Ex-BBC star Bill Turnbull turns attention from cancer battle to nuclear power plant fight

EXCLUSIVE: The Classic FM presenter battling cancer is taking on a new fight – against a Sizewell C nuclear plant in local area which he says will devastate wildlife and ruin the countryside

Bill Turnbull at the site of the two new nuclear reactors proposed at the Sizewell plant (Image: Phil Harris/Daily Mirror)

Broadcaster Bill Turnbull is ready to do “whatever it takes” as he turns his attentions from fighting the Big C to a new enemy – Sizewell C.

The former Strictly contestant has become an unlikely eco warrior, warning a proposed new nuclear plant will devastate wildlife and ruin the countryside around his home for years to come.

At its peak, a 14-year building plan would see 1,500 lorries a day thundering down country lanes.

As his own battle with cancer continues, Bill, 64, is chairing local opposition meetings and ­drumming up support to halt the development at Sizewell, Suffolk.

Bill is feeling better despite cancer battle – and is ready for another fight (Image: Phil Harris/Daily Mirror)

Speaking from his home Bill says: “It would be a complete travesty if the new plant is built.

“Sizewell C is just too big and destructive for this special environment. It is the wrong project in the wrong place. This is an area of outstanding natural beauty.

“It is very close to a ­beautiful and important nature reserve. That would be destroyed. It just does not make any sense. I won’t back down, there is no backing down.”

EDF Energy – which runs the current plant at Sizewell – is planning two new nuclear reactors in a £14billion project.

The plant would be the size of 300 football pitches and would border RSPB Minsmere nature reserve, home to some of the UK’s rarest wildlife.

The build could start next year – but the plant won’t be able to provide electricity until 2035.

Bill, best known for 15 years on BBC Breakfast alongside the likes of Louise Minchin, moved to the area four years ago.

Over tea and biscuits with his wife Sarah – who he affectionately calls Sesi – Bill says: “People come here for dark skies, tranquillity, beautiful landscapes and an area of outstanding natural beauty.

“If this plant goes ahead, that will be cut in two. People will have roads built across their farms, there will be traffic day and night, an influx of construction workers.

“I worry about RSPB Minsmere. It is a jewel of wildlife, a natural treasure and a very precious nature reserve.

“Birds breed there that they haven’t had for decades.

“The idea you would build two nuclear reactors on its doorstep and have the largest construction site in Europe just a couple of hundred yards away is just bonkers.

“It will be 24/7, there will be light, noise, dust. It’s not just the birds, it’s otters, water voles and other animals. I worry about those populations being decimated, I worry about water contamination from the site. It will have a huge impact.”

Bill turned activist after a chance meeting in his local pub with Alison Downes, who leads local campaign group Stop Sizewell C.

He admits he was reluctant to speak up publicly because he spent his whole career as a journalist, where impartiality is a necessity.

Bill goes on: “I never meant to become an eco warrior, it just sort of happened. It feels a little bit strange, but also feels liberating.

“I think about it daily and feel very passionately about it because it overshadows the way we are going to live.”

And he jokes: “I’ll be throwing myself in front of whatever I can throw myself in front of to prevent the build.”

The energy giant plans to build 2,500 temporary multi-storey homes for construction workers – and he fears the area could be overrun with prostitution and drugs.

He explains: “The stories I hear about the 1980s and 90s, when they built Sizewell B, are not pretty.

“You hear tales of ­prostitution coming to the area and drug abuse, because there are so many workers away from home. It would take a lot of the tourism income out of the area long term and ruin it for future generations.”

The campaign is a huge undertaking for Bill, who was diagnosed with incurable prostate cancer in 2017.

Yet he says lifestyle changes – including cutting out meat and dairy and taking up yoga and meditation – have left him feeling healthier.

He says: “At the moment, we are holding steady. I’m on a treatment called Radium 223.

“It was working very well for five months, now it is working sort of okay.

“I feel very well. I’m pretty much not eating meat or dairy.

“I did a lot of research and it comes up time and time again that a wholefood, plant-based diet is good for you. It gets overwhelming, but it is great to be part of that cancer family. You get a lot of support from other people.”

Bill is also on a hormone treatment, which gives him mood swings.

He says: “Most of the time, I am absolutely fine, I get hot flushes, they pass. But occasionally, I can feel my mood dipping. Now when we go down into a dip and I howl like a baby – well, like a grown man, which is much worse – I understand it is chemically induced and it will pass the next day. And it always does.”

