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 17 September 2020
From Graham Newman

Representation

Whilst I have no issues about nuclear power per se, I do wish to raise the following issues of concern about the plans for the building of Sizewell C. 1 Site location and its effect on coastal processes ? It is not clear from the documentation that the hard coastal defence features are adequate to withstand the increasing regularity and strength of damaging storms and other weather events for the full 170 years for which the site must remain secure against such threats. There is a risk the site could become an island. ? Even if the design has taken account of coastal engineers’ best estimates, please be advised that expert predictions about the shoreline in this vicinity have sometimes proved incorrect. Even less severe storms in the winter of 2019/20 have caused significant loss of coastline nearby – events that were not forecast to occur within the next 10 years 2 Transport to the site ? I believe the current mixed “road & rail” transport strategy, in which 61% of the project’s freight will be brought to the site by road to be totally unacceptable, unsustainable and environmentally damaging. It is already admitted that the power station will need to operate for 6 years to mitigate the CO2 dispensed in its construction! ? Whilst whatever strategy is adopted, the disturbance to nearby residents is unlikely to be significantly mitigated, there is a significant benefit for the rest of Suffolk (and indeed further afield) for a greater use of the rail network – particularly given EDF’s proposals for enhancement of the rail branch line between Saxmundham and the site. ? Further enhancements to the rail line between Ipswich & Saxmundham to facilitate a greater proportion of freight to come to the site by rail are dismissed as being “unable to be achieved in the time available”, but this is simply incorrect. A recent project to build more than 1km of sidings (ie equivalent distance to a passing loop between Melton & Wickham Market stations) near Norwich for the new Greater Anglia train fleet was completed in less a year (completed February 2020, cost £7.2million), presumably unfettered by Network Rail’s “Governance for Railway Investment Projects” process. ? Without greater use of rail, the entire A12 route from East Ipswich to Saxmundham will become seriously congested (particularly the single carriageway sections), as will the A14 around the Orwell Bridge and its junctions with other major routes. More freight by rail would obviate the need for a “Freight Distribution Depot” as far away from Sizewell as is the Seven Hills site proposed (30 miles distant), which is likely to obstruct passage to the nationally strategically important container port at Felixstowe. In summary, I ask the inspector to withhold permission for this project to go ahead without these aspects of the proposals, and the potential mitigations, being implemented. Graham Newman 17th September 2020