11 September 2019

EAST SUFFOLK’S DECISION TO APPROVE THE PREMATURE AND PRE-EMPTIVE DESTRUCTION OF CORONATION WOOD SHOWS CONTEMPT FOR THE 126 OBJECTIONS IT RECEIVED AND SETS THE SCENE FOR THE WIDESPREAD CHAOS TO COME FROM SIZEWELL C

Together Against Sizewell C (TASC) is appalled by the decision of East Suffolk’s Council’s (ESC) Strategic Planning Committee’s decision to approve EDF’s planning application for the creation of more space in the Sizewell C site to accommodate the possible new nuclear development of Sizewell C twin reactors which condemns Coronation Wood to be felled. The development requires the moving of some Sizewell B (SZB) buildings and car parks to other areas west of SZB which will further impinge on the Suffolk Coast and Heaths Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).

The decision was carried by nine votes including that of the chairperson with eight councillors voting against

TASC’s Secretary, Joan Girling, who spoke at the meeting on 9th September asked “Are Councillors and Officers aware that there is a Duty of Regard for the Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB to conserve and enhance its natural beauty and if it were not for the fact that SZC needs more space and if this was a stand-alone application would planning permission be granted? The AONB hierarchy states that damaging the AONB landscape should be avoided before considering mitigation and compensation. We request that you turn down this application outright and allow it to be part of the Development Consent Order for SZC when it is submitted to the Planning Inspector and determined by the Secretary of State”

After the meeting TASC’s Chairman Pete Wilkinson commented “To approve this application so far in advance of a protracted process which may well see approval for Sizewell C denied is pre-emptive and irresponsible. To offer 126 objectors just three minutes collectively in which to publicly state their case is not democratic and is derisory. To be prepared to sacrifice a much-loved historic landscape feature and buffer such as Coronation Wood and to further infringe the AONB months in advance of the development consent order being submitted, let alone approved for Sizewell C, is inexcusable. It demonstrates a contempt for the many objections submitted from NGOs and individuals from a wide area, many of whom see Coronation Wood as a well-loved feature of the Sizewell landscape.

“TASC salutes the environmentally aware councillors who voted against this planning application and hopes that those who voted for it can live with a clear conscience when the bulldozers move in. If SZC does not go ahead, an outcome which TASC will do everything in its power to achieve, Coronation Wood will have been sacrificed for nothing”

 

Image result for sizewell coronation wood

TASC Astonished at East Suffolk Council Planning Officers’ Recommendation to Approve EDF’s Plans to Commence Premature Building Work for Sizewell C despite Widespread Objections

 

Having read the recent Planning Officers’ report from East Suffolk Council for the EDF Sizewell B relocation of facilities planning application, which is to be considered at the ESC Strategic Planning meeting on 9th September, Together Against Sizewell C (TASC) are very disappointed at the Planning Officers’ recommendation to approve. TASC’s press officer Chris Wilson said, “TASC are particularly disappointed at the lack of concern shown for the Suffolk Coast and Heaths Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Sizewell Marshes Site of Special Scientific Interest which so many objectors have cited as being in need of protection. We know Leiston-cum-Sizewell Town Council, Aldeburgh Town Council, Theberton and Eastbridge and Middleton Parish Councils, the AONB team, Suffolk Wildlife Trust, the RSPB and Suffolk Preservation Society all requested refusal of this application that EDF have submitted in preparation for building Sizewell C’s twin nuclear reactors on Suffolk’s Heritage Coast. Indeed not one single person has expressed support. EDF could not have written a more biased report themselves.

The application should not be considered as a standalone project but only as a part of a development consent application for Sizewell C.”

TASC’s Secretary, Joan Girling, said, ”What is truly astonishing is that just a few days ago East Suffolk Council declared a Climate Emergency. Yet their Planning Department then recommend approval of a plan involving destroying the 100 year old Coronation Wood, badger setts and a part of the unique Sizewell Belts SSSI. One wonders if the officers of different departments talk to one another. The only hope now is if the elected members take notice of the large numbers of well-considered objections from members of the public, local town and parish councils and leading conservation organisations against this proposed wilful destruction of the Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB, all for the benefit of EDF who neither have planning, regulatory and licencing consent for Sizewell C nor the funds available or a finance package in place to build it.”

For more information contact: Joan Girling Secretary 01728 830965 or Chris Wilson Press Officer 07976 820524 or Pete Wilkinson Chairman 07940 524831

Together Against Sizewell C Wood Farm, Westward Ho, Leiston, Suffolk IP16 4HT

A banner was displayed prominently on both sides of the Wickham Market bridge over the A12 a few days ago.

