Nuclear brainwashing for our children Added: 06 May 2008 08:36

A scheme is well underway to introduce nuclear power as a friendly option into the curriculum as the nuclear industry believes most teachers are anti-nuclear! To witness the depths of this activity, visit:
http://www.nuclearspin.org/index.php/Main_Page Nuclear brainwashing for our children

Nuclear as terror target Added: 05 April 2008 14:11

Sometimes we are accused of being scaremongering or "political" in talking of the risk of terror. Our fears are realised below:

Attacks on nuclear power stations, oil and gas terminals, Canary Wharf and Heathrow’s control tower were being considered by leaders of the plot to blow up seven transatlantic airliners in mid-flight, a court was told yesterday.

Times 5th April 2008

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article3671825.ece
Nuclear as terror target

British Energy after NDA land at Bradwell Added: 04 April 2008 09:25

Centrica Plc. has expressed an interest in using land owned by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) to develop new nuclear power stations in the United Kingdom. Thursday is the closing day of a month-long process launched by the NDA to gauge interest from parties wishing to use its sites across the United Kingdom, as part of the government's push to build more nuclear power. An industry source said Centrica has expressed interest in the NDA sites. The UK energy provider, which currently has no nuclear assets, joins nuclear provider British Energy Group Plc. in expressing interest in the NDA's sites. British Energy told Thomson Financial News that it is interested in NDA sites, particularly those adjacent to British Energy's existing plants at Hunterston, Hinkley Point, Dungeness, Sizewell and Bradwell.

Interactive Investor 3rd April 2008
http://www.iii.co.uk/news/?type=afxnews&articleid=6638587&subject=companies&action=article BE after more land at BradwellInteractive Investor 3rd April 2008

Likely reactor designs for new Bradwell Added: 04 April 2008 09:08

http://www.hse.gov.uk/newreactors/

The above is the result of the regulators' inspection of recommended designs Reactor design assessment

British Energy plans to convince Essex residents of a new nuclear power station Added: 04 April 2008 08:55

The people of the Sizewell area have had their induction to the subject, with reps from the site, from government departments and from British Energy. Below is the link to their slide show and the minutes of the meeting.

We anticipate a similar meeting regarding the British Energy site at Bradwell.

http://www.british-energy.com/pagetemplate.php?pid=416 British Energy visit to Bradwell areawww.british-energy.com/pagetemplate.php?pid=416

Motion on new build put before Colchester Borough Council Added: 04 April 2008 08:51

The Motion below has been submitted by me and accepted for debate at the Colchester Council Meeting on 20th February.

‘This Council –

Notes with regret that British Energy is looking to construct a new nuclear power station at Bradwell,

Opposes the construction of such a facility close to the substantial town of West Mersea,

Instructs the Chief Executive to convey these views to the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform and to British Energy and to send copies of these letters to our two Members of Parliament, Essex County Council and Maldon District Council.’

(This motion was put by Henry Spyvee, Colchester Lib Dem Councillor. The motion was not accepted by the Council, being ammended to be less strong).

Two new reactors for Sizewell Added: 14 March 2008 20:39

PLANS to built two new nuclear power stations at Sizewell, as revealed by the EADT yesterday, have been greeted positively by community leaders. The two reactors each of which could be bigger than the existing Sizewell B station, should generate 1,600 megawatts of power, compared with the 1,200 megawatts of Sizewell B, depending on the type of reactor chosen. Costing nearly £6 billion, construction could start in 2013 and be completed by 2018. It is estimated that about 5,000 workers would be on site at the peak of the construction period. The draft proposals unveiled at a community meeting on Tuesday night included twin reactors, a new access road and a beach landing stage to help minimise road deliveries.

