Sir, Eleven years on from when the government suggested new nuclear could be part of the energy mix to combat climate change, we are still no nearer to being given the opportunity to challenge the choice of Sizewell as a potential site, either through the planning process, or through the site licencing process and the involvement of the nuclear regulators. Despite technology moving on at such a pace that the previously agreed strike price of £ 92.50 per megawatt hour for Hinkley Point C is now being shown to be hopelessly unaffordable for UK taxpayers. With many alternatives now needing no subsidy and alongside new storage technologies and changes to the distribution system there is no need for a fixed baseload from nuclear and certainly not at a price double that of alternatives. The former head of the National Grid recently confirmed there is no need for fixed baseload. Government is also continuing to promote fracking despite alternative gas supplies from other technologies including anaerobic digestion and use of hydrogen. It is clearer than ever before that one of the original reasons promoted for new nuclear ie combating climate change is easily achieved by alternative means, given the will, by government, to change policy. These alternatives will be delivered quicker and cheaper but will also be accomplished without the disruption to the environment and peoples’ lives from a 10 to 12year build programme and without the legacy of nuclear waste left for future generations to monitor, manage and guard. The reactor type is not yet finally tested and commissioned anywhere in the world despite the first construction commencing in 2005. It is believed that certain parts of the reactor do not yet have an approved manufacturing process for the quality desired by the industry and the regulator.

The new Suffolk County Council really does need to address whether it supports new nuclear and should thoroughly research the need and the alternatives, rather than continue to waste taxpayer money and officer time in pursuit of new roads and hostel sites, which cannot possibly compensate for or mitigate the impact on Suffolk of the monstrous intrusion of Sizewell C. This would also allow it to help guide what training needs, particularly in engineering, are best addressed at the Alde Valley training centre. The provision of which is to be applauded, whilst recognising that it simply replaces a provision at Halesworth which has been closed. Our young people can then be trained in industries with a beneficial sustainable future rather than those of the past.

Mike Taylor

Leiston

I was particularly heartened by the front page article, EADT March 2nd by Richard Cornwell, in which the views of the tourist industry of this area were so forcibly put by Michael Pritt, owner of the Wentworth Hotel, Aldeburgh. This tourist destination is not alone by any stretch of the imagination and attracts local spending and provides many permanent jobs as part of Suffolk's successful recreation, leisure and tourist industry. 
Some of the many hotels and businesses are smaller, such as B&Bs providing accommodation for the many who visit the coast and surrounding areas. Accommodation EDF have said they would like to take advantage of for their employees should Sizewell C&D ever get the 'go'. 
I cannot understand why more residents from Aldeburgh haven't constantly expressed their concerns as forcibly as has Mr Pritt. Particularly as it is planned to construct an 800m long commercial jetty, just up the coast from Aldeburgh, with ships delivering to the site.
As has been stated over and over, to the north and south of Aldeburgh, are internationally recognised 'Special Protection Areas' (SPA's) . Just north is the world famous RSPB Minsmere, developed since just after the last war to the amazing bird and wildlife reserve of today. Now, unbelievably, it is proposed to plonk two giant nuclear power stations right next to this precious site and over Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Also as part of their discussions with EDF, our local councils are trying to insist EDF improve our roads locally as part of the package. These should have been part of the councils' responsibility years ago.  Many were planned in the1960's.!
As Michael Pritt rightly says, Sizewell at this stage is still only a' potential site for the Sizewell C&D nuclear additions. C&D would have two reactors and these are to be larger than the existing Sizewell 'B, which is the American designed Westinghouse type. This is already sitting alongside the now defunct UK Magnox
Sizewell 'A' model which is now having to stand there for the next 70 years when we are told it will become safer to commence dismantling. This task lasting a further 20 years!
  
In addition,  Sizewell now has wind farm terminals installed. The offshore wind farms are already safely generating electricity and more are nearing completion,  creating many, many safe skilled jobs. Unlike Sizewell C&D, which will take 12 years and not 10 years to build at an estimated cost of £20 billion not £10 billion to build. Which is 20% of its 60 year life expectancy. Certainly not a low carbon operation, as we are led to believe.In addtion to all of this is the necessity to have ''outages'' for 8 weeks every 18 months when there is a complete ''shutdown'' costing in the region of £60) mill each time. Low carbon energy, just a myth!    The 'Chinese Partners' have been invited to invest 20% in this 'potential' project, and more at Hinkley Point, I understand.  Following that, the Chinese are hoping to construct their own HPR 1000 model at Bradwell. How about that!  It has been said the very shallow Blackwater tidal river would not be able to cool those huge reactors. It makes me shudder to think of the consequences.
Now, along with all of this, there is the necessity to store nuclear waste at Sizewell. This spent fuel, highly dangerous material, is to be stored in huge
containers, as featured in the past in the EADT. This will remain on site for centuries and the real issues of having to deal with the waste problem we are
leaving for our future grand children's children, and more, to sort out.  Politicians seem totally oblivious to the seriousness of our local plight and concentrate only on the false promise of long term job creation.  Yes, 5500 jobs while under construction, says EDF.  But many imported and many former employees from other nuclear sites with the required skills. And a few for local businesses and workers. Leiston hasn't exactly thrived after the building of Sizewell A or B, has it? And! one thousand additional workers are required to work upon the outages each tme. I had this point confirmed to me at the last Sizewell Stakeholder Meeting .
Regrettably the area as we know it will have suffered irreparable damage. At the end, to have provided only 900 jobs between two additional nuclear power stations with a three shiftwork arrangement, including security jobs, domestic and cleaning jobs, after12 years, ain't that many! Most of the former jobs in tourism and other local businesses will, by then, have long gone!  
Bob Hoggar
Dear Sir,

On 12 of January I attended an exhibition in Lowestoft put on by EDF as part of the stage 2 consultation for Sizewell C.

