AGENDA ITEM NO: 22
Public meeting in connection with RWE npower Proposals for Nuclear New Build at Braystones Thursday 26th March 2009 at 6:00 pm – 8:00 pm Beckermet Reading Rooms
Introduction to the Meeting – Chair County Councillor Norman Clarkson This special meeting was called at the request of residents and Councillors, following on from the Drop in Session earlier in the afternoon and as a response to RWE npowers proposals for a nuclear new build at Braystones.
The following presentations were then made:
Energy Coast Master plan – Rosie Mathisen, Energy Opportunities Director, West Lakes Renaissance
DECC Site Nomination & Selection Process – Councillor Elaine Woodburn, Leader Copeland Borough Council
RWE npower Proposals for Site Nomination – Stuart Dagnall, Nuclear Development Manager, RWE npower
Also in attendance were: Councillor Yvonne Clarkson Councillor John Jackson Members of the RWE npower team Jonathan Marriott, Area Support Manager, Cumbria County Council. 122 members of the public attended the meeting
Following the above presentations, the floor was opened up to the public for their questions and comments
Q, Resident – We do not like being between two nuclear sites, How was the Braystones site chosen? There are 4 villages within 1 mile of the proposed site at Braystones which is a sizable population, Residents are concerned for their safety and How can they be assured their safety in the event of an emergency.
A, Stuart Dagnall RWE (SD) – Local residents and villages will be considered and RWE will need to identify an emergency plan for the area.
Q, Will a paperbased plan protect people?
A, (SD) The impact on the local population will be taken into consideration. We are at a very early stage and residents will be kept fully informed.
Page 1 of 16 Q, addressed to the Councillors – We commend RWE for meeting with us but we need to have the other two main investors present for consultation, being the National Grid and the Infrastructure. Can we have the Councillors commitment that there will be a public consultation with the National grid and the Infrastructure?
A. Elaine Woodburn (EW) – Yes there will be. The investor for the area runs into billions of pounds and there will be public consultation at the right time.
Rosie Mathison (RM) – A lot of work has already been done with the planners for the Lake District National Park(LDNP) and the National Grid, during the planning of the Sellafield site proposal.
Yvonne Clarkson (YC) – The first time the Councillors heard about the Braystones and Kirksanton proposals was in the Whitehaven News. Why Braystones, was it cheap? Why not use the NDA owned land at Sellafield?
A, (SD) – The NDA owned land at Sellafield was not for sale. It may become for sale once the Bradbury,and 2 other sites Auction is over. If is become for sale, RWE will be interested in the site and would look at its development possibilities alongside the other proposed sites, if they are chosen as suitable sites. There are advantages and disadvantages for all of the sites. Sites have to be nominated by 31st March 2009 to be considered as a nominated site, after this date the list of nominated sites will not be reviewed until 2025. If only Sellafield site is put forward and it turnes out to be a poor option, West Cumbria would loose out, so therefore have the three options
Q, Peter Manning, retired site Manager (was involved with Irish Sea bed Contamination/Clean up) –There is a unique situation here with historic contamination in the sea bed. How will you cope with cooling and other works stirring up this contamination? You need to get on with researching this and how to deal with it and you need to do the work now. If not there will be a repeat of Nirex. Mr Manning also commented that Hartlepool and Heysham power stations are located in densely populated areas and are run/operated safely. These New Build style power stations are far safer the existing ones.
A, (SD) Answer to Sea bed contamination – There is still a question of movement of contamination and who is responsible for it. This will be a key part of risk assessment. Will have to look at the probability of disturbing the historic seabed contamination.
Q, Local resident – Would like to thank Yvonne and other councillors for pushing and insisting on this Public Meeting. It looks like your ‘backing 3 horses’ in Cumbria to get the odds down. What about the implications on local residents? Why 3 Developments, residents are cheesed off, would there have been a public consultation if councillors had not pushed for one. You have alienated a basically pro-nuclear population. There were bore hole test done 6 months ago Why is this meeting only happening now 3 days before
Page 2 of 16 the deadline? Why have you kept it quiet and away from the Councillors? Have you bought 2 less favourable sites just to get Sellafield?
A, (SD) RWE attended the meeting last week at the Civic Hall in Whitehaven and had planned these 3 drop in sessions to answer any of the public’s questions.
Comments from the floor – Residents said they knew that RWE were not invited to the NDA meeting at Whitehaven, and they know RWE want the Sellafield site.