East Anglian Daily Press 13th March 2008
http://www.eadt.co.uk/content/eadt/news/story.aspx?brand=EADOnline&category=News&tBrand=EADOnline&tCategory=News&itemid=IPED12%20Mar%202008%2023%3A40%3A08%3A777 new nuclear at Sizewell

Bradwell Added: 14 March 2008 20:35

Andy Blowers: Towards the mouth of the Blackwater estuary looms the decaying hulk of Bradwell nuclear power station, which operated for 40 years until 2002. It is now being decommissioned, a process that will not be finally finished until the next century. Yet, before the old station has been cleaned up, another is proposed as part of the government's determination to have a replacement nuclear programme. Bradwell is in the frontline as the UK's energy policy reaches the local battlegrounds. Last night, I led a panel of experts presenting some of the issues to a public meeting at the Mersea Island community centre. It was the first of what will be many meetings to give local people a chance to speak for the future of their community.

Guardian 12th March 2008

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/mar/12/nuclearpower.energy
Bradwell

Protesting outside a nuclear power station is now illegal Added: 14 March 2008 20:33

From last week, protesting outside nuclear power stations is illegal.

Independent 10th March 2008
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/simon-carr/simon-carr-big-brother-considers-surveillance-his-right-793668.html protests now illegal

We and the Environment Agency are not happy Added: 25 February 2008 12:17

Two government agencies at the heart of the nuclear industry are at war over safety concerns at some of the country's most sensitive sites. The Environment Agency believes insufficient funds have been made available by ministers for the clean-up of some sites, and the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) is accused of making things worse by deciding to concentrate on especially toxic waste at sites such as Sellafield in Cumbria. This prioritisation will delay clean-up elsewhere, "prolonging and potentially increasing risk to the environment that they pose and the costs necessary for their maintenance", the Environment Agency argues in a strongly worded response to the NDA's draft business plan covering the years 2008-11.

Guardian 25th Feb 2008
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/feb/25/nuclearpower.greenpolitics

British Energy needs competition Added: 25 February 2008 12:12

The Government is concerned that a lack of competition in the UK nuclear industry threatens to distort decision-making in the race to build a new generation of nuclear power plants. In an interview with The Times, Malcolm Wicks, the Energy Minister, said the Government would look critically at British Energy’s ownership of eight of the most attractive UK sites for new reactors. “We want to see proper competition here,” he said. “We don’t want to see some sort of cagey deal between one company and another company . . . We have got to facilitate proper competition.” Mr Wicks’s comments come amid rising concern that British Energy, which generates a sixth of Britain’s electricity, could have undue influence over where new plants are built. There is a limited number of UK sites where nuclear plants could be built and local people would be supportive. These include the sites owned by British Energy, a company in which the Government! has a near40 per cent stake, and those owned by the Government through the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority.

Times 22nd Feb 2008
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/utilities/article3412912.ece

Sizewell fears Added: 13 February 2008 09:43

Sizewell

BRITISH Energy is being accused of “irresponsible” conduct over its refusal to disclose full details of the risk to the public from the storage of highly radioactive nuclear waste at the Sizewell B power station. The company has provided some background information but claims details must remain confidential to protect the safety and security of the plant. The criticism has been voiced by Pete Wilkinson, an independent environmental consultant who was a member of a Government-appointed committee on the disposal of radioactive waste.

East Anglian Daily Times 12th Feb 2008

http://www.eadt.co.uk/content/eadt/news/story.aspx?brand=EADOnline&category=News&tBrand=EADOnline&tCategory=news&itemid=IPED11%20Feb%202008%2021%3A00%3A53%3A620
Sizewell fears

Fears about waste from fuel elements exploding at Bradwell Added: 05 February 2008 09:24

There has been much discussion in the papers about fears that the debris from the fuel elements could suddenly deteriorate and explode. This organisation has been sporadically in touch with the authorities on this matter ever since the 1998 Nuclear Installations Inspectorate Report expressing concern. After many conversations over the years, and including new discussions due to the publicity, Brare is confident that the relevant parties are dealing with the matter in the correct manner. If anyone wishes for further details, please contact the website.

