On 22nd November 2019, The Planning Inspectorate (PINS) accepted Scottish Power Renewables (SPR) plans for examination. We are still encouraging campaigners and supporters to write to Andrea Leadsom, Secretary of State for BEIS, calling for a full public inquiry because we believe that the UK needs a national offshore strategy for wind power. These SPR plans will be quickly followed by National Grid’s two interconnector proposals Nautilus and Euroconnector, and also Greater Gabbard and Galloper’s extension plans. We will be fighting one after the other. It is a draining process for campaigners. We need to help each other to build that spirit of solidarity. This is a battle. We need to make considered representations to PINS by 27 January 2020 but, we still believe that the real answer is not a struggle for mitigation, but to halt the whole process and explore more deeply, a holistic and efficient strategy for producing green energy in an environmentally responsible way.
1. Work closely with the campaign groups SASES (Substation Action/Save East Suffolk) and SOS (Save our Sandlings) to prepare well-considered objections and representations to PINS. SASES will be providing in-depth guidance on the way to write these, and will be holding a 2pm workshop on Saturday 4 January 2020 in Friston Village Hall. Please check out the SASES website for contact details of local councillors to email before Christmas to express your specific concerns. Our councillors need to hear our voices as soon as possible. The PINS response must focus on why SPR plans are wrong. We cannot suggest alternative locations to PINS.
2. We need to continue to call for the full public inquiry and pressure has to continue to be put on the Secretary of State for BEIS. Your postcards, emails and letters will continue to make impact. We will shortly be posting more updates on this national plea for reassessment. Remember that our current MP Dr Therese Coffey said at the Woodbridge Hustings on 21 November that the current plans “are not acceptable”. All other parliamentary candidates for this constituency are in favour of a public inquiry and would like to prevent any environmental damage. They believe there are better alternative solutions. We continue to learn from scientists and geo engineers what these future solutions will look like. We have to urge the UK government to think more holistically and frankly, be more bold and innovative like our European neighbours. The current plans are embarrassing due to their lack of coordinated planning and use of innovative technology. It is hard to understand how the UK government claims world leadership status in green energy when it extinguishes threatened wildlife and precious land so brutally and needlessly in the pursuit of so-called green energy.
Use our Fast fast track form or send an email or letter to Andrea Leadsom - please put your name, address, post code and the reference: Re: Scottish Power Renewables: East Anglia One North and East Anglia Two
We do not advise you to use all these issues. Just focus on the ones that matter most to you. Please write in your own words as your different points of view hold much more weight
Seven known energy projects (six substations/ interconnectors at Friston and one giant nuclear twin-reactor at Sizewell) constructed in a tiny part of East Suffolk over a period of 10-12 years will devastate and cause permanent damage to the countryside, making coastal Suffolk a no-go zone.
Crown Estates round 4 have sold off more sea bed causing a further tsunami of Windfarms to come. Where will they land?
Cables landing on Thorpeness beach - a fragile, eroding and constantly shifting shoreline, where only two years ago a man walking his dog died from a sudden cliff collapse.
Miles of cable laid into 60 metre wide trench developments, gouging out pieces of unique heathland and AONB, one of the rarest natural habitats in the UK from Thorpeness through Aldringham & Knodishall to Friston.
Coastal Suffolk will experience dust, noise and light pollution for at least a decade or more. These onshore projects are not on a fast turnaround.
Newly industrialised sites, made of reinforced concrete and tarmac will replace meadows and rare habitats. Who knows how long the land will take to renew itself?
Bats, badgers, barn owls, nightingales, red deer and many species of migrating birds live along the line of the intended cable route. Where will these protected or endangered species live? How will they survive, where will they go, will they ever return?
London scale traffic congestion and hold-ups will be a daily frustration. Accident black spots are inevitable as cyclists are squeezed between HGVs and cars. Emergency vehicles and service vans will be delayed.
Tourism is the main provider of local jobs. Why would visitors decide to come here if the roads are clogged with construction vehicles? Not just 'A' roads but rural lanes will be used as rat runs by contract workers.
The tourism economy is fragile, like the environment it is not guaranteed. Traffic congestion may become so bad as to make other destinations more attractive.
Retail businesses will suffer. Shops will close. High streets will lose their vibrancy. Every kind of business will lose out including local trades and service industries because everything is connected. There are NO SIGNIFICANT PERMANENT JOB INCREASES for local people from these substation plans. That is a fiction promoted by these big energy companies.
Imagine that East Suffolk is like a through road for the production of as much as 30% of our country's electricity power. It will turn into an ugly junk yard for clean energy, a kind of dumping ground.
The social implications of a mass influx of temporary workers are well documented, as at the time of the construction of Sizewell B Nuclear Power Station.
An increase in temporary workers can lead to petty crime, drunkenness and social disorder. Lives will be blighted. Rental accommodation costs for locals will rise and housing stock will be adversely affected.
Senior management from SPR and their clean energy consultancies have been ticking all the boxes, and carrying out the consultation meetings as required in the due process. Yet, these consultations are a sham, produce little or no significant change. They are designed to weary the reader.
However, a lack of response will be deemed as acceptance of their plans, so time and time again we point out the same fundamental problems.
We are told that there is a robust National Strategy for the production of clean energy. It is based on big energy companies blasting their way through any barriers. What failed to be considered was a National Strategy for the delivery of this power. It is needed.
Until the country has a robust offshore strategy for wind energy transmission infrastructure and delivery, National Grid should, in the short-term, use brownfield sites (already industrialised locations) avoiding the needless destruction of ancient woodlands, AONB and rare heathland habitats.
Ref: Scottish Power Renewables:
East Anglia 1 North and East Anglia 2
Fast track form:
Andrea Leadsom, Secretary of State, BEIS, 1 Victoria St., London SW1H 0ET.
Please state your name address,
copy your own MP and email@example.com
You need to state you name
and postcode to make your correspondence valid.