RWE met last week with Parish Councils which was more than we needed to do
A, (SD) – RWE wanted to be part of the meeting at the Civic Hall but NDA said this was ‘unsuitable’ . They wanted to introduce the nominated site then. This is the start of the nomination and consultation process and not the end.
Comments from the Floor regarding House Prices – Great concerns over house prices falling in Braystones/Nethertown/Beckermet due firstly to the site being nominated, people feel that the damage has already been done. Traffic concerns were raised relating to Beckermet, the village is used as a ‘rat run’ at present for Sellafield. What will it be like if there are 2 sites in the area? Residents realised that there could be a nuclear plants at some stage, if and when the nominations are published and have to live with this, one Kirksanton resident commented that they ‘feel like this is the end of their lives’.
Q, to EW, How can the Council promote tourism when proposed Nuclear Newbuild will use Greenfield sites?
Beach Resident – concern over House prices falling and the removal of access/use of the Beach.
A. (SD) The beach will be used to land large plant items and these will need to be moved over the beach. How this is done will all be researched if the site is accepted as a nomination. RWE has researched maintaining beach access and looked into access for pipework which would be done by tunnelling under the beach and remediated. Once works were completed they beach would be re-opened and they would retain any existing access ways. House Prices and planning blight will be considered for residents during the consultation time which is 6-12 months.
Q, from beach resident – What will happen to resident son the beach? What about people who live there?
A- (SD) We would plan to tunnel under the beach for cooling water pipes, so this won’t affect the beach (laughter from the floor). We haven’t identified how yet. Access has not been identified at this stage.
Page 3 of 16 Q- The Proposed site is 70 yards behind my house and you plan to taken over the marine side(beach) as well, How will I get access to my house? It looks like this will wipe us out.
A, (SD) Outside the boundaries of the site they will need a marine off loading facility. The land highlighted on the map is the area they have the option on but this does not indicate that all of the land will be used which backs onto peoples property.
A, (EW) Elaine replied to the previous question re Tourism – There have always been tension between Tourism and Nuclear, but attractions can sit side by side. Look at Muncaster Castle now one of the areas most popular visitor attractions and Sellafield Visitors Centre , prior to change, attracted a lot of visitors. In the past Cumbria Tourist Board have sold the area as quiet and ignored the Nuclear issues. We need to consciously advertise our area. Nuclear Newbuild could be an attraction in itself. Regarding safety issues – This is highly technical, we are sitting next to a nuclear site at the moment and have no concerns. We currently have 70% of the country’s nuclear waste, far more than will be generated by nuclear newbuild.
(YC) – How would you get access to the site? Don’t blame residents for the concerns. Is consultation something you pay lip service to, a tick in a box. Would you genuinely take into account the Braystones residents? As residents, we are onside with New Build.
A (SD) On access front – RWE know that they need a new route in from the A595, with wider roads. The feasibility of this would be looked into with a transport study. If the transport links can not be improved, this could be a reason for not considering the site. All of this would be done if the site is nominated. Re Lip Services – Yes we want to hear Public, Local and Political views, we are not looking to fight in order to get the site to go through. We would look at the Sellafield site if it was an option. We have £8 billion to invest/develop in the area. RWE do not have to come to this area if there is too much concern – if the site is not suitable and there is not public support..
Comment from the floor – You have significantly damaged the trust that BNFL has built up over many years.
Q, Brown/Green Field Site-question to Council – How can you consider Tourism when the proposed site is on Green Field sites?
A, (EW) This is not Copeland Borough Councils decision to propose this site. CBC has not been involved in this nomination and has not seen the full details. The nomination has come from RWE.
Q, Beach Resident – What effect would the work on the beach have on residents?
Page 4 of 16 A, (SD) The cooling pipes would be put under the beach by tunnelling. There would be pipeline laid out to sea. There would be a Marine Off Loading Facility to transport large vessels and large equipment off loading. A Bailey Bridge would need to be built.
Q, How will normal life carry on for beach residents? Has Mr Dagnall been to the beach? Looking at the southern boundary the current route to College Row would be blocked and beach access is merged into the proposed site – how would beach access be maintained?