Meeting at Mersea March 11 Added: 23 January 2008 10:18

Concerned citizens of Mersea have organised the above meeting to discuss all the ramifications of new build. High level specialised speakers are agreeing to come and talk about:

applying the national to the local scene

why we don’t need nuclear – the alternative low carbon economy

why we don’t want it -the dangers to health and environment

what dangers lurk within – the problem of dangerous long-term wastes with nowhere to go

decoding nuclear nonsense

and what to do about it!
Further details will be given in due course. Mark 11th March in your diaries and spread the word! Mersea's concern is Essex's concern too, living as we do in proximity to two nuclear sites subject to new build considerations.

Letter published in East Anglian Daily Times 19 Jan Added: 19 January 2008 12:32

----- Original Message -----
From: brare energy
To: EADTLetters@eadt.co.uk
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 8:25 PM
Subject: "nuclear solution is the right way to go"


Since 1999 this particular anti-nuclear group has engaged intensively and extensively with all relevant parties on decommissioning reactors like Sizewell A and Bradwell, improving environmental performance at Sellafield, on managing radioactively contaminated ground, and on radioactive waste management.

The knowledge gained from these activities has led us to a less rosy view of nuclear power generation than that of Mark Salisbury (Letters 15 Jan).

Making the old nuclear wastes safe will cost the tax payer around £70 billion pounds. Even that will not be enough to quickly restore the Bradwell and Sizewell A sites.

As for building new nuclear power stations, Mr Salisbury says "nuclear power is one of the most cost-effective and cheapest power generating technologies". If I were to make a cost-benefit analysis I would need to include the following points:

Firstly, the small print in the Energy White Paper shows that future governments will pick up the tab for any unforeseen circumstance. For example, in the event of an accident, no commercial concern would be able to pay out the billions of pounds of compensation. A cap is to be set on decommissioning costs, so that the taxpayer will pay any outstanding dues. So, although the Bill states that nuclear power companies must operate as independent commercial concerns, in reality this will be impossible.

Secondly, even shiny new nuclear power stations produce radioactive waste. True, the waste produced would only add about 10% of volume to the existing nuclear waste legacy over their lifetime, but it would increase fivefold the amount of the deadliest, long-lasting type. Although the Bill states companies must pay for the repository facility, it is not currently known by how much, and how the cost will be calculated. This new high level waste will have to be stored at each site because it will be too dangerous to be stored underground for at least 50 years. There is as yet no public statement on how this waste will be managed in the interim, and what potential dangers there are to the public.

Thirdly, the Government is pressing ahead very quickly with the construction of a deep geological repository ( five times the size of the Royal Albert Hall) to put in all these wastes. The Committee for Radioactive Waste Management, which recommended this as the least worst option, was more cautious, recommending that there was still more research to be done. As the Chairman mentioned the other day, there is nowhere in the world where there has been one built. We recommend a slower approach here, with a greater practical understanding before action is taken.

Fourthly, during the coming months all county councils in England and Wales (Scotland has refused to consider geological disposal) will be asked to express interest in hosting this deep geological repository. There are promises of financial inducements. It will be up to our elected local politicians to decide whether the cost will be worth it. East Anglia is a good prospect, with good communications and large infrastructures nearby. East Anglia could well become the radiation heartland of the United Kingdom.

Public meeting on Bradwell, Mersea MICA centre 22 Jan 7pm Added: 17 January 2008 15:07

This is an article from the Mersea Courier:

BRADWELL PUBLIC MEETING
Tuesday 22 January
7pm MICA

There is a more important aspect to this public meeting about decommissioning than appears at first sight.

For 40 years a large quantity of Fuel Element Debris (FED) has been collected in the vaults under the Power Station. This is highly radioactive and if left too long or comes in contact with water, it can ignite. It is nearing its “sell by date”.

The original plan was to encapsulate it and store it safely, but now Bradwell are planning a plant to dissolve it, not in Carbonic acid but in Nitric acid to reduce the volume, but not the radioactivity, to pass the remains through a filter system to reduce the radioactivity and release the remaining liquid into the Blackwater.

It has also been suggested that having installed the new plant at Bradwell permission will be given to take similar waste from other stations.