Bill, who was on Strictly in 2005, currently presents a weekend show on Classic FM.

He recently stepped in for Piers Morgan alongside his old breakfast TV sidekick Susanna Reid on Good Morning Britain.

He says: “It was thrilling being back, I think viewers liked the novelty of having me.

For now, Bill is throwing all energy into halting Sizewell C.
He vows: “We have to keep going, not falter for a second.”

Sizewell C facing delay because of coronavirus – planning submission postponed

https://www.eadt.co.uk/business/sizewell-c-dco-delay-edf-energy-says-1-6580597

PUBLISHED: 18:14 26 March 2020, by Richard Cornwell

Proposals for a new £14billion nuclear power station on the Suffolk coast are facing a delay because of the coronavirus.

EDF Energy says its planning application for the twin reactor is all ready to be submitted – but it has decided to postpone the submission by a “few weeks” because of the current crisis.

It has assured people that they will still be able to take part in the planning process for Sizewell C and the time for people to register will be extended.

Campaigners would have been furious if the application for a Development Consent Order had gone ahead as planned by the end of March with the current lockdown in place because of the virus and councils and community groups unable to meet due to the restrictions on movement and gatherings.

EDF was due to submit the DCO to the Planning Inspectorate by the end of March.

The company said this would now be put on hold for a few weeks, with more time for people to register as participants for the public examination phase of the DCO process to help to ensure local communities have enough time to review the application and participate.

EDF is liaising with the Planning Inspectorate to discuss how normal arrangements can be flexed so that communities are not disadvantaged by the current difficult circumstances.

Humphrey Cadoux-Hudson, EDF’s managing director of nuclear development, said: ‘‘We are ready to submit the application but we recognise that many people in Suffolk, including the local authorities, are adjusting to new circumstances created by the coronavirus crisis.

“We will defer the submission for a few weeks and once submitted we will extend the period for registration to make it easier for people to participate.

“During more than eight years of consultation we have worked hard to be transparent and to allow everyone who has an interest in the project to have their say. We will continue to do so in these difficult times.”

EDF says Sizewell C will help the UK stay in control of its energy transition by producing low-carbon, always-on electricity made in Britain. Replicating the Hinkley Point C design will allow for lower construction costs.

The company says the project will bring huge investment and job opportunities across Britain and especially to the Suffolk area.

It said: “It is important that the planning process moves forward so that if Sizewell C is approved it can play its part in helping the UK to recover once the coronavirus crisis is over.”

Campaigners though have a range of concerns, including the siting of a campus for workers and the routes and proposals – the latest suggestions including a potentially temporary link road from the A12 to the coast – to bring materials to the construction site.

There are also huge worries over the impact on tourism and wildlife for more than a decade while the enormous plant is built.

In a joint statement, leader of Suffolk County Council, Matthew Hicks and leader of East Suffolk Council, Steve Gallant said: “Both Suffolk County Council and East Suffolk Council absolutely agree that this is the right decision for EDF Energy to take at this moment in time. We believe there is no other choice for them to take during such a difficult time for us all as we focus on fighting the effect of Covid-19 across Suffolk.

“Given the critical need for our communities to have the ability to fully engage with the consultation and decision making process that forms a valuable part of the Government’s formal Development Consent Order, we are relieved to hear EDF Energy has given due consideration to the timescales for making their submission and will delay for a number of weeks.

“We are now keen to understand what this means as we all currently expect to be living with the effects and restrictions surrounding Covid-19 for some time to come and we would not be happy to see anything done that restricts the community in taking an active part in the decision making process.

“We are keen to keep talking to EDF Energy about when it will be appropriate for all parties to see EDF Energy make their submission.”

A spokeswoman for Stop Sizewell C said: “We welcome EDF’s decision to defer submission of its application for a Development Consent Order for Sizewell C at this difficult time, but given the seriousness of this medical crisis and the significant national and local impacts of Sizewell C it would be unacceptable if there was only a short delay. We urge EDF to pause until such time as the Planning Inspectorate, Government’s Statutory Advisers, local authorities, parish and town councils, groups and concerned individuals are fully resourced and fully able to engage in what will be a mammoth process to assess what we consider to be the wrong project in the wrong place.”

Since 2012, more than 10,000 local residents and organisations have taken part in four stages of public consultation.

The application for a DCO will be submitted to the Planning Inspectorate and a final decision to grant a Development Consent Order will be taken by the Government.

