technologies. These are deliverable in the short term, are scalable, and would provide jobs, skills and export opportunities. They would allow the UK to reduce our reliance on carbon-based fuels and inflexible, expensive nuclear energy, foreign construction firms and imported systems technology and fuels. For the UK, Sizewell C would be a poor investment financially. At present there is no agreed model for financing. It’s a fact that the electricity it would generate is already poor value. As renewables get cheaper (as technology improves and economies of scale accrue) nuclear power becomes even less cost-effective. Also, EDF are an unsuitable, unreliable partner. They have a very poor record for on-time, on-budget delivery of nuclear power stations. Financially, EDF only survives as a business thanks to French government support. Finally, Sizewell C will need management for an indefinite period after its operational lifespan is over - an ongoing, unavoidable legacy cost for future generations. The construction and operation of Sizewell C would have a highly significant, detrimental impact on East Suffolk, including but not limited to: - irreparable damage to the heritage coastline, the AONB the site is situated within and unique, valuable wildlife ecosystems (including RSPB Minsmere). - over the 10-12 years of construction, a vast increase in heavy vehicle road traffic on Suffolk’s limited and unsuited road infrastructure. Some new roads will be built, but these will serve little purpose once the construction is complete. This will have a significant environmental and societal impact over a wide area of East Suffolk, not just at the site. - the huge, light polluting building site will adversely effect bird populations and behaviours. - after the limited time (50-60 years) that the power station is operable, Suffolk will be left with the permanent legacy of a vast white elephant of a building, containing nuclear waste for which there is no satisfactory long-term storage plan. - during the construction period, Suffolk’s thriving tourism industry - which employs thousands - will suffer badly. The income brought in by both construction and operation will in no way compensate for the damage of this project to existing, thriving industries. - few of the jobs working on the construction site will be new jobs for local people. Most workers will be from other areas of the country, necessitating the construction of large scale dormitory sites in order to house them. - once up and running, the power station will not be a significant employer for the area. The number of jobs is small in relation to the scale of the project. The Suffolk coast itself has historically suffered from erosion. With a significant rise in sea levels over the next few decades an inevitability, it would be folly to build a nuclear power station in such a location. The sheer scale of this building project in what is a largely rural area will fundamentally change the way of life of residents, cause irreparable damage to the environment, and alter the character of East Suffolk for ever by effectively urbanising large swathes of the area. Suffolk’s economy depends to a large extent on its rural character and reputation as a peaceful, relaxing place to visit. Tourism and hospitality are important local industries, which create jobs for many others in food production and distribution, trades, construction, shooting and many ancillary services. The impact of the construction of SZC on these should not be under estimated. For Suffolk, this project would be highly detrimental to our economy, our community and our environment. For the UK, it would be a poor investment, would be very likely to be delayed and cost more than budgeted, and would create a costly, dangerous legacy for future generations. Thank you.