The rest of the decommissioning is, after only 5 years, at a standstill from lack of funding and there are many years of work to go before they can begin to think of dismantling the highly radioactive graphite reactors, which in itself takes 10 years, and currently nowhere to put them.

The problems are massive and there are some serious questions to be asked, before we get involved in the issues around a possible new power station on the land adjacent to it, which may or may not happen in the end.

Bradwell are currently being taken to Court by the Environment Agency for a historical long term leak which has caused ground contamination.

It is in the interests of Mersea to protect our estuary and our mudflats from further contamination, so please come along on 22 January and hear what they say which has not been put on the poster. It is important to question the proposals.

Bobby Teague
Member of FED sub-group Bradwell LCLC

Letter on radioactive waste Added: 15 January 2008 18:02

Published in the Colchester Evening Gazette Jan 15:
Bernard Jenkin expresses interest in seeing that communities adjacent to a new nuclear power plant at Bradwell are financially compensated (Gazette 11 January). Unfortunately none of us can ever be financially compensated. The small print in the Energy White Paper shows that future governments will pick up the tab for any unforeseen circumstance. For example, in the event of an accident, no commercial concern would be able to pay out the billions of pounds of compensation. So, although the Bill states that nuclear power companies must operate as independent commercial concerns, in reality this will be impossible.

The tax payer is paying around £70 billion pounds to make the old nuclear wastes safe. The radioactive waste produced by new nuclear power plants would only add about 10% of volume to the nuclear waste legacy over their lifetime, but would increase fivefold the amount of the deadliest, long-lasting type. Although the Bill states companies must pay for the storage facility, it is not currently known by how much, and how the cost will be calculated.

The Government is pressing ahead very quickly with the construction of a deep geological repository ( five times the size of the Royal Albert Hall) to put in all these wastes. The Committee for Radioactive Waste Management, which recommended this as the least worst option, was much more cautious, recommending that there was still much more research to be done. As the Chairman mentioned the other day, there is nowhere in the world where there has been one built. Surely caution must prevail?

Within the coming months all county councils in England and Wales (Scotland has refused to consider geological disposal) will be asked to express interest in hosting this radioactive waste facility. There are promises of financial inducements. It will be up to our elected local politicians to decide whether the cost will be worth it.

Yours sincerely

Val Mainwood
Bradwell for Renewable Energy

Halcrow report on coastal defences Added: 13 January 2008 11:55

: http://www.british-energy.com/documents/halcrow_review.PDF Halcrow report: http://www.british-energy.com/documents/halcrow_review.PDF

Bradwell's new station could be subject to flooding Added: 13 January 2008 11:52

Nuclear plants 'need better flood protection'Nick Mathiason The Observer, Sunday January 13 2008

Advertising guide License/buy our content About this articleClose This article appeared in the Observer on Sunday January 13 2008 on p1 of the Business news & features section. It was last updated at 23:47 on January 12 2008. Emergency measures will be needed to protect nuclear power stations from the effect of tidal surges as extreme weather patterns increase, according to a wide-ranging body of experts.

A study last year by the Met Office commissioned by nuclear firm British Energy said that 'increases in future surge heights of potentially more than a metre could, when combined with wind speed increases, threaten some sites unless existing defences are enhanced.'

British Energy, which runs nine reactors, said it is mindful of the risks, having commissioned Halcrow, the engineering consultancy, to devise contingency plans and beef up defences. This is likely to add 2 per cent to the £2.8bn cost of each reactor. Nuclear reactors tend to be sited on the coast to access large quantities of water needed for cooling.

This weekend the Department for Business and Enterprise said: 'The potential impact of flooding, and taking into account climate trends, would clearly be an important consideration in any future siting assessment. It would, of course, need to be considered alongside the potential for coastal sites to be protected from rising sea levels.'

A leading nuclear consultant suggested risks to reactors could be serious if a reactor failure coincided with a surge in tides, making it difficult for emergency services to rescue the situation.

The government's decision to build new reactors led last week to rows over how much public money will be needed to pay for them. 'This is one more nail in the nuclear coffin,' said Caroline Lucas, a Green MEP. 'As far as I can see the government has not factored this into its decision.'