The first consultation was in 2013 and I responded, as did many others, with answers objections and queries as was required. The consultation document for stage 2 consists of 321 pages, the vast majority of which contain the same information as the stage 1 consultation and which do not contain the answers to the questions many respondents raised during stage 1 .

Originally EDF’s intention was to have only 2 stages of consultation before applying to build the new reactors, however the standard answer given by EDF employees during the stage 2 exhibition to any questions I asked about details of the plans was that more information would be available during a stage 3 consultation that they intended to carry out at some point in the future. I asked why the stage 2 consultation was being held at all, given that there was so little new information in the stage 2 document, and was told that EDF felt they had to do something because it had been so long since the stage 1 consultation and they needed to keep the momentum for the project going.

So the upshot is that the stage 2 consultation is even more of a sham than I already believed it to be (we only get to comment on where they are going to park the cars, we don't get a say in whether it gets built at all). We are being asked by EDF to use our free time to plough through the consultation document, go to exhibitions and respond to the consultation just so they can look like Sizewell C is not dead in the water.

I suspect EDF would not be upset if people did not respond to the consultation. I don't believe they want our views at all. If they did they would not have held both stages of the consultation over the Christmas / New Year period when a lot of people just don't have the time or energy to get involved.

regards,

Emma Bateman,
Lowestoft

I visited the Theberton TEAGS ( Theberton Eastbridge Action Group on Sizewell)  meeting last Saturday morning along with many others from outside Theberton.The meeting was to discuss the importance, in their view, of a new D2 road from the A12 to run across farmland directly to the Sizewell Nuclear site. The road, it is estimated, would cost £52 mill and would relieve traffic having to use current roads, one of which is the B1122 through Theberton. County Councillor Richard Smith addressed the meeting and read the whole of his letter to the EADT (12th Dec) supporting the new D2 road.  EDF have made it abundantly clear they will not pay for this road.
What so many at the meeting seemed to totally overlook was ''THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM''. The proposal to build two new Nuclear Power Stations, C&D, next to the operating Sizewell B and the shut down A station. 
(Incidentally it is necessary to leave this Magnox reactor for the next 70years, plus 20 years to complete its removal, I'm informed.) In addition to this, nuclear waste is now required to be stored at Sizewell and from all reactors at their respective sites. A second Sellafield here in Suffolk. The chosen site, it has been pointed out, will not now be large enough as it is a requirement to construct large stores on site for the nuclear waste! 
This is in addition to the site being slap bang over an AONB (Area Outstanding Natural Beauty), a SSSI (Site of Special Scientific Interest), a SPA (Special Protection Area) and an internationally designated RAMSAR site. This is also part of our delicate heritage coast for which the Tourism and the recreational industries boast, and constantly, rightly remind us in the EADT. The industry is worth a minimum of £250mill a year to the area.
It is now apparent there will also have to be excavated borrow pits, (30metres 100ft deep) but better known as quarries, all for the concrete construction materials. They will also excavate 'peat' to over 20 metres (80ft) deep and this will release vast amounts of carbon dioxide. Where Nuclear is involved the ''Low carbon'' claim is but a deliberate deception! No Nuclear power station has ever been fully remediated and leaves always a never ending legacy of cost and subsidy which we tax payers have to pay. I have long thought we, as a small country, are driven by military requirements for enriched plutonium and not simply electricity. ''The lights going out'' is a scare tactic for the Nuclear Industry.  EDF were even sending their electricity across to France recently. Why not? It's cheaper for them as the rate of exchange between the £ & Euro is in their favour and our demand for electricity has gone down by16%. It is also a fact that EDF took from Britain in 2015 a profit for France of  £750mill. Another reason it all costs us so much. They do very nicely for their country and we pay.
No wonder EDF are reassuring all of the inhabitants of Leiston that everything will be just fine, (EADT headline, Monday Jan 9th). For them to say otherwise would be inconceivable. It will be as difficult to control behaviour in Leiston, as it was the last time with ''B''. In your article Councillor Colin Ginger said how bad it was, but doesn't seem able to say it will all be very difficult again for Leiston, being just a short walk from the campus and the building site. Last time the saying was, and as was said at the Theberton meeting, the construction workers could always find ''A beer, a woman and a fight''. Young men haven't changed that much.
It is now accepted that12 years minimum and £20billion plus should be allowed for the contract. That equals 20% of the expected operational period of 60 years, excluding £60mill outages. These are currently every 18months at "B" and, presumably, for each reactor vessel.? Therefore x 2 with imported French and American technical specialist staff ? for the minimum 6 weeks duration. We must always remember we are buying the electricity from EDF, a French company, and they can call the tune as to who does the work. Local Jobs? I have already noticed while driving close by to the park and ride site at Hacheston/ Wickham Mkt. that EDF
have chosen to investigate the archaeology, using a Cotswold company (as indicated on their vehicles) when the County Council surely has staff able to undertake this 'local' task.

Local Jobs? I wonder!

 

Bob Hoggar

Click on the image to open and enlarge in a new window