A, (SD) Is would be our intension to maintain an existing access routes or offer an alternative. Re beach visit – Yes I have visited the beach. Large items would have to be moved via the sea on a large roll on-roll off facility, usually positioned at high tide. As for the railway, they have not decided how to transport items over this yet. RWE would retain access or provide an alternative. (RM) The Railway and Marine Off Loading facility are also issues that have had to be considered in relation to the Sellafield nomination along with cooling water, although there isn’t housing there. Comment from the floor – The sand embankments are high around the Braystones site but are mainly level around Sellafield so this would be more suitable.
Q, We would like to see the monies spent in our area. £8 billion is a lot of money, would RWE be prepared to consider using some of the money to buy residents’ homes which would be close to the site – and make this a fair compensation.
A, (SD) Yes Mr Dagnall agreed personally but he isn’t authorised to commit RWE and would take this back to RWE to discuss with them.
Q, re Brown Field Site and the demise of the Marchon site – Why was the Marchon site not considered?
A, (EW) Elaine reiterated that it is not Copeland Borough Council’s jobs to nominate sites. They worked with the NDA for the Sellafield Site for 18 months but have not got the chance with RWE. With regard to the Marchon site, this is built on a cliff, is in a largely populated area and this site is already earmarked for other purposes. Elaine emphasised that this is a lone process and we are only at the start. On house prices – she thinks house price concerns are justified but has no answer to peoples’ concern now. She went on to say that 12-18 months work has gone into the Sellafield proposal, she understands the concerns but CBC & CCC will be working closely with the companies involved. The government says most nuclear new build will be near existing sites. The good thing is that during the meeting, no one has said they are against Nuclear Power and Nuclear New Build and she was pleased we welcome this concept for the area.
Page 5 of 16 Beach resident re compensation – We live there because we love the site and living on the beach. We don’t want compensation we just want to continue to live there.
Q, Local resident – Would the Council consider relaxing the planning regulations if they wanted to move? Buy us out and help us to relocate elsewhere. This resident had chose to live in this area, chose it to bring up his kids, the area is local to work and close to a nice beach. If we had to move to another better area, would we get planning for the area we choose?
A, (EW) The Council are looking at new sites for housing in general but could not commit to relaxing the planning rules.
Q, What would happen to the spent fuel, Would the waste be stored on site?
A (SD) Spent Fuel would be stored on site in an engineered dry store through the life of the station, until a new deep store repository is available.
Q, Wouldn’t it make sense to store all of the spent fuel together, e.g. Wouldn’t it make more sense to use the existing site at Sellafield?
A, (SD) Not sure if spent fuel would stay on site if the Sellafield proposal went ahead. Not sure if there is available store space on site or whether it would be transported to repository. The repository may not be at Sellafield/ in the area.
Q, **(CHECK)** Bill Gough, worked on site since 1952 – Very few people have spoken out against Nuclear New Build, message to RWE he suggests they take tanks and extend the existing site at Sellafield. (SD) sentiment noted.
Q, Local resident – re Population density – doesn’t think it is a good idea to sandwich a community between 2 large power stations. I take it personally that my health and safety could be compromised because I live in an area of low population density. Are they considering our safety or it is not important because it is only small numbers. Point clarified again- 2 power stations and residents are concerned for their exposure, who live in the middle area between the sites. Multiple locations must multiply the risk.
A, (SD) It is all taken into account. No exclusion zone around the site. An emergency plan will be put in place if the site is accepted.
Norman Clarkson to Rosie Mathison – Good Idea and wonderful things coming to our area, lots connected to Nuclear. Are we more reliant on Nuclear, when Copeland wants diversification. Isn’t it time for the Ministry of transport to say where the roads will be?. Need more people/organisation involved, Ministry of Transport here. What will happen to the current road going through the proposed site?
Page 6 of 16 A, (RM) Rosie can’t comment on the Braystones site but for Sellafield there is major transport investigation needed with respect to The Energy Coast as a whole. Investment into Transport and Access is an issue. As part of the Energy Coast, transport has a big emphasis. Looking forward we need to lobby central Government to ensure links are improved and need Government assurance of improvements. We need to make the case at a national level – if we’re having their energy generation they must reciprocate with our infrastructure
Q, Roads – Egremont – Where will the route run from Egremont to site? How can you route roads through already built up areas?
A, Very early stage and this will be considered at the planning stage in 2010. Traffic Action plans first though we all know that improvements need to be made. It is too early to start these for either of the sites as these surveys cost and the sites have not been accepted yet.
Comment – RM commented on Sellafield Site. The Government are looking at Nuclear Power and they have been heavily engaged with all organisations involve in the Sellafield site proposal, inc. AMEC and National Grid. A lot of work has already been done to get us to this stage but it is still very early in the process. If the roads are not feasible then the newbuild isn’t feasible either.
