Examples Letters for East Anglia Study responses

Mar 17, 2024 | Uncategorized, National Grid, Network Design

In Newsletter 136  we urged you to write to key decision makers, giving you template text and a distribution list to create emails in your own words.

Here on this page/post we will show examples of great letters from a supporters that might give you further inspiration or ideas for your own letter.

Letter 1:  see text on pdf HERE or below

Subject: ESO East Anglia Network Study published 12th March 2024

This process, being led by National Grid, is now getting beyond belief. No person or Government in their right mind would condone what is a form of ecocide. The race towards net zero is understandable and the harnessing of wind power is commendable but the drive to ride rough shod over Suffolk’s Heritage coast is a crime against humanity, the communities and the precious, protected environments that exist along the unique coastal stretch.

Please will someone instruct National Grid to stop their flawed, one way, dismissive “consultative process” and really listen and look properly at providing balanced alternatives. Their well written and lengthy documentation throughout this process says subjectively just what they want and feel they need to say politically. It claims they are listening but in no way does it reflect the level of opposition to their plans, or quantify the anticipated high level of damage that will be caused to the local economy, tourism, wildlife, ecosystems and the whole coastal land stretch.

Locally we feel we are being bullied and bulldozed into accepting this is the only option because of the location of Friston, a small medieval village that just happens to be located near to pylons enabling an easy grid connection.

Key questions for all to consider:

  • Why has there been no detailed, clear consideration of the short and long terms costs and benefits of using possible brownfields sites and an offshore grid? This can then be compared more fairly with the significant difficulties and additional costs of having to work onshore across large expanses of greenfield sites, protected areas with SSSI and AONB status plus a complex marine environment and rapidly eroding coastline?
  • Why has there been no attempt to independently quantify the possible loss of jobs and revenues particularly for the tourism and hospitality sector? The area currently receives up to 60 million day visits per annum. The main attraction being the unique combination of a coastline set in a largely rural and relatively unspoilt environment.

I completely agree with SEAS who are advocating the following three actions are taken:

  1. Widen ESO’s narrow brief and complete a holistic study using quantitative HND criteria. This should include all planned energy projects in East Anglia, the corresponding North Sea offshore sector, and the offshore bootstraps and interconnections.
  2. Conduct a detailed, independent evaluation of Friston versus Bradwell-on-Sea, Grain and the other brownfield sites closer to London, given the increased goals for offshore wind energy and interconnection with the Continent.
  3. Perform a full economic quantification of the tourism impacts for the Aldeburgh and Bradwell-on-Sea areas.

Most of all, National Grid Ventures need to stop throwing their weight around, rushing to meet deadlines by cutting corners and really listen to the local population, They have access to the expertise that points to the benefits of an Offshore grid infrastructure. They say it is something that will happen soon. When is soon? It is needed now and will be future proofed and integrated as part of a holistic energy network. They have the profits to put towards any short-term costs that will result in future long term cheaper, greener energy.

Let’s see the Government and ESO taking a longer term, investment focused, strategic approach demanding some real evidence of Corporate Social and Environmental Responsibility from National Grid.

Thank you for your consideration,