Representation by Isobel Newport-Mangell
- Date submitted
- 17 March 2022
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
MY EXPERIENCE OF THE LOCAL AREA - 5th generation of a family which has lived and worked within the area as defined by the Order Limits of the proposed scheme - considerable network of local relations through commercial, social and voluntary activities - lifelong knowledge of the local environment and sensitivity to the wider impact of the scheme on local residents HOW THE PROPOSAL AFFECTS ME The implementation, and inherent risks to Health and Safety, of this inappropriately large Industrial National Infrastructure Scheme, will result in the loss of an ancient rural, agriculturally productive, ecologically diverse environment, for which no proposed mitigations can compensate. WHAT WE HAVE, AND WHAT WE WILL LOSE: - a centuries old established, efficient, productive farming industry and associated infrastructure and community - 2500 acres of this farmland to be expropriated (against the will of several longstanding landowners) - long-term, stable employment for many local families - locally produced/sourced high quality food (= minimal carbon footprint) - naturally evolved and long-established habitats – maintaining an increasingly fragile biodiversity, with recognised benefits to our health and wellbeing KNOWN ADVERSE EFFECTS OF THE SCHEME: - unprecedented disruption to everyday life during the minimum 2 yr construction phase and beyond - resulting mental ill-health (impact neither assessed, nor addressed, anywhere in the Applicant’s Documentation) - the only local benefit perceived are 27 jobs – how many will be lost? - concern around no meaningful guarantees that the land will be restored to former agricultural after the < 40 years of the scheme’s useful life POTENTIAL, AS YET UNQUANTIFIED, ADVERSE EFFECTS OF THE SCHEME: - 77acres, 500MW, of Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) over 3 sites - currently the largest in the world - unprecedentedly close to settlements, posing (on a novel scale) life-threatening risks to populations (a total population of 34,000/10 settlements) and livestock all within 0.5-3 miles of BESS installations which would normally be sited in remote areas/deserts - “The study area is mostly rural and sparsely populated” (15.6.11): - a misleading representation of scale of impact on the settlements neighbouring the scheme, The largest 2 of which -totalling 26000 population -are not referred to at all - Inherent fire and explosion risks of Lithium-Ion batteries are now recognised and documented - No Fire and Rescue Service can extinguish them, and the toxicity of the gases released are lethal - I am concerned and deeply troubled at the lack of rigour of assessment and impact, of a critical incident involving BESS in the Applicant’s documentation. What detail on BESS exists “7.6 Outline Battery Fire Safety Management Plan”, came very late (November 2021) to the Consultation Phase – a month before it was due to close - This document only cites 6-15MW examples that are not remotely comparable to the 500MW proposal here - No confidence in a process, in which risk cannot be fully assessed until BESS details are published “following receipt of any Development Consent Order”, and therefore beyond our ability to scrutinise them MATERIAL INADEQUACIES OF THE CONSULTATION PROCESS The inadequate opportunity (only one face-to-face meeting with Applicant, 1 week before Register of Interest deadline) to ‘engage early with the Applicant to shape the scheme’ (as advised by the Planning Inspectorate) resulting in widespread loss of confidence in the initial consultation process. Any compensatory mediums for consultation have fallen far short of universal outreach and fairness of opportunity to engage (eg. online webinars-which allowed for Applicant to answer pre-issued questions of their choosing)