Comment from resident who had spoke to Jamie Reed – He was open enough to say he doesn’t know how improvements will be made or when. Roads could be the last thing to get improved and it is known to be very difficult to get funding from Central Government for road improvements.
Q, There is not enough details available at the moment. This is a big issue, a good idea for our area but large developments. When will more details be available? How will CCC & CBC protect our interests or are Braystones/ Beckemet dispensable?
A, (SD) RWE details will be made available as part of the consultation period. (RM) WLR will be involved in the consultation process. (EW) The Council do not feel residents/communities are expendable. We need to have your view to feed back. We still need Roads to be a priority, but to get investment in roads, there has to be some reason to invest in them – ie industry. Regarding the Geological Facility, EM said yes we need investment and Nuclear New Build has to have plans in place if this goes ahead. There are no plans for geological disposal yet.
JJ – The area was promised good road in the 50’s, and are still waiting. We should have the road infrastructure first. If we had good roads we wouldn’t need marine offloading.
Comment from floor – lack of communication – No one informed the Councillors so if you were not informed where do we stand, If you aren’t listened to how can we expect to be?
Page 7 of 16
A. (NC) We first read statement from Whitehaven News 26th April. Mr Humphries, Emergency Planning Officer, is critical of both RWE sites, and concerned of effect on health of local people. New reactors bring in new populations, thought to have brought health issues in the past
Re Lack of Communication – (NC) we were not told of RWE proposals we need communication from RWE.
(EM) There will be public consultation later in the year. Nominations are announced on 15th April. EM gave her assurance that CBC will talk to residents prior to decisions being made.
Q, If all goes through and residents remain on the Beach, Can we have free electric?
Q, If Community is against this, Don’t you need the public’s support to go ahead. We need the right site to go through with public support, need to go through public consultation.
(EW) I said that it needs public support to go ahead – at the right time. Now we need the right information.
Stakeholders – Aren’t Homeowners stakeholders? Why have they not been considered?
Comments from floor – No need to sell the idea of Nuclear New Build to our area. Great for employment, It is the major employed in the area. Don’t like being blackmailed – that we must say yes to Braystones to get the investment in our area at all – implying that to say no to Braystones will lead to job losses in West Cumbria.
Comment on discrepancy in employment figures, need realistic figures to be used. 10,000 from RWE 2-3000 NDA large discrepancy. (RM) Figures come from 300 workers per reactor to run, 1000 per reactor to build. Overall figures depend on the number of reactors built. Some sites may/ will have more than one reactor. We need to take this away, and make sure we are consistent in future.
Q, You have said 10,000 LOCAL people will build the reactors but only 1,000 to run them. How do you mitigate against boom and bust, and 9,000 on dole after build? Would immigrant workers be used?
(RM) Workforce planning – retraining, young people’s education/training. The big issue will be to get it right. We have learned a lot from the boom and bust times of THORP
Q, How can we mitigate against a boom/bust scenario like we had in Egremont during the build of THORP.
Page 8 of 16 A, Number at Sellafield are going to drop in future years. There is a need to re-train and work closely with the HR team and the workforce, along with outside organisations like Connexions, to help train the right people to have the skills needed for the future. No energy company will develop or invest in a site if the workforce are not available
Comment made – A lot of reference to Sellafield site proposal. EM reiterated that CBC & WLR have been heavily involved in the case of the last 18 months, here to go through the site nominations. CBC openly support the Sellafield Site because they have been involved from the start, but CBC can not stop other sites being nominated, only at planning stage. It is not CBC’s business to decide if other developers come forward.
Comment – Beckermet residents are Pro Nuclear and Pro New Build but not at Braystones. Can we have a show of hand For and Against the New Build at Braystones?
Q, How will the National Grid run over the LDNP?
A, (RM) the National Grid have asked to carry out an options study and they will liaise with the LDNP and all District Local Authority Planning departments. The emerging option is a 400Kv grid. The likely and preferred option is a ring system around Cumbria and the National Park. This would run North to Harker, would replace a nest of several smaller lines, but in this area there is Hadrian’s Hall to consider. Going South there would be Ravenglass and the highlands/fells to consider. There would be 132 lines to replace. Emerging option is pylons to Ravenglass then the line would be able to go underground in parts, through the National Park and possibly across Morecambe Bay, between Barrow and Heysham, but plans are in the very early stages. Another option would be under the sea from Sellafield to Heysham. Not currently an option as AC live lines have been done before but never a DC Line. They know that they can run a short stretch of DC line under the sea from a Nuclear site.
