ITV 5 September 2020

A campaign group has encouraged all residents to comment on plans to build a new nuclear power station at Sizewell on the Suffolk coast before a deadline is reached at the end of September.

Stop Sizewell C held a meeting at Theberton church on Saturday, 5 September, to hear the views of local residents.

EDF claim the new power station will create 2,400 jobs in the county if plans are approved by the government.

The proposals are now with the Planning Inspectorate, but comments can be submitted until the 30 September by those registered as an ‘interested party’.

Alison Downes, Executive Director of Stop Sizewell C, urged residents to share their views:

What do EDF say?

The energy company, already involved in the construction of Hinkley Point in Somerset has emphasised the benefit the power station will bring to Suffolk’s economy.

A statement said: “Sizewell C will deliver jobs, skills, education and training for decades to come while helping to tackle the climate crisis.

“Thousands of local people stand to gain well paid employment from the construction and operation of Sizewell C, just as we have experienced at Sizewell B and at Hinkley Point C in Somerset.

“We remain as committed as ever to making the most of Sizewell C for Suffolk.”

Sizewell B power station on the coast
Sizewell B’s dome dominates the landscape on the East Suffolk coastCredit: ITV Anglia/PA

EDF also highlighted a letter signed by ten education and business leaders supporting the project.

The letter, backed by people like Dr Nikos Savvas, principal of West Suffolk College, said: “Our schools, colleges and youth organisations are working with the existing power station Sizewell B and the Sizewell C project.

“We want to develop home-grown talent and help them stay and develop their skills in the region so they can live, work and bring up their families in an area with a bright future.”

The plan is also backed by Adam Dalby, from Brafe Engineering in Woodbridge, who currently works on Sizewell B and said the company “would like to work with Sizewell C”.

He added: “It’s a boost for the company, just the fact that something’s being built in the UK of such high engineering value.

“There is a skills gap in the UK, so a project like Sizewell C can only benefit that in terms of the skills development and the opportunities it can provide.”

Saturday’s meeting was chaired by broadcaster Bill Turnbull, former host of BBC Breakfast, who lives in East Suffolk.

He said the region’s beauty means residents should do “everything we can” to protect the area.

Not all local residents have opposed the construction of Sizewell C; environmentalist Zion Lights said the power plant could be a chance to shift the country away from fossil fuels.

She said: “The UK energy mix still mostly consists of fossil fuels, with around 40% reliance on gas, and intermittent use of coal. These polluting energy sources not only drive global warming, but they also lead to increased air pollution and have impacts on local, often disadvantaged communities who have to live near these highly polluting plants.

“In contrast, nuclear is a clean and reliable source of energy that can help to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels.

“We have to think beyond localism and consider the impact of a warming planet on the rest of the country – and the rest of the world. Without nuclear, we cannot wean ourselves off of fossil fuels – Germany’s energy experiment has shown us that.

“The alternatives are hugely environmentally destructive and also take a significant toll on humans. That’s why we need Sizewell C, and then Moorside to be built.”

The Times: Sizewell C faces six-year emissions lag

Sizewell C faces six-year emissions lag
Emily Gosden Energy Editor
Tuesday August 25 2020,

A proposed new nuclear plant in Suffolk could take six years to offset the greenhouse gas emissions generated in its construction, EDF has admitted.

The French energy group estimates that 5.7 million tonnes of carbon dioxide will be emitted in the nine to twelve years that it will take to build the Sizewell C plant.

It argues that this is “small in comparison to the savings that would be achieved once the power station becomes operational, when the station will be displacing more carbon-intensive energy from the national grid”.

In publicity material, EDF claims that Sizewell C will “save nine million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions for every year of its operation”, based on it replacing gas-fired power plants.

However, in planning documents it admits that the actual savings may be far lower. By the time that the proposed plant is built, Britain’s power mix is expected to be far greener, as more wind and solar farms are built.

Compared with “the likely estimated mix of energy generation sources” at the time, this would result in Sizewell C displacing only a million tonnes of CO2 in 2034, “the first year of operation”, EDF states. On this basis, the energy company “conservatively” estimates that the construction emissions “will be offset within the first six years of operation”.

Alison Downes, of Stop Sizewell C, said this meant that it would be 2040 before the plant was “making a positive contribution to the UK’s net zero targets . . . EDF’s revelation that it will be 20 years before Sizewell C is built and has paid off the carbon from its construction exposes what a hopeless — as well as expensive and risky — solution it is to our urgent climate crisis.”