Nuclear industry appeals for new funding model to support Sizewell C

Nuclear industry appeals for new funding model to support Sizewell C

PUBLISHED: 08:00 08 March 2020 | UPDATED: 14:35 08 March 2020

Campaigners say fresh funding fears have cast doubt on the viability of Suffolk’s new nuclear power station.

Sizewell C would be built near to the existign Sizewell B  Picture: GETTY IMAGES

Sizewell C would be built near to the existing Sizewell B Picture: GETTY IMAGES

The Theberton and Eastbridge Action Group on Sizewell C (TEAGS) said a letter from the nuclear industry urging government to support a new financing model for electricity infrastructure exposed the vulnerability of new projects.

TEAGS’ Alison Downes said the Nuclear Industry Association submissions to the Chancellor highlighted growing worries the Treasury may ditch plans for a new funding model, on which EDF Energy’s business case for Sizewell C depends.

The NIA’s letter warns it will be impossible to replace the nation’s ageing nuclear power stations and achieve carbon net zero targets without the right investment policy.

It says there is an “urgent need” for a new financing mechanism to ensure “investor confidence, reduce the cost of capital and provide very significant value to the consumer.”

The proposals have been met with significant oppostion Picture: SARAH LUCY BROWN

The proposals have been met with significant opposition Picture: SARAH LUCY BROWN

The letter goes onto say timing is “critical” – as the business case for Sizewell C depends on the timely transfer of operations from Hinkley Point C; EDF’s sister project in Somerset.

It calls on government to respond to consultation on the ‘Regulated Asset Base’ model of funding, which was opened last year.

RAB grants companies rights to charge a fixed price to consumers in exchange for providing the infrastructure.

EDF said RAB could lead to lower financing costs and “significant savings” for consumers.

However, opponents say RAB would expose bill-payers to huge costs.

Paul Dorfman, founder of the Nuclear Consulting Group, said new nuclear projects had experienced “vast cost and time over-runs”.

“Under RAB, the plan is for the burden of risk to pass to hard-press UK consumers and taxpayers,” he added.

The RAB model, which has also been termed a “Sizewell surcharge”, sparked major opposition when consultation launched last year. More than 46,000 people have signed a petition opposing the plans.

Chris Wilson of Together Against Sizewell C said at the time of the petition that without massive subsidies, nuclear projects will “crash and burn”.

Mrs Downes said the industry was right to worry that the Treasury may ditch RAB.

“Based on its other projects, it will be impossible for EDF to accurately predict how much Sizewell C will cost and how long it will take to build,” she added.

“EDF has made it clear that RAB is essential for Sizewell C to proceed, but it will be too expensive, slow to deliver and is not the answer to our climate emergency.

“Any funds spent building Sizewell C would suck vital resources away from cheaper, faster green energy, energy efficiency measures and innovation in new technologies.”

The Treasury declined to comment.

Campaigners fear new £1bn energy project is ‘terrifying prospect’ that would destroy Suffolk countryside

PUBLISHED: 05:30 24 February 2020, Andrew Hirst

Vast swathes of countryside could be sacrificed for a £1billion new infrastructure project deemed ‘critical’ in meeting the nation’s energy needs.

Map shosing infrastructure projects, including the Suffolk to Kent connection Picture: NATIONAL GRID ESO

Map showing infrastructure projects, including the Suffolk to Kent connection Picture: NATIONAL GRID ESO

Energy bosses want to build a 2GW offshore connection between Suffolk and Kent, with associated substations and onshore cables, expected to industrialise more land near Sizewell.

 

The proposals, featured in a National Grid Electricity System Operator report, claim the new transmission route would offer economic benefits and help achieve carbon net zero targets.

But campaigners met the news with disbelief, saying the region is “swamped” and cannot cope with more energy projects.

Michael Mahony, of the Substation Action Save East Suffolk group, said: “It is difficult to comprehend how National Grid can even begin to think that an area which cannot accommodate seven major energy projects is suitable for yet two more. There is no thought to the irreversible damage to the East Suffolk countryside and people’s lives that all these projects will cause.”

Left to right, AONB Partnership chairman David Wood and manager Simon Amstutz. Picture: GREGG BROWN

Left to right, AONB Partnership chairman David Wood and manager Simon Amstutz. Picture: GREGG BROWN

Proposals for projects such as Sizewell C power station, various offshore wind farms and two ‘inter-connectors’, transmitting electricity between the UK and Europe, have seen Suffolk named the “Energy Coast”.

