LionLink EIA Scoping Report Letters

Mar 27, 2024 | Cumulative Impact, Environment / Net Zero, National Grid, Project Updates, Uncategorized

To help you to respond to the LionLink Environmental Impact Scoping Report (by 4 April), please find below and HERE suggested letter text from a local resident to guide/inspire you to write your own.

We suggest sending it to the following emails




Example letter text below:

Subject: LionLink Environmental Impact Scoping Report

Dear Sir/Madam,

I write as a resident of the Suffolk Coast and am astounded at the degree to which your report is flawed and insufficient in scope.

I believe it is based on 4 assumptions that are wrongly limiting the scope of the EIA which we address below:

  1. Friston is not the inevitable connection point for the project

You dismiss alternative network designs (as suggested in previous non-statutory public consultations) involving longer offshore cables (but with onshore infrastructure savings) as being non-viable, but make no attempt to justify this, with analysis including all relevant costs to the consumer.

  1. Environmental impact cannot be ignored

You consistently downplay the extent of destruction that will be caused to highly designated areas of landscape and biodiversity. More detailed studies are required of both the geology and risks of coastal erosion, and in addition assessment of the ecological impact particularly on biodiversity. Entire ecosystems are at risk that cannot be replaced or compensated for by one off interventions elsewhere.

  1. Traffic/congestion impact is a significant and material issue

You make no reference to the extent of additional traffic that would be added to roads that will already be over stretched with the impact of Sizewell C. Further research is required using peak traffic flow numbers not averages, taking into account the potential cumulative impact of multiple projects.

  1. The Tourism economy will be existentially threatened

The area is totally dependent on tourism. It is an area with lots of small businesses serving the hospitality sector – itself made up of small businesses. Tourists come to the area to enjoy the natural landscape and the peace and quiet. How can you assume that your plans on their own, let alone in combination with others, will not deter visitors from coming to the area, I have seen reports suggesting an economic cost to Suffolk Coastal tourism of as much as £1billion across the lifecycle of the projects, therefore this needs to be assessed. Without quantifying the negative impact on the tourism economy, how can any cost benefit analysis of current plans vs an alternative using offshore infrastructure to take energy to a brownfield site closer to demand be justified?

This report lacks the scope and detail necessary to properly assess the impact of the LionLink project and further analysis is required as outlined above. In order to satisfy the requirements of the planning process, you must widen the report’s scope if it is to provide meaningful analysis of options and lead to sensible conclusions.

Yours sincerely,