Thanks to the Shut Down Sizewell Campaign

http://www.shutdown-sizewell.org.uk/

TASC members have raised concerns over the amount of fresh water that Sizewell C would require. EDF have yet to explain where this water will be sourced, as there is not an adequate existing supply. The text is copied from an article in the East Anglian Daily Times 11-08-19. The original article is here

Where will 2,000,000 litres of water a day to cool Sizewell C reactor come from?

Campaigners have voiced concerns over where up to two million litres of drinking quality water will come from every day to cool the reactors of the new Sizewell C nuclear power station if it is built.

Together Against Sizewell C (TASC) says that Suffolk is one of the driest places in the UK and is worried about the £14billion project's impact on and security of local mains water supplies.

EDF Energy says investigations are under way to see how water demand can be managed.

TASC has been left frustrated because full details of where the water will come from have yet to be provided and claims its questions have been "ignored, skipped over or evaded".

A spokesman said: "We know that East Anglia is the most arid region in the UK, our water resources are already over stretched and there is little prospect of finding new sources of water, a reality acknowledged by Essex and Suffolk Water in their 2019 Draft Water Resource management plan.

"This was echoed by the Environment Agency: 'The confined chalk groundwater in the East Suffolk area is fully committed and no further consumptive abstraction can be considered.'

"We also know that climate change will bring more droughts and floods as weather patterns become increasingly chaotic. England, Scotland and Wales are projected to be in deficit by 1.4 billion to 5 billion litres of water per day by 2080.

"If Sizewell C is built, the water supply for it will have to be consistent. The water will be needed to replenish the cooling pond and cool parts of the reactor. Obviously, keeping these processes operating safely is vital, and the supply cannot be cut even in times of drought. So when there is not enough water for farmers, households and industry, the power station will still have to be supplied every day, week in, week out, for decades into the future."

EDF Energy, Essex and Suffolk Water and the Environment Agency are engaged in "constructive discussions" regarding the construction and operation of Sizewell C.

An EDF spokesman said: "We recognise the issue of water supply is an important one for the local area.

"We are investigating how peak and seasonal water demand may be balanced to ensure there is no detriment to surface water flows, so as to ensure that Water Framework Directive compliance assessment criteria can be complied with, and that no ecological detriment will occur as a result of the project.

"The identification and development of potential measures - which may be used to both reduce and balance demand - is therefore being developed collaboratively with the right stakeholders, at the right time, to make sure our DCO submission is robust."

This is copied from a Press Release from Woodbridge Town Council. The link to the original is here

"Woodbridge Town Council has resolved to oppose the building of Sizewell C.
The Woodbridge Town Mayor, Councillor Eamonn O’Nolan, said ‘for all the good intentions that may lie behind it, Sizewell C is a dangerously reckless project that must be stopped. The fine engineering minds employed on it should be giving their attention to the question of how to make safe the reactor that is already there, not building a new and bigger one alongside it.In terms of environmental impact, nothing discussed so far in the consultation process comes close to the reality of a Fukushima scenario. Yet that is what we could be facing -the prospect of our region becoming globally known in the same terms as Fukushima or Chernobyl: Effectively uninhabitable.The technology may have improved slightly, but the fundamental fact remains that uncontrolled water and nuclear reactors do not mix safely.EDF’s planners speak of Sizewell as standing on “a stable part of the Suffolk coast”. This is simply not true. Sizewell stands roughly halfway between Dunwich, where a medieval city now lies under the sea, and Slaughden, a village that was swept away in a storm barely a century ago. Its familiar white dome is within sight, or a short walk, of both. The people of Suffolk know how “stable” this coastline really is.’Councillor O’Nolan went on to say, ‘there are many unanswered questions:

  • We know too that sea levels are going to rise -but how far and how fast?
  • We know climate change is already affecting storm activity -but how great will the change be?How much will even a small rise in sea level affect the ability of the offshore shallows to absorb storm energy?
  • Is any existing or planned protection of the Sizewell site enough to defend it adequately against these certain changes?

EDF don’t have accurate or reliable answers to these questions -because nobody does. No doubt their engineers are confident. No doubt the engineers who designed Fukushima were confident too. Are our engineers that much cleverer and foresighted than their Japanese counterparts? If you think they might be, would you stake your life on it -and the lives of your children?It's not even as if we need the promised power. The argument that renewable energy is unreliable is simply out of date. Solar, wind and potentially tidal sources provide ample power -and the question of availability on demand is answered by developments in thermal energy storage.’At less than 20 miles distance, Woodbridge is potentially within a future Sizewell disaster exclusion zone, and we believe there is no justification for putting the inhabitants of the town and the whole of the Suffolk coastal area at such high risk"

Ends

The vote was unanimous.
Thank you to TASC members who spoke to council members and gave them an alternative view to the one EDF is peddling