But while campaigners say they support renewable energy, they warned a lack of co-ordination from the industry risks sacrificing Suffolk’s precious landscapes for the UK’s growing energy demand.

ScottishPower Renewables’ (SPR) proposals for a 30-acre substation site near Friston, on the edge of the Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB, have attracted some of the fiercest criticism, including from Suffolk County Council and East Suffolk Council.

SPR claims the substations are needed to transmit power from its East Anglia One North (EA1N) and East Anglia Two (EA2) wind farms, which together with East Anglia Three are expected to power 2.7 million homes.

The abnormal load makes it's way from Ipswich Quay, as it heads to the National Grid substation in Burwell, Cambridgeshire. Picture: GRAHAM MEADOWS

The abnormal load makes it’s way from Ipswich Quay, as it heads to the National Grid substation in Burwell, Cambridgeshire. Picture: GRAHAM MEADOWS

But with Suffolk expected to host even more wind farms in the future, there is growing concern about the extent of onshore infrastructure that will bring.

The concerns prompted a group of East Anglian MPs to write to Secretary of State for BEIS Andrea Leadsom in October to press the case for an ‘offshore ring main’ (ORM), which would see several wind farms connect to the same marine cable, thereby reducing the disruption onshore.

But while the government considers its strategy on the ORM, National Grid ESO is seeking to push ahead with projects deemed “critical” for its energy needs.

Its Network Options Assessment, published in January, includes the Suffolk to Kent ‘SCD1’ transmission route among 42 projects listed ‘to proceed’, with a completion date as soon as 2028. It estimates the cost as £500m-£1bn.

Paul Collins, Charles Mcdowell and Alison Downes from Therberton and Eastbridge Action Group on Sizewell (TEAGS) Picture: SARAH LUCY BROWN

Paul Collins, Charles Macdowell and Alison Downes from Theberton and Eastbridge Action Group on Sizewell (TEAGS) Picture: SARAH LUCY BROWN

A further project, ‘SCD2’, would see second 2GW circuit created between Suffolk and Kent, running parallel with SCD1. However, this is currently on “hold”, meaning investment is not required this year.

Although details of the onshore infrastructure required are scant, Mr Mahony claims it will cover a 30 acre site with buildings 28 metres tall, based on similar ‘converter stations’. He believes National Grid will seek to use the same Friston site as SPR plans to use for its substations, meaning further industrialisation of a rural location.

The Suffolk Coast and Heath AONB has previously highlighted concerns about the cumulative impact of energy projects on the natural landscape. Chairman David Wood said that although no details were publicly available yet, he hoped the developer would pay due regard to the purposes of the nationally designated landscape, to conserve natural beauty.

“The Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB is designated for its natural beauty and supports a wealth of wildlife and has outstanding landscapes,” he added. “This mixture supports a thriving tourism industry worth over £210m per year and supports over 4,500 jobs. We expect those making decisions that may impact the nationally designated landscape will play due regard to the purposes of the AONB.”

The Theberton and Eastbridge Action Group on Sizewell C (TEAGS) has also raised concerns.

TEAGS’ Alison Downes said: “We are going to be swamped. The more we hear about all the energy projects planned for this part of Suffolk, the stronger our fears about the cumulative effects on local people, our precious natural environment, tourism and businesses. Multiple, uncoordinated projects with all their construction traffic and workers, built at the same time, is a terrifying prospect.”

East Suffolk Council said it had not been consulted on the project.

What did National Grid have to say?

National Grid said the Network Options Assessment report was published each year with proposals to meet the future needs of the transmission network – as well as recommendations for those which would be most beneficial.

“National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET), as the electricity transmission network owner in England and Wales, publishes its response to the NOA each summer,” a spokesman added.

“NGET is currently considering all of the recommendations from the ESO alongside any other options available to deliver the capability required and will be outlining which we intend taking forward in our Network Development Policy in the summer.

“Where any link between Suffolk and Kent might connect to the transmission system has yet to be determined, and where any plans are taken forward, there will be consultation.

“We are committed to working with local communities in East Anglia.”

A Note on EDF’s Financial Results by Prof Steve Thomas

(EDF published its 2019 financial results on 14 February. We asked Professor Steve Thomas for some analysis and here is what he said.)

