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 24 September 2020
From Diane Humphrey

Representation

Damage to this part of Suffolk will be incalculable; loss of peace, protected habitats, tranquillity and dark night skies. Locals and visitors are attracted to this area for precisely those reasons and will be driven away by the noise, pollution, closures of beaches and footpaths, traffic congestion and general disruption. My areas of concern are: 1. Location • If you were starting from scratch there is no way you would choose this site • Coastal erosion and possible risk of flooding, including the possibility of the site becoming an island housing five nuclear reactors. • The catastrophic impact and implications for the ANOB and local wildlife. • The toll on local infrastructure of eight other totally uncoordinated energy projects 2. Local Impacts • There has been a failure to conduct vital studies including Health and Community. The proposals must not reduce quality of life or access to emergency services or healthcare. This area is already a ‘black spot’ for emergency services as it is between the major response hubs and in a rural setting and already struggles to cope at the moment. • There has been no proper assessment of the impact of on the thriving tourist economy. It is estimated tourism may lose up to £40m a year and 400 jobs. • EDF states that the project will create employment for local people but these will be mainly lower skilled worked all other workers will need to be ‘imported’. • The campus is single occupancy and workers must leave the site to socialise with non-EDF personnel. There is no impact analysis of the impact this will have on the surrounding area. • The impact on local communities in terms of traffic, noise light pollution and general disruption has not been given sufficient consideration. I strongly oppose the 2,400 capacity a Worker campus. The campus will destroy the local environment and amenity. • The park and ride planned north of Darsham Station has increased from 800 vehicles to 1250 vehicles. This park and ride will run 24/7. This will be a significant detriment to local residents in terms of noise, light pollution, traffic pollution and congestion. The installation of a roundabout on the A12 in Yoxford will further exacerbate the situation. 3. Transport • The proposal to adopt a road-based transport plan is the easiest and cheapest for EDF whilst being the most disruptive for the local community. The number of HGV vehicles visiting the site under the are equal to the “Road-Led” proposals which has already been rejected by all statutory consultees in consultations • The road proposal cuts through and splits communities and farm land leaving ‘islands’ of unproductive land and severed communities. There will be loss of amenity as the footpaths become unusable. There is no legacy of benefit to the local community. • There has been a complete failure to properly consider the impact on local traffic including the additional traffic on local roads and people turning rural roads into ‘rat-runs’. • There has been no impact assessment on the effect on property. Many rural properties are sited very close to the road and are already shaken as large vehicles pass. The potential for lasting damage to these properties has not been considered nor the adverse impact on health from fuel emissions. 4. Environment and Landscape • The effect on the local environment will be devastating has been given insufficient consideration, in particular the adverse impact on RSPB Minsmere and the wetlands. • The position, design and scale of the construction will be a true ‘blot on the landscape’, changing the landscape for ever and destroying precious habitats for rare birds, animals, flora and fauna. The AONB will be dislocated and destroyed. • The Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (ANOB) will be dissected for at least a decade. This threatens the fundamental aspirations and reason for existence of any ANOB. • Where did those four giant proposed pylons suddenly spring from? The reason the pylons are necessary is because EDF have identified it unacceptable to bury the cables, further evidence that this site is unsuitable. In Addition, by choosing overhead cabling you are making terrorist threats that much easier. • The project is far too big for the location and land available. Government guidelines suggest that a single nuclear power station should occupy 30 hectares, Sizewell C&D are squeezed into 32 hectares. • Significant dust pollution will be caused to the ANOB by the spoil heaps, which are estimated to reach 10 storeys high! 5. Coast • Building a nuclear power station on an eroding coastline is just not sensible. The flood risk is totally unpredictable. • The impact on the marine life has not been properly considered. I endorse the Relevant Representation submitted by Stop Sizewell C, RSPB and National Trust. The Sizewell C application is totally unsuitable for a digital examination process.