Glyn Rhonwy Pumped Storage

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.

Glyn Rhonwy Pumped Storage

Received 10 January 2016
From Dr Jane Huuse

Representation

Objection to the QBC Glyn Rhonwy development
1. Footprint: The huge environmental/physical footprint created by the scheme in order to potentially produce only 2.8% of the UK’s 2025 pump storage needs. If approved this could create a precedent for degrading beautiful upland landscapes across the UK for private profit. Why not get companies, either private and/or public, to co-ordinate and economise on scale, ruining only a few sites of beauty, and agree to use profits for example to fund research in to improving energy efficiency for future generations?
2. With rapidly evolving battery technology (for example use of Vanadium batteries to balance the grid), it may be the case that the QBC type of pump storage is soon considered exceptionally inefficient. A landscape ruined in vain?
3. The Environmental Impact Assessment is not accurate on a number of points, some of which I would like to discuss in more detail. Incidentally all reports provided for previous planning permission consideration by Gwynedd Council had been commissioned by QBC with some start up funds from Gwynedd Council to develop the site. . Will a balanced view of the facts (also made by qualified environmental personnel (without the huge financial incentives)) be taken in to account if presented to this panel?
4. The construction phase of this development will have a severe impact on those living along the access route (particularly those located in upper Waunfawr) and those in Llanberis. Many of the > 200 year old houses are within a few meters of access route (presently a narrow rural lane). Heavy goods vehicles using this route are likely to pose significant danger to school children, local children walking between houses (no pavement), buildings and walls. Some houses show strong potential for collapse. If this project gets the green light, then QBC proposes against the resident’s will, to use this route for its heavy goods vehicles and their associated site personnel at any time from 7 am to 7 pm, putting a lot of current road users at avoidable risk.
5. I also contest the conclusion of the EIA’s traffic section that concludes there will be insignificant disturbance from their heavy machinery and/or workers’/service vehicles using this access route. Pilot drilling on the development site resulted in vastly increased traffic counts around the clock and a strong increase in heavy noisy vehicles. Monitoring equipment was set up after site establishment and taken down before site abandonment and did thus not capture the most significant traffic increases. Thus there are major queries about the validity of the vibration and noise monitoring the company has carried out.