Bradwell meeting at Mersea 22 January at 7pm Added: 10 January 2008 14:21

This will start at 6.30 for 7pm, and will be held at the MICA Centre. It is open to all who are interested. The subject will be the progress made to date on decomissioning.

Press Release 10 January Added: 09 January 2008 21:14

BRADWELL FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY
www.brare.co.uk

PRESS RELEASE

NEW NUCLEAR POWER STATION AT BRADWELL – A FAILURE OF NERVE



Gordon Brown is promising to take tough decisions. One of these “tough decisions” will be announced this coming Thursday, when the latest version of the Energy Bill will be published, and a new generation of nuclear power stations will be announced. Among the top favourites is the British Energy site at Bradwell-on-Sea, home to a Magnox site in a state of decommissioning.

This long-established community group argues that, far from being a brave move, it is one of political treachery and cowardice. Political treachery, because the original Paper in 2002 proved the case for a non-nuclear future, with a combination of energy conservation measures and a whole array of renewable energy options.

Ever since the publication of this Paper, its substance has been eroded by vested interests. False arguments have been put up about nuclear electricity reducing carbon emissions, omitting the fact that only a small proportion of energy is actually electricity, and a minority proportion of that is nuclear.

Gordon Brown’s failure to take on board the radical options is a tragedy. He could have instigated an exploration of decentralised and micro generation facilities, questioned how effective the National Grid really is, he could have looked at the provision of energy from the concept of supply rather than demand, he could have initiated deep measures to encourage energy conservation. There are so many exciting ideas out there that will be snuffed out, not to mention many business and employment opportunities.

And what of the people of Essex?

This group has been intensively involved in working with the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority and the local site company on its decommissioning options and methods. We are trying to protect the Blackwater Estuary from further excesses, and are about to start an engagement with the site licensing company on an exploration of possible effects of the decommissioning process.

In 1986 this group, then known as the Shut Down Bradwell Campaign, sat down in the road with Bradwell villagers in order to stop Nirex forcing their way in with their pile drivers for somewhere to put their nuclear waste. We saw them off then. Now we have the same intractable issues raising their heads again. We will not give up.

ENDS

Research that the Government will ignore Added: 31 December 2007 10:57

Here are two recent reports on economics and security of supply of nuclear power from the Sussex Energy Group. This evidence was presented as part of the new nuclear consultation, and has been ignored by the government, as next week they will announce a new generation of nuclear power stations, one of which will be at Bradwell. Their full consultation is available from a link in the papers.


http://www.sussex.ac.uk/sussexenergygroup/documents/economics_brief_webonly.pdf


http://www.sussex.ac.uk/sussexenergygroup/documents/security_brief_webonly.pdf Sussex Energy Group

New nuclear likely for Bradwell Added: 29 December 2007 12:27

As we stand at the threshold of the New Year and wonder what it will bring, there cannot be many safer predictions than that 2008 will see the rebirth of nuclear power. Hint after hint has been dropped by ministers that an announcement is imminent about new nuclear plants at existing sites, with Sizewell in Suffolk, Dungeness in Kent, Hinkley Point in Somerset and Bradwell in Essex firm favourites.

Telegraph 28th December 2007
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/12/28/earthlog128.xml new nuclear for Bradwell

New nuclear power station at Bradwell? Added: 27 November 2007 17:37

British Energy has earmarked Bradwell and Sizewell, among others, to herald a new fleet of nuclear reactors. It believes work on flood defences will make the proposition viable.

Response to nuclear waste consultation Added: 19 November 2007 12:06

BRADWELL FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY

Response to the MRWS Consultation

We are a group in North Essex that involves itself in sustainable energy matters, and, working in collaboration with the now defunct nuclear power station site, aims to achieve decommissioning with as little impact as possible upon the immediate environment. Our view on nuclear power generation is that it is unsustainable because of its long-term human and environmental impact.