In presenting its 2019 results, [1] EDF focused on its improved levels of profits compared to 2018. Its gross profits, EBITDA, (earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization) increased from €14.9bn to €16.7bn on sales of €71.3bn (up from €68.5bn). This figure comes down to €3.8bn compared to €2.5bn for 2018 when interest etc are taken off and excluding one-off items like sales of assets. 

What is conspicuous by its absence is any mention of ‘Opération Hercule’, the plan to split EDF into a renationalised ‘bad bank’, the nuclear assets, and a part-privatised ‘good bank’, renewables, electricity sales to consumers and power networks. Nowhere in the presentations is there any hint that EDF will need a massive restructuring effort underwritten by government if it is to remain a viable company. Also essentially absent is any mention of the Sizewell C project.

A key priority for EDF is to put itself in a position to finance the vast investments it will have to make in the next decade. The largest of these is the so-called Grand Carenage, the project to life extend its 58 operating reactors in France from 40 to 60 years, that cost it €4.3bn in 2019. The expected spend between 2014 and 2025 when perhaps half the reactors will have been life-extended went down from €55bn to €45bn presumably because of the decision to close the two Fessenheim reactors in 2022 and perhaps the four Bugey reactors by 2025. However, the French safety regulator, ASN, is not expected to specify exactly what upgrades will be required for life-extension until early 2021 and life-extension expenditures will continue beyond 2030. 

€1.76bn was invested in Hinkley Point C in 2019 compared to €1.61bn in 2018, leaving about €17-19bn to be spent assuming no more cost increase occur. If the project is completed near to time, about €2.2bn per year on average will be needed from now on of which two thirds will come from EDF, the rest from CGN (China).

The result of this was that net debt, after years of being relatively stable went up from €33bn to €41bn and EDF forecasts it will increase to €46bn in 2020. This is despite EDF forecasting that it will sell assets worth €2-3bn in 2020 compared to €0.5bn in 2019. It is not clear which assets are expected to be sold but there have been reports of EDF reducing its stake in British Energy (the UK’s AGRs and Sizewell B) from 80% to 51% perhaps generating up to €3bn. However, given that two of its station (Dungeness B and Hunterston) have been offline for a year or more with their return to service dates continually being put back, it is hard to see why anyone would take a gamble on such a risky set of assets. If this sale does not happen, EDF’s debt will increase further, which in turn will mean credit rating agencies may downgrade its rating increasing its cost of borrowing. Flamanville 3 continues to be a drain on EDF with €0.8bn invested in 2019 for a project that should have been generating income 7 years ago.

However, the end is not near for Flamanville. The method of dealing with the well reported problem of defective welds that cannot be accessed by humans is not expected to be approved by ASN until end 2020. This makes the target of loading fuel at the end of 2022 look very tight.

See https://www.edf.fr/sites/default/files/contrib/groupe-edf/espaces-dedies/espace-finance-en/financial-information/publications/financial-results/2019-annual-results/pdf/fy-results-2019-consolidated-financial-statements-20200214.pdf

and https://www.edf.fr/sites/default/files/contrib/groupe-edf/espaces-dedies/espace-finance-en/financial-information/publications/financial-results/2019-annual-results/pdf/fy-results-2019-appendices-20200214.pdf

and https://www.edf.fr/sites/default/files/contrib/groupe-edf/espaces-dedies/espace-finance-en/financial-information/publications/financial-results/2019-annual-results/pdf/fy-results-2019-appendices-20200214.pdf

NE CONSULTATION ON COAST FOOTPATH ALDEBURGH TO DUNWICH

If you would like to respond this consultation by 25 March, here are some suggestions:

Official Guidance on responding can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/england-coast-path-comment-on-a-proposed-new-stretch.

The documents for the stretch from Aldeburgh to Hopton on Sea can be found here https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/england-coast-path-from-aldeburgh-to-hopton-on-sea-comment-on-proposals. We are interested in the sections from Aldeburgh to Sizewell and Sizewell to Dunwich. The form to be completed is the second from bottom “Form to make a representation about proposals” (We don’t recommend objecting, and anyway only landowners and occupiers may do so.) Or you can download the form as a pdf below.

Box 1. The reference for the section Aldeburgh to Sizewell is AHS1. The reference for the section Sizewell to Dunwich is AHS2. If your comments include both the windfarm projects and Sizewell C, use both references.

