Representation by Peter Moggridge
- Date submitted
- 16 March 2022
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Battery storage sited within a generating station which is usable for storing energy not generated by that generating station cannot be considered as ancillary to that generating stations purpose as defined by the planning act 2008. Any battery which can import electricity from the grid is not part of an NSIP. BESS is categorically defined by the planning inspectorate as not being an NSIP. Environmental Impact. EIA. Most responses by Sunnica to aspects considered in the EIA such as Residues and Emissions do not stand up to peer group scrutiny. There has been a lack of knowledge or reluctance to divulge by Sunnica relating to multiple aspects of the project. A paucity of alternatives. Key project details have not been provided. Lack of detail to determine the environmental impact. More focus is needed on the wider determinants of health and wellbeing. Matters likely to give rise to significant effects like increased traffic, access, change of land use and wider socioeconomic effects. There are few positive outcomes for the community or surrounding area. How is the community and landscape protected if this project fails after it has been built. Residues and Emissions. Incomplete account of all potential pollution and off site emissions, including toxic elements in the event of a disastrous thermal runaway event to the L-ion batteries and lack appreciation of risk to first responders and of a coordinated mitigation to the surrounding area including the local population, military assets and the COMAH site. The toxins emitted, such as Hydrogen Fluoride ( HF )in vast quantities and the Hydrochloric Acid and Fluorides created when water is combined with HF. No consideration of the effect to the ground water source protection zone including the Cam and Ely Ouse chalk ground water area if contaminated by run off contaminated with toxins after any event. Climate change and greenhouse gases. The scheme has not been proved to reduce these and has been assessed to actually increase not reduce greenhouse gases. Where is the total provable reduction in carbon emissions? It may not even contribute to Net Zero commitments which need to be substantiated. Ecology. West Site B will significantly invade the primary and almost exclusive habitat of a plant protected under Section 8. There is little evidence that an alternative habitat could sustain this species. Any disruption or change to the habitat will almost certainly be disastrous to the species Selinum carvifolia. We cannot afford to undermine food security by using valued agricultural land, which is capable of contributing to food supply particularly at a time of worldwide concerns about food and energy security. Particularly with an intermittent unreliable generating station of PV which by government figures and national grid to deliver at best 11% of its ultimate rated capacity. PV is are not capable of generating at night. Is a ludicrous waste of waste productive land. Has the sequestration of carbon capturing crops and trees been adequately taken into consideration. Access to West site B is shown on Fordham Road. All traffic using this access will pass through Snailwell. The route has an environmental restriction to HGV’s over 7.5T put in place to protect the village from HGV traffic.