That concluded the questions from the floor, and Norman Clarkson closed the meeting.
He thanked people for their views and echoed comments that this area supported Nuclear New Build but agreed the public were very concerned about where the site should be placed. He assured the public that their concerns would be addressed at the appropriate time. He added that the Councillors were not consulted prior to the proposal but will make sure that everyone is consulted in the future.
The feeling was that a further public meeting would be required preferably at a larger venue.
The meeting ended with a show of hands for the Braystones Site – None, for the Sellafield site – Unanimously For
Page 9 of 16 Public meeting in connection with RWE npower Proposals for Nuclear New Build at Kirksanton Tuesday 24th March 2009 at 6:00 pm – 9:00 pm Kirksanton Village Hall
Introduction to the Meeting – Chair County Councillor Sue Brown This special meeting had been called at the request of the Kirksanton Action Group, following on from the Drop in Session earlier in the afternoon and as a response to RWE npowers proposals for a nuclear new build at Kirksanton.
The following presentations were then made:
Energy Coast Master plan – Rosie Mathisen, Energy Opportunities Director, West Lakes Renaissance
DECC Site Nomination & Selection Process – Councillor Elaine Woodburn, Leader Copeland Borough Council
RWE npower Proposals for Site Nomination – Stuart Dagnall, Nuclear Development Manager, RWE npower
Also in attendance were: Stewart Kemp, Nuclear Issues Manager, Cumbria County Council, David Davies, Head of Services, Copeland Borough Council; Members of the RWE npower team Jonathan Marriott, Area Support Manager, Cumbria County Council.
Questions and Answers
Michael Wills (MW) spokesperson for the Kirksanton Focus Group was invited to start this session of questions he made the comment that 90% of residents living in Kirksanton village are opposed to the building of a nuclear facility in a most inappropriate site. He said they had no part in the consultation and the only information that had filtered through was at today’s Drop in Session, which is not adequate.
Throughout the evening all the speakers stressed that they were not at the consultation stage, but were “raising stakeholder awareness” in line with the Strategic Siting Assessment (SSA) Conditions.
Q Looking at the Energy Coast Master plan we are 2½ years into this plan to attract investment but from the examples given we don’t feature along this part of the coastline so why has the Energy Coast allowed RWE here?
EW Energy Coast Group has not allowed anything. This plan is a 400-page document and it does not identify or specify what goes on in each area. There are areas we would like to focus on; there are plenty of sites but nothing to identify this site.
Page 10 of 16
Q Why are RWE coming in at such a late stage? A The urban strip from Egremont to Maryport has been identified, such as the ports, roads, new acute hospital and health campus, and at Millom the community hospital. The flagship projects are in the industrial centres but these will develop as money becomes available. Cumbria County Council (CCC) is putting forward investment into Cumbrian schools. The actual process for a new build and setting up development for a new build has created interest from Utilities and it’s positive for jobs.
Q If you haven’t identified these two sites (Kirksanton and Braystones) then why has RWE gone for these two sites? A The process has to be gone through. RWE in terms of investment are looking at £7-8 billion they want the best site to develop on.
Q There are three options, why not go next to Sellafield? A Is it a suitable site? It isn’t a given that it is. If there is no suitable site we won’t develop on it, as it won’t get through the SSA process this will be taken into account. We are looking for a potential site for development.
Q The site is virtually bordering the prison at Haverigg, there are concerns about the proximity of nuclear sites to institutions whose occupants may not be able to evacuate. Bearing this in mind is Kirksanton a suitable site and what discussions have you had with the prison. A This will be considered in the Emergency Plan. If not we would not get to build.
Q There’s no mention of what the local population wants or not? A The next stage will be discussions with the local communities, no this hasn’t been done yet but we will take these into account and those of the wider community.
Q Can they be reassured that they will be taken into consideration? A Yes
Q How do you define community? Just Kirksanton or Haverigg, Silecroft etc.
