Together Against Sizewell C campaigners to resume legal action against new power plant on Suffolk coast
Campaigners have decided to fight on with legal action against Sizewell C after a judicial review into the planned power plant was rejected by the High Court.
Together Against Sizewell C (TASC) said a desalination plant will be needed to guarantee a permanent water supply for the £20bn plant.
However, the group said such a plant was not put forth in planning documents, and was therefore not assessed or scrutinised when the go-ahead was given for the 3.2 gigawatt nuclear station last year.
Now, the group will look to appeal against the High Court’s decision and seeks to argue the ruling against them was ‘wrong by law’.
A Sizewell C spokesperson said they had a plan to supply water to the power station which was scrutinised in detail by the Government and they would robustly defend their position in any further legal action.
Jenny Kirtley, the chairwoman of TASC, said: “It is imperative we appeal the sanctioning of Sizewell C even though the proposed nuclear plant does not have a guaranteed mains water supply, without which it cannot operate.
“We also appeal the ruling on EDF’s claim that the Sizewell C site will be fully decommissioned by 2140. This date has been flatly contradicted by the Office of Nuclear Regulation, who told TASC it will take 70 years after the plant stops generating for spent fuel to cool sufficiently, be moved offsite and the store decommissioned.
“The only way the 2140 deadline could be met at Sizewell C would be to slash its operating life by nearly 30 years, meaning generation stops in 2070, driving a coach and horses through this project's claimed commercial viability and contribution to meeting the UK’s climate change goals."
In its application for a judicial review, TASC said issues over water supply should now have been treated as a separate issue from the plant itself.
The group also claimed that judge David Holgate’s ruling to say that NNB Generation Company (SZC) was ‘unable to identify a permanent supply of potable water’, was wrong, and instead felt the construction of a desalination plant could have happened at any time.
The group said the firm instead opted for a deal with Northumbrian Water, which would increase the scale of the operation, and require additional infrastructure to be built.
In addition, the group felt water supply was not taken into account during the planning process, which then-Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng was ‘entitled to take into account’.
It also said there was no inter-dependence between water supply and the power station, that there was no basis for the Businesses Secretary to decide water supply and plant operation were separate projects, and that the court did not deal with TASC’s call to assess a desalination plant.
A Sizewell C spokesperson said: “We have a clear plan to supply water to the power station which was scrutinised in detail by the Government before it granted our Development Consent Order last year.
“Two previous attempts by TASC to apply for judicial review on this issue have been firmly dismissed by the High Court and we will robustly defend our position in any further legal action.
“We need to move to clean sources of energy like nuclear and renewables so that we reduce our dependence on gas which still regularly provides more than 45 per cent of the power for our electricity system.
“Sizewell C will save 9 million tonnes of carbon dioxide each year and will play a key role in strengthening Britain’s energy security.
“Campaigners seeking to delay the project are endangering our efforts to fight climate change, lower energy bills and create thousands of jobs across Britain, including in East Suffolk.”