National Grid has said that it plans to be able to run Britain’s power network with entirely “zero carbon” electricity by 2025 whenever there is sufficient renewable generation to do so — well before Sizewell C starts up.

EDF stood by its nine million tonnes savings figure. “Sizewell C will start making a substantial contribution to net zero from the moment it begins generating, well before 2040.

“It will continue to do so during at least 60 years of operation,” a spokesman said.

Financing HInkley Point

August 2020: Stop Sizewell C is pleased to co-author this updated report with Professor Stephen Thomas, on the financing of Hinkley Point. Our first report on this topic was published in January 2020, but it has now been re-written to include the findings of the French financial regulator Autorité des marchés financiers (AMF) and the Court of Audit, Cour des Comptes.

The report exposes EDF’s funding crisis and raises profound questions about how – and whether – Hinkley Point will be finished, and the challenges facing Sizewell C.

View or download the full Hinkley report here: Hinkley finance August 2020

East Anglia’s nuclear option – is the £20 billion Sizewell C project right for the region and country? ITV Anglia 19 August 2020  By Tanya Mercer. Visit the link to view the video report.

It’s one of the region’s most talked-about and controversial projects – Sizewell C nuclear power station.

The electricity company EDF plans to build a new nuclear power station on the Suffolk coast, but what will that mean for our region?

How will it impact local people and the environment? And what role does nuclear power play in the East as the country moves towards zero carbon emissions by 2050?

There’s been a nuclear power station at the site since 1966 when the first Sizewell A opened.That is now being decommissioned and Sizewell B, famous for its large white dome that houses the reactor is due to stop producing electricity in 2035.Those in favour of the Sizewell C project say it will help meet the country’s energy needs and is efficiently low carbon. Those against say a nuclear power station is too expensive, takes too long to build and will destroy the stretch of heritage coast for tourists and residents alike.

  • EDF proposes building a twin nuclear reactor at a cost of £20 billion pounds.

  • The station would generate enough low carbon power for 6 million homes.

  • Compared to fossil fuels, that would mean a saving of 9 million tonnes of Co2 every year.

  • It’s expected to operate for 60 years.

  • The whole project will take around 10-12 years to build with a construction site covering 620 acres.

The planning application has now gone in and people have until September to give their views.

The Secretary of State is then due to make a final decision in around 18 months time, and if approved construction could begin in 2022.

Famer Stephen Brett talks to Tanya Mercer about the impact of a new nuclear power station.
Famer Stephen Brett talks to Tanya Mercer about the impact of a new nuclear power station.Credit: ITV News Anglia

For farmer Stephen Brett, it’s a worrying time. He could lose 20 acres of the land to the construction of Sizewell C.

He’s also chair of the local parish council and he says the impact on the community will be devastating.

Mr Brett said: “It means we won’t be able to produce as much food for the cows. And we also run a small campsite which has been here since the 1940s and that will be impacted by the building of the power station. I don’t want to over dramatise this, but it could destroy us.”

A poster warning of the huge increase in traffic if Sizewell C is built.
A poster warning of the huge increase in traffic if Sizewell C is built.Credit: ITV News Anglia

Other locals fear that their villages will become unrecognisable during the ten years of construction as they accommodate borrow pits, construction equipment and extra transport on the roads.

EDF intends 40 per cent of material to come by sea and rail. It’ll build a two-village bypass on the A12, two park and ride sites accommodating 2,500 vehicles and a link road to the site. But locals say it’s not enough infrastructure and the impact will enormous.

Alison Downes of the Stop Sizewell C campaign said: “The number of vehicles that we’ll have to deal with is going to be phenomenal we’re talking 1140 HGVs a day, 700 light goods vehicles, 600 buses and up to 10,000 cars. This is going to affect not only us but everyone in Suffolk who uses the A12.”

But EDF say this project could be a huge boost for the region.

  • It will provide 25,000 jobs during construction and 900 permanent jobs – around a third of which will be filled by local people.

  • They say the station will be worth £125 million a year for the local economy during construction and £40m during its operation.

 John Dugmore, chief executive at Suffolk Chamber of Commerce said: “It’s about getting the best deal for Suffolk and East Anglia, maximizing the economic opportunities if Sizewell C is going to be built.

“There is evidence to show around £100 million a year will go into the economy during the build of a nuclear power station and around £40million a year during operations.”

A new nuclear power station will create new job opportunities.
A new nuclear power station will create new job opportunities.Credit: ITV News Anglia

EDF also intends to provide training and education benefits bringing apprenticeships and skills to the region.

Brafe Engineering in Woodbridge already work with Sizewell B and hope to benefit if the project goes ahead.

 Adam Dalby, from Brage Engineering, said: “It’s a boost for the company, just that something’s being built in the UK of such high engineering value.

“We do have a skills gap in the UK so I think such a big project like Sizewell C can only benefit that in terms of the skills and development opportunities it could provide.”

But those against fear EDF will import existing supply chains and workers who are already being used in Hinkley meaning local people will lose out.

People walking on the beach near Sizewell power station in Suffolk.
People walking on the beach near Sizewell power station in Suffolk.Credit: ITV News Anglia

There’s also a fear that it will come at a cost to existing businesses – especially the tourism industry.

One of those concerned is local brewery Adnams.

Andy Wood from Adnams said: “The tourism industry employs nearly 100,000 people, the value of tourism in Norfolk and Suffolk is about £5.4 billion, and all of these things are going to be impacted by a large construction infrastructure project.”

The impact on wildlife is also raising concerns.

At RSPB Minsmere – an internationally important wildlife reserve – there are serious concerns about how noise and pollution would irrevocably damage rare wildlife habitats and species.

Adam Rowlands, from RSPB Suffolk, said: “We’re concerned about the direct impact, so the noise, the visual disturbance, in essence that could change the patterns of the birds and the other species that use the area.”

The RSPB is concerned about the impact of a new nuclear power station on the wildlife at Minsmere.
The RSPB is concerned about the impact of a new nuclear power station on the wildlife at Minsmere.Credit: ITV News Anglia

As the government strives to reach its target of net zero carbon emissions by 2050, efficient energy is key.  EDF says nuclear is clean and reliable, but others are concerned it’s too slow and expensive.

This battle has raged for decades and each side is hugely complex. Some of the region’s MPs have spoken out in favour of the development, saying it will bring much needed investment to the area and secure jobs.But others are worried about the potential involvement of of a Chinese state-owned partner called China General Nuclear.  While this involvement was originally championed as a success for British diplomacy, it is now viewed more as a potential threat to national security.

EDF says it wants Sizewell to be majority-owned by British investors, but that it is up to the government to decide who invests in the plant.

People have until September 30 to give their views before a decision is made.

Costly and dangerous’ – Brideshead Revisited actress Diana Quick on why she opposes Sizewell C

Read online, by Andrew Papworth, 16 August  2020

She is one of the country’s best-loved, Bafta-winning actresses, famous for starring in some of the nation’s favourite television and theatre shows such as the legendary ITV drama Brideshead Revisited.

But now, Suffolk resident Diana Quick is perhaps taking on one of her most important roles yet – as a leading campaigner against a £20billion nuclear power station on the county’s coast.

Having moved to Suffolk in the 1980s, Ms Quick – also a writer and director – quickly took an interest in plans for Sizewell B which, at that stage, were being considered by a planning inspector.

“I thought if it was going to be in my back yard, then I want to find out about it,” she said.

Despite a forensic three-year hearing which was, at that time, the longest and most expensive public inquiry in British history, opponents lost that battle.

Yet during the process Ms Quick, now 73, said: “I became absolutely convinced that it was not the answer to our energy needs.”

And now, after EDF Energy submitted a planning application in May this year to build a new twin nuclear reactor at the historic fishing village, Ms Quick is a leading campaigner in the Stop Sizewell C movement to prevent it from ever being built.

‘Consequences are very grave indeed’

EDF says nuclear energy is a “national imperative” for the future, with Paul Morton – project lead for Sizewell C and former Sizewell B station manager – saying: “I don’t believe the lights will stay on without it.”

Ms Quick said: “It may be, in the short-term, we need small-scale reactors.”

But she said of Sizewell C: “My main objection is the scale and the location.”

She argued there are “lots of ways to deliver the energy we need” which have not been fully considered.

She also said it would be more energy efficient to have smaller scale units powering local areas, rather than giant stations providing electricity to vast populations.

While Mr Morton accepts that “renewables will play a big part” in providing the UK’s electricity, he believes: “That will get nowhere near being able to fulfil the needs of the nation.

“When the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine, we still need to be able to power our homes, pump our water, produce our food.”

EDF Energy also argues that Sizewell C’s “footprint is much smaller than for many other low carbon projects” and that, with low wind recently, the country has had to rely on gas for 40% to 50% of its electricity.

However, Mrs Quick says claims nuclear power provides clean and safe energy are “very far from the case”.

She added: “It has become very clear that, if something goes wrong, the consequences are very grave indeed.

“The present generation has seen that, with the terrible consequences of what’s happened in Japan and Chernobyl.

“The important thing for people to remember is that what a nuclear reactor does is generate a lot of heat to turn a turbine.

“It all seems to me an unnecessary, costly and dangerous way of generating electricity at a time when there are all sorts of exciting alternatives.

“The money could be much better spent exploring other avenues. It is very significant that Germany has not built any new installations, and that the US nuclear comeback has stalled.”

When asked previously about the risks of a Chernobyl-style accident at Sizewell B, Mr Morton bluntly said: “With the levels of design, attention to detail, the way in which the plant is operated and the level of legislation, it’s not going to happen.”

Jon Yates – currently acting station manager at Sizewell B – says the introduction of human performance technology, which focuses on eliminating mistakes at all levels, has vastly cut down the chances of even the easiest to make errors.

Engineers and technicians reportedly “touch talk” – resting their finger on the switch and saying out loud what they are about to do – to make themselves stop and think before pressing something by accident.

However, Ms Quick said: “No matter how many safety measures there are, in most of the events that have happened a key factor has been human error.

“You cannot legislate for that.”

EDF also says that: “Chernobyl was a very different nuclear power station which was operated in a very different political and regulatory climate.”

It says Sizewell C “is a much safer reactor design and the UK regulatory system is one of the toughest in the world”.

However, Ms Quick believes that large-scale nuclear power stations are still “not safe enough”.

She added: “There have to be smaller and safer ways which have less danger for the world.”

Suffolk economy will be ‘severely compromised’

EDF Energy believes Sizewell C will bring at least £125million a year to the local economy during construction, creating thousands of jobs.

It says it wants to ensure as many Suffolk residents as possible benefit from those opportunities. For example, it has launched a new youth employment hub in Leiston with Access Community Trust.

However, Ms Quick said: “I would like to see facts and figures on exactly what these job opportunities are,” with questions over how many senior roles will go to local people.

She added: “Some of these job opportunities could instead be in alternative ways of generating electricity.”

She also believes other sectors, such as tourism and the arts, could be “severely compromised” by the impact of building Sizewell C.

“I’m very aware of how the arts and tourism are very big generators of income in this part of the country,” she said.

“All that will be severely compromised if Sizewell C goes ahead.

“It will be very difficult for tourists to even get to the area, because of the volume of traffic on the roads.”

EDF Energy says 40% of construction materials will be moved using rail and sea.

It said its studies show the majority of tourists will still visit – but added: “We are proposing a Tourism Fund to promote the area and its many attractions.”

However, Ms Quick said: “Although there has been a lot of talk of bringing work and money into the area with one hand, with the other it is going to be taking away a significant portion of income.”

‘We owe it to our grandchildren’ to protect wildlife

The RSPB, which manages the nearby Minsmere nature reserve, and has warned Sizewell C could be “catastrophic for wildlife”.

Part of the Sizewell Marshes Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) could be built over to make way for Sizewell C, although EDF says: “Where we are using land for Sizewell C, we are creating replacement habitats to compensate.”

It has already created 67 hectares of new heathland and wetland at nearby Aldhurst Farm, which it says “will provide a net increase in the amount of land for wildlife compared to the current position”.

Yet Ms Quick feels those mitigating plans are “completely inadequate”, saying: “It’s not going to be the same as destroying a unique habitat.

“In the long-term, we do owe it to our country, to our children and our grandchildren to think about destroying a very unique site.

“If they are going to go ahead and destroy it, it will be impossible to restore it.”

‘EDF need to rethink the scale of what they’re doing’

Ms Quick also questioned the involvement of China General Nuclear Power Corporation (CGN), which has a 20% stake in the £20billion scheme, amid rising tensions with the country.

“I still think there’s a very big question mark about allowing them to have any access to a nuclear facility,” she said.

“Why would we give them any kind of leverage over our nuclear installations?”

She also fears the building costs will spiral out of control, ultimately at the expense of the UK taxpayer.

Building a £20billion nuclear power station anywhere in the UK is, arguably, always likely to generate some opposition.

However, Ms Quick believes the consultation and engagement with the public so far has been “risible”.

“There are no proper answers,” she said. “The information is inadequate.

“EDF need to rethink the scale of what they’re doing.”

FT 25 June 2020: Cost of new Sizewell C nuclear plant put at £20bn

Higher-than-expected price tag revealed for first time in planning documents

A new nuclear plant proposed on England’s east coast will cost £20bn, according to planning documents that reveal the higher-than-expected price of the project for the first time.
The developers of the proposed plant at Sizewell in Suffolk — France’s EDF and Chinese state-owned CGN — had previously indicated the power station could be built for 20 per cent less than Hinkley Point C. Britain’s first new nuclear plant in a generation is under construction in Somerset. This implied a cost of about £18bn for the Suffolk plant, called Sizewell C, after EDF last year said the price tag for Hinkley Point had risen to as much as £22.5bn. The first new-build project has suffered a string of cost overruns.
The revelation of Sizewell’s cost in extensive planning documents published on Thursday will reignite the ferocious debate around whether the UK should build large new nuclear plants.
Some backbench Conservative MPs, opposed to Chinese state involvement in critical national infrastructure, have concerns about the project because of the presence of CGN. The Chinese state-owned company is a junior financing partner on the Sizewell C project but hopes to install its own reactor technology in another proposed nuclear station at Bradwell-on-Sea, Essex.
The Financial Times reported on Wednesday that CGN, or China General Nuclear Power Corporation, was on a US list of 20 companies with links to the Chinese military compiled by the Pentagon. The list is part of an attempt by the White House and Congress to prevent Beijing from obtaining sensitive technologies as well as US funding.
EDF said in the planning documents that the cost estimate for Sizewell C includes design, construction and land costs associated with the proposed site, which is situated next to one of the UK’s operational nuclear plants, known as Sizewell B. It also takes into account “expected inflation and contingencies”, according to the document.
The company had previously claimed the cost savings on Sizewell could be delivered because it would be a “near identical copy” of Hinkley Point C. EDF said the budget detailed in the planning application includes inflation over the estimated 10 years of construction, whereas the latest estimate for Hinkley Point C — estimated to be in a range of £21.5bn to £22.5bn — was based on 2015 prices.
The 20 per cent cost saving still stood if you subtracted a fifth from the Hinkley budget and then adjusted that sum for inflation, the company added.
EDF and CGN are yet to clarify how the new plant would be funded. The UK government last year launched a consultation on a so-called regulated asset base model (RAB) — used for other forms of infrastructure such as energy networks. This would lower the cost of capital of the scheme because consumers would have a surcharge added to their energy bills before the plant was completed.  The government is yet to report back on the consultation.
Privately, some nuclear industry leaders have been making an argument for the taxpayer to take a stake in any new project.
Stop Sizewell C, a local campaigning group, said the funding statement was “a work of fiction” and described the £20bn pricetag as “totally eye-watering”.
Greenpeace UK’s chief scientist Doug Parr said the nuclear industry’s claim that it can always make the next power plant cheaper was “just never true.” He pointed out that the costs of renewable power had dropped below half those of nuclear “and just keep dropping”.

EADT 25 June ‘No way Sizewell C benefits will outweigh the impact’

Local campaigners have said the “battle for the soul and integrity of East Suffolk” has begun after the final proposals for Sizewell C were revealed by energy giant EDF.

The detailed plans which set out the next stage of the process have been met with staunch opposition from established campaign groups.

Sizewell C took a step closer to fruition after the Planning Inspectorate said on Wednesday the plans were suitable to go to the next stage of the process.

MORE: The final proposals for Sizewell C on the Suffolk coast revealed

Pete Wilkinson, chairman of Together Against Sizewell C, said: “TASC recognises that the acceptance of the Sizewell C planning application marks the beginning of a battle for the soul and integrity of East Suffolk.

“The long-term jobs offered will be few compared to what could be generated by a renewables programme – nuclear is notoriously capital- not labour-intensive.

“The often quoted 25,000 jobs actually disappear on closer inspection to 25,000 short-term, construction-related job ‘roles’.

“During the ten year plus construction phase, should it ever begin, the lives of residents will be made a misery from the thousands of daily vehicle movements as well as the 24/7 noise, light and air pollution.

“As for their promises, EDF has been economical with the evidence of their desire to give the community, its representatives and the regulators the sort of information it needs to assess accurately the impact of their monstrous plans.

“There’s no reason to believe they have undergone a Damascene conversion.

“Let’s hope the Planning Inspectorate and the Secretary of State see through this tissue of hope of expectations and kick the plans into touch.”

Alison Downes, from Stop Sizewell C also raised questions over the plans, highlighting the overall cost of the project and the number of commuting workers as issues.

She said: “Even on a cursory first look at EDF’s proposals, they are worse than we expected: the eye-popping £20bn cost of the project, higher than even the most cynical of us predicted; the 7,900 workers – of which 6,000 will need local accommodation and the remainder could commute from up to 90 minutes away – and the traffic.

“There cannot be any way on earth that the benefits will outweigh the impacts, so it’s time for the people of Suffolk to collectively say “no” to Sizewell C.”

Letter Financial Times 25 June: Critics can only gawp at nuclear’s latest wish list

Letter: Critics can only gawp at nuclear’s latest wish list

In the UK, the Nuclear Industry Association’s begging bowl runneth over (“Nuclear developers press for ‘prompt’ decision on new UK plants”, June 24). The NIA’s full report contains a barrage of demands including that development costs be paid for, an assured flow of orders and all risks covered by taxpayers or consumers. For an industry in global decline, beset by technical difficulties, overruns and overspends, this is audacious indeed.
Tom Burke Chairman, E3G
Dr Paul Dorfman University College London
Professor Stephen Thomas University of Greenwich
Alison Downes Executive Director, Stop Sizewell C

BBC 25 June Sizewell C: Nuclear power station plans accepted for scrutiny

An application to build a new nuclear power station has been accepted for examination by the planning inspectorate.
Stop Sizewell C said it will continue to fight the application.
EDF Energy said in a statement: “The decision means the Inspectorate is satisfied that the eight years of public consultation by the project was conducted properly and that full examination of the proposals can now take place.”
But Alison Downes said the “quality of EDF’s consultations, held during the coronavirus pandemic, failed to provide required information”.
She added EDF “had not been transparent in its disclosures of environmental assessment or transport strategy” nor the plant’s impact on the local area.
Concerns about effective scrutiny of pre-application proposals during the lockdown restrictions was supported in letters from local MP Dr Dan Poulter and Suffolk County Council.
In a joint statement on Wednesday Suffolk County Council and East Suffolk Council said:
“The lack of a comprehensive set of documents up to this point has compromised the engagement that has taken place, and the Councils do not feel they have been able to complete their pre-application work with the Applicant (EDF Energy) to the extent set out by the Planning Act 2008,”
EDF Energy said a copy of the full planning application and supporting documents would become available on the Planning Inspectorate website.

EADT 24 June Councils join opposition groups in raising concerns over Sizewell C

Opposition groups alongside Suffolk County and East Suffolk councils have raised concerns over Sizewell C after plans moved another step forward.

Alison Downes from Stop Sizewell C PICTURE: RACHEL EDGEAlison Downes from Stop Sizewell C PICTURE: RACHEL EDGE
Alison Downes, from Stop Sizewell C, said: “We maintain that Sizewell C does not fit the needs of the government or the country – building the wrong project in the wrong place is not the way to revive the UK’s economy.

“The benefits to Suffolk claimed by EDF are highly questionable and don’t consider the damage to our existing local economy including tourism, when that industry needs all the help it can get.”

Pete Wilkinson, chairman of Together Against Sizewell C, added: “We have to accept the reality that such a ridiculously inappropriate application has made it through the first hurdle, however improbable that is.

“If there is any sense of proportion and reason left in the UK or in this government, it will be laughed out of court.”

Richard Rout of Suffolk County Council has raised concerns over consultation from EDF  Picture: SUFFOLK COUNTY COUNCILRichard Rout of Suffolk County Council has raised concerns over consultation from EDF Picture: SUFFOLK COUNTY COUNCIL

Raising concerns over the nearby Minsmere reserve, RSPB Suffolk area manager Adam Rowlands said the organisation has seen no evidence the development would not have a detrimental impact on wildlife at the reserve and beyond.

Suffolk County Council, working alongside East Suffolk Council, has raised “serious concerns” over EDF’s consultation so far, after being asked to provide views by the planning inspectorate.

Richard Rout, chairman of Sizewell C Joint Local Authorities Group (JLAG), said it is “now especially important” EDF gives local communities the opportunity to scrutinise plans.

Mr Rout said: “Whilst we accept that EDF Energy may have passed the legal requirement they needed to meet in regards to public consultation for their proposed development at Sizewell, we strongly believe that the consultations to date have been hindered by significant gaps of information in the documentation provided.

“We will make our feelings clear to EDF Energy in regards to public engagement arrangements for such a development and if EDF Energy do decide to press on and start the process, we will be asking them to commit to an extended 84 day period at the very least.”

The Liberal Democrat, Green and Independent Group at Suffolk County Council will be submitting a motion next week calling on the council to publicly oppose the plans.