Q If Sellafield is not a suitable site then why put so much effort into this? It’s all based on Sellafield being suitable. EW Yes all the effort has gone into Sellafield site. The “Nuclear New Build Working Group” have assessed and put forward the case for a nuclear new build of the Sellafield site area. RWE have nominated two other sites. We are at an early stage of the process so sites can be nominated by RWE, one of the biggest utilities, I understand that you don’t want it down here, it might not be a preferred site. If we don’t secure a new build plant it will be the death knell for West Cumbria.
Page 11 of 16 Q Has there been any communication with the Lake District National Park Authority (LDNPA)? A This is the next step to be taken. EW We have consulted with regard to the National Grid connection.
Q They (LDNPA) had no idea about the proposals for the Kirksanton site. LDNPA seem to have been ignored by the entire panel. Looking at the map the whole of the Energy Coast, from Ravenglass to Silecroft is in the Lake District National Park. A On the grid connections we have had extensive discussions with the planners and LDNPA because activity on the Sellafield site is an issue. RM There has not been a need to consult on the site planning but we have on grid connections.
Q One of the criteria – health protection/ limit transport/attention road transport What are the other sites RWE have looked at as alternative sites and that are more suitable? Kirksanton has limited access. A This is not a council nomination. The Working group look at the best site – this could be Sellafield as having existing nuclear facilities. CBC has not made a decision because it’s not the right time and CCC is probably in the same situation.
Q Braystones and Kirksanton are both green field sites. EW It’s not our job to say to RWE, which is the best site. Until we’ve got all the information CBC will not make a decision. It is up to RWE to say why they chose this site.
Q What size is the proposed development? A 72 metres is the highest point for AP1000 and 62 metres for EPR The footprint for nuclear and turbine is 25 hectares. 50 hectares with all the other buildings or 125 acres.
Q It is reported that there is no new nuclear build in Germany because of the proximity of the reactors to residential areas and risks of cancer. Are there any plans for compensation in the event of cancer diseases, especially as new builds have been banned in Germany? A They have not been banned but it is government policy not to proceed at present; a political decision that has been taken in Germany. Please provide me with the information you have and I will then provide you with a written answer.
RM Our government has gone through a justification process with the European Union and the law. In France 70% of energy is produced by Nuclear power. This government would not have gone forward if it felt there was a danger.
One resident said that he was very excited about the nuclear new build, he has lived here and worked in the nuclear industry for 25 years and he has seen businesses close. This is an once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to secure the
Page 12 of 16 future for our children and their children. It’s madness for people to turn this down.
Q If it goes ahead, and cooling water will be taken from the sea what would the impact be on the coastline? A The actual thermal dispersion has not yet been modelled, but it would involve pipes under the beach
Q So there would not be a sign of any visual change? A No
Q In 2016 we were facing losing 8,000 jobs in Sellafield. Risk of repeating the errors of 50 years ago and continuing the dependence on nuclear for the economic survival. A Waste and contaminated sea will bring sustainable development Got to manage it better than the last 50 years.
Q Diversification you have not mentioned tourism, which is building up, we’re attracting more people to our beaches, if this nuclear new build goes ahead bookings will be down, the coastline will change. According to the Energy Coast Master plan tourism is a priority how will we attract people to this area, how secure will our businesses be? A Yes there is a tension between the development at Sellafield and tourism. I don’t think Sellafield site blocks that out. WLR etc and RWE will have to work hard at this. There is no easy answer.
Q The map showing the proposed site is a curious shape. Is this to do with the Duddon RAMSAR wetlands site.. There has to be a 500 metre buffer area from protected species. (SPA – protection of birds.) A Yes we are aware of this and that is why the boundary is the shape it is. We would have to make a case in mitigation and this would be the next stage of the investigation. We need to develop a scoping study to quantify the mitigation necessary. If we can’t make a case then we would not be able to proceed.
Q No one from RWE lives here. Kirksanton is a place of great tranquillity. You build a power station and this will be lost forever. The proposed site is 200 yards from our back gardens. No one has been considered. A Throughout the period there will be consultation, there is scope to site the power station one km away from the village.
Q What will happen to the value of our houses? We will lose it overnight.
Q What size will the actual site be as different figures have been given from 185-acre site but at the Drop-in the proposed site is 300 acres, it precisely stops on the boundary with the LDNP.
Q How many permanent jobs will there be, as you will be creating extra jobs but tourism will be losing out?
Page 13 of 16 A During construction there will be 2 to 3,000 construction jobs. Areva have put documents on the Internet but it’s about 240 permanent jobs for one reactor, 1,000 at peak times.
