The Sizewell C Project

The views expressed in this page do not represent those of the Planning Inspectorate. This page consists of content submitted to the Planning Inspectorate by the public and other interested parties, giving their views of this proposal.

The Sizewell C Project

Received 10 August 2020
From UK & Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLA) (UK & Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLA))

Representation

NFLA has made detailed comments in all four rounds of local consultation by EDF Energy on Sizewell C (see our website [Redacted]. We would be concentrating our comments on the following: - The National Policy Statement for new nuclear is out of date and needs renewing before Sizewell C can be approved. - The concerns of NFLA that a major impact of building Sizewell C would be the production of nuclear waste with a radioactive content equivalent to 80% of the UK’s existing radioactive waste inventory. This could require anywhere between 20% and 35% of the underground space required by existing waste in a deep geological disposal facility. - Unlike spent fuel generated by existing UK nuclear reactors, it is not the intention of future reactor operators to reprocess spent fuel from new nuclear reactors. As a result, spent fuel will almost certainly remain on-site for decades, perhaps for as long as 160 - 200 years. - According to the UK Government’s Article 37 submission to the European Commission on Hinkley Point C, a severe accident would only release 0.0447TBq of radioactivecaesium-137. In contrast a modelling exercise by the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland suggested showed that a 10,000TBq of Cs-137 was possible. An analysis for the Austrian Environment Agency shows that a possible severe accident in the spent fuel pool could result in a release of 1,780,000 TBq of Cs137. Superimposing maps of radioactive fallout from Chernobyl, which released around 85,000TBq of Cs-137 show that a severe accident could require large areas of southern England to be evacuated depending on the wind direction. - Concerns around the financing of the new nuclear reactors planned for Sizewell C. - Construction issue problems with the EPR technology in France and Finland. - Proposed extensions to the site boundary requiring the destruction of a number of sensitive habitats. - Transport issues and nuclear emergency planning issues.