Box 2 – leave blank

Box 3. Tick Other (unless of course you are responding on behalf of one of the agencies listed)

Box 4 – leave blank

Box 5 is for your comments. We suggest something short along the lines of the text below, but we strongly encourage you personalise this, or change it to say whatever you want: “I support the idea of a coastal path around the UK, but am distressed at the environmental damage and disruption to the Suffolk Heritage coast and the Suffolk Coast & Heaths AONB that will be caused by the proposed construction of twin reactors at Sizewell. This project will completely block this section of coastline for at least a decade. I am astonished to note that the reports covering the area between Aldeburgh and Sizewell do not appear to make any mention of the numerous (potentially 8 or more) offshore wind projects that are proposed to come ashore around Thorpeness, an area noted for its erosion and fragile coralline crag. If these projects go ahead, the cabling for offshore wind stations and interconnectors will result in the coastline and AONB being dug up repeatedly, ruining the area and your schemes for a coastal path. This area has been designated the ‘Energy Coast’ without our consent.”

Box 6 – up to you if there is something you want to include

Box 7 – probably the answer is “no” unless you have already submitted something

Box 8 – likely “no”

Box 9 is for your personal information

Send the completed form to eastcoastalaccess@naturalengland.org.uk or to England Coast Path Team, Natural England, Suite D, Unex House, Bourges Boulevard, Peterborough PE1 1NG

EDF poised to submit planning application for £20bn nuclear power plant

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/02/15/edf-poised-submit-planning-application-20bn-nuclear-power-plant/

By Robin Pagnamenta, 15 February 2020 • 8:00pm

EDF is poised to submit a formal planning application to build a new £16bn nuclear power station at Sizewell in Suffolk within weeks.

The French state-controlled electricity giant is putting the final touches to the paperwork required for a so-called Development Consent Order for the new station, Sizewell C, from Britain’s National Infrastructure Commission, the final stage in the planning process.

If approved, the new station, on the coast between Ipswich and Lowestoft, would include two new EPR reactors – making it an identical twin of another plant under construction at Hinkley Point in Somerset. Sizewell C, which is also backed by CGN, a Chinese government-controlled company, would generate 7pc of UK electricity, enough for 6m UK homes.

Sources familiar with the project said EDF hoped to file the application as soon as the end of this month although it could be delayed until March. EDF said: “Work on the DCO application is continuing”.

EDF has been working to address concerns about the suitability of the site, where an existing nuclear plant, Sizewell B, has been generating electricity for 25 years. Its low-lying coastal location has raised concerns about flood risks, especially with forecasts of rising sea levels.

At 79 acres (32 hectares), the Sizewell site is significantly smaller than the 111 acre (45 hectare) site at Hinkley Point, fuelling concerns about congestion during construction as well as the environmental impact.

Sizewell is surrounded by protected marshland and bird habitats including RSPB Minsmere to the north.

The NIC is expected to take about a year to approve or reject the application. However, a government funding package for the plant has not yet been finalised, raising doubts over how quickly it will proceed. The Government is determined to avoid the mistakes made with the funding for Hinkley, where EDF was awarded a guaranteed “strike price” for the electricity generated for 30 years.

The agreement was struck at a time of record electricity prices, prompting criticism that it represents a poor deal for consumers who will subsidise the new plant via a surcharge on their bills. Instead, ministers are examining an alternative framework designed to provide regulated returns to investors.

The so-called Regulated Asset Base model is aimed at cutting the cost of raising private finance for new nuclear plants, which have very high upfront costs, in order to trim consumer bills and maximise value for money.

ITV anglia, 6pm 14 February

Watch from 5 minutes 50: https://www.itv.com/news/anglia/2018-05-04/catch-up-watch-the-most-recent-itv-news-anglia/

Alison said “We concur with the RSPB’s concern that Sizewell isn’t an appropriate place to build a nuclear power station, and the environmental impacts could be significant, as well as the impacts on the local tourist economy and on the communities who will have to put up with all the disruption during its delivery.”

Daily Telegraph Letters, 29 January

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2020/01/29/letterswhy-arent-british-companies-competing-huawei-provide/

SIR – Charles Moore is quite right to highlight the risks of China’s involvement in our core infrastructure.

All attention may currently be on Huawei, but meanwhile China General Nuclear, also blacklisted by the United States, is EDF’s partner in building Hinkley Point nuclear power station, is a potential partner in the proposed plant at Sizewell C in Suffolk, and wants to build its own reactor at Bradwell in Essex.

Alison Downes
Theberton, Suffolk

Follow

Get every new post on this blog delivered to your Inbox.

Join other followers: