4 April 2018

The Times today quoted Simone Rossi of EDF as saying about Sizewell C, “This is the year where we need to understand whether this whole thing is really feasible or not. If we were to conclude that maybe it’s not feasible, then at that point maybe we say we are not in a position to continue the project.” The paper reported that EDF was threatening to halt development of Sizewell C unless it received assurances that a viable funding model existed. [1] EDF later reportedly distanced itself from The Times article. [2]

Reacting to these reports, Paul Collins and Alison Downes of Theberton and Eastbridge Action Group on Sizewell said:

“This is the second story this year concerning EDF’s desperation to save costs. Our almost non-existent faith that EDF will work in the best interests of east Suffolk’s environment and communities has taken yet another blow. It seems impossible that the aspirations of the project being an environmental exemplar, or the adoption of creative approaches to tackling issues such as transport and worker accommodation will be realised. Ultimately this special corner of Suffolk will be the loser.

Simone Rossi is making a great deal of noise about the future of this project. He needs to recognise that many of the delays have been of the company’s own making, and we think he owes it to the people of east Suffolk to come and hear our concerns face to face. We further urge government and our elected representatives not to be swayed by EDF’s imperatives and to robustly ensure that the company does not ride roughshod over affected communities.”

TEAGS is advocating:
* For EDF to reveal its Environmental Impact Assessments and demonstrate how its construction proposals reflect the very special circumstances of Suffolk’s Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and its unique environmentally-sensitive habitats including RSPB Minsmere, and how it will minimise habitat destruction, hydrology impacts, noise, light pollution and disruption to wildlife and visitors.
* An accommodation strategy fully integrated with the needs of local people for affordable housing. Despite strong objections, after Stage 1 EDF narrowed its options to a single location for a campus for 2,400 workers at Eastbridge, prematurely discarding other sites that have potential for legacy housing. Independent consultants Boyer and Cannon have identified a number of other possible sites with this potential.
* A dedicated access road. EDF admitted in November 2017 that road transportation is one of the most challenging aspects of the project and that it does not yet know if the B1122 or the junction with the A12 at Yoxford are fit for purpose.
* An open and transparent approach to understanding coastal processes and landside hydrology. EDF have to date avoided discussions on these issues with relevant stakeholders such as Suffolk Coast Against Retreat.

Notes
1. The Times https://www.thetimes.co.uk/…/nuclear-site-in-danger-without….
2. East Anglian Daily Times http://www.eadt.co.uk/…/edf-denies-threat-to-abandon-work-o…