Q At a meeting about the Morecambe & Duddon Bay partnership there was no mention of these proposals and I only found out when I came home. Why all the secrecy. People matter more than the Natterjack toad!
Q We’re told the energy problem is in the South of England; have RWE done tests nearer to where the power is needed? A There are viable sites in Southern England but they don’t have access, there is an auction process for other sites. RM There are significant demands in the northern cities of Liverpool, Manchester and Leeds where sites are not being rebuilt. There is a second demand in the North of England.
Q Please can you clarify if these 2 to 3,000 jobs will be put out to tender, and how do you protect the local people. Some companies bring in their own workforce. EW Plans are in place and we will speak to a developer. It’s important to put in place ready skills for the number of jobs to be created in this area. Investment in skills in West Cumbria is vital however we can’t make it part of the tendering process. West Cumbria people are the best people for the job. RWE It has been an issue with other projects but we can’t discriminate. The majority working at the moment with these skills are British workers. It’s not just the cheapest tender but also a matter of the best for the job.
Q Power Stations are going off line, this is happening in my lifetime and then we seem to keep looking at more and more greenfield sites. A It’s all to do with the scale of decommissioning, as there is not enough free space, when decommissioning frees up sites for other uses. We are behind in our decommissioning process. It is possible.
Q RWE team – Nominations are to be in by March 31st you will have to tick some boxes, so which boxes will you tick? Some concerns are: Exclusionary criteria – is Eskmeals to be considered a military establishment? A Up to MoD to define. Demographics. Who defines? A. Down to head count by area. Emergency planning – evacuation – prison/hospitals A. The mitigation statements must be evaluated.
Q What is the community infrastructure levy? A I don’t know, this is for the Council, a question to take away. October 2009.
Areva is a French company and it is known that a third of jobs go to the French people.
Q Is it true that the NDA nomination at Sellafield might not be suitable?
Page 14 of 16 EW BNFL did a study of the site some time ago and found it to be suitable. RWE We would be interested in the Sellafield site, although it’s not a guaranteed site.
Q Both the reactors of your (RWE) choice have never been operated and have no track record, can you assure people they will operate safely and economically. A These Reactor types are both under construction, neither have been completed, but the designs are based on a long safety track record, they will have been completed in Finland, China & France. Q But they are late and over budget… A They are two years behind the programme because it’s the first of its kind.
Q Why is it at such a late stage that this has been raised, few of us have had any indication that this was going on. Why is it being presented now? Many people are not opposed to nuclear power but why has it been introduced at this late stage? Is it about a nuclear coast? Why so little, so late? EW The two West Cumbrian MP’s have worked tirelessly for the Energy Coast Master Plan and are working in partnership with other organisations. Lateness- SSA process doesn’t require consultation at this stage but to raise awareness. It will be a long process. RWE In terms of communication, this is the start of the consultation, it was decided that it would be inappropriate for us to take part in the meeting last week, at Whitehaven since that was about the Sellafield nomination, we did attend the meeting and had anticipated an active role.
MW Speaking on behalf of Kirksanton villagers, the lack of communication has been a failing in this process. If you want to progress you will have to do better than how it started. You will need to look at the wider community and not just the immediate village of Kirksanton. This is a big joined up public area including Barrow, Duddon, Broughton and Kirby.
Comment: RWE have many messages to take away with them.
Comment: An Awareness Seminar should have happened before the boreholes were done. A The response was that this was not required. Comment: It’s an intrusion on a small community.
One resident asked for Kirksanton to be removed from the list. RWE responded that this application would be going forward.
Q Is it ethical and moral? RWE are picking on a community. A The dilemma is that this is still a suitable site. In relation to SSA it meets the criteria and there is great potential for West Cumbria. We will take into account issues for the local community later.
Page 15 of 16 In conclusion
31st March 2009 Deadline for nominations; 15th April 2009 Government will publish the nominated sites; Hard copies will be available in local libraries; Or visit the website www.nuclearpowersiting.decc.gov.uk
April 2009 If Kirksanton is nominated as a potential site then: Cllr Sue Brown proposed that another meeting should be convened, within the time frame, to go through any factual omissions in the application; Bigger venue possibly Millom School Hall; MP Jamie Reed to be invited; Not 21st April as there is already another meeting in Keswick that night.
Summer/autumn 2009 Government will assess each site to decide if it meets a number of criteria. Sites assessed as suitable will be listed on the draft Nuclear National Policy Statement.
Page 16 of 16