Given the troubled history of the NIREX intervention in the eighties at Bradwell, people in North Essex have rather dusty views on nuclear waste matters. We felt very strongly that the group needed to represent these people by trying to tackle the thorny problem of what to do with the radioactive waste generated by stations such as the Magnox at Bradwell. Therefore we were happy to take part in the CoRWM stakeholder engagement plan.

In general we were pleased with the result of the CoRWM findings. It reflected our push for recognising the uncertainties that still exist regarding geological disposal. We pressed very hard for storage rather than disposal, because the latter is still uncertain in technology and in intergenerational equity. We insisted on the primacy of R&D, in particular with regard to interim storage, as for the next forty years at least, that will be all we will have. (And who knows what will happen beyond then?) Most importantly, the emphasis on storage and R&D would leave options open for people in forty years time to decide for themselves.

Therefore we were most disappointed to see the hijacking of the first CoRWM report by the Government. Within three days it was trumpeting geological disposal as the “solution”. Since then events have progressed quickly, with “volunteering community” schemes being researched, and NIREX becoming absorbed into the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority.

What seemed like an open and intelligent way forward has been scuppered. The person in the street has now fallen back on the “mistrust them all” argument.

Vox pop

Here are some of the comments I get on the street, on market stalls and at places like the local Coop:

· The Government is hurrying so they can say that there can be new nuclear power stations because there will be a place for the waste to go.
· People do not trust local politicians to do the job properly. What role would my local parish/town council have in saying whether we have a repository in our area?
· How will we know if our Council is interested? They are not going to tell us!
· What are the bribes going to be? Who will benefit from them?
· How come you can suddenly have these sites almost anywhere?
· We used to be told that the geology was unsuitable everywhere except the Grampians
· The geological experiment at Sellafield failed – how come they know all about it now?
· How do we know the radioactivity is not going to escape, in the short term or in the future?

These somewhat bellicose views reflect BRARE’s concerns too. Furthermore:

· The Government must pause and take stock, by re-visiting all the CoRWM Recommendations. It is not enough to cherry-pick.
· On reading these Recommendations, it is implicit that there is much work to be done on how to get to grips with the uncertainties and technical difficulties, and how to move forward with society at large. This will take time and should not be rushed.
· This includes CoRWM’s view that it is not responsible for any discourse or action on new build, and that it is dealing solely with legacy wastes. If the Government brings new build into the equation, the good groundwork already done by CoRWM will be lost, as many stakeholders and members of the public will be alienated. After all, we don’t know yet how to deal with legacy wastes. We should not therefore be creating more.
· Geological disposal should not be heralded as a “solution”. The regulatory bodies now accept that eventually there will be seepage into the environment. There has to be realistic discussion about this. Much talk is optimistic – nowhere has a functioning repository. The vagaries of geology, climate, type and volume of waste, mean there can be no blueprint.
· Regarding volunteer communities, how is such an entity to be defined? Given the hierarchy of local government decision-making, will the people nearest the repository have the greatest say, and most of the money? How truly representative of the population is local government? How is the person in the street going to have their say? There needs to be a site where all councils who have expressed interest can be listed.
· Has the terrorist threat to communities been explored in detail?
· It is understood that any minor geological problems can be ironed out by technology, and that technology can be adapted to a potential site. Has this research been published and peer reviewed? Have the scientific and regulatory goalposts been moved since the NIREX Rock Characterisation exploration at Sellafield?
· We feel there is confusion over the issue of retrievability in the CoRWM consultations. The public in general liked this issue, which suggests storage to be preferable, as there is a measure of control. The idea of phased disposal is surely an oxymoron. Nobody is likely to want to go to the trouble and expense of retrieving waste that has been stored for geological disposal. The lack of control that disposal implies weighs heavily with the public.

Bradwell loses out with NDA Added: 09 November 2007 10:05

PRESS RELEASE

Nuclear Decommissioning Authority cuts back on decommissioning Bradwell

Bradwell for Renewable Energy
www.brare.co.uk

This group of people in Essex condemns the plans for the cut-back of the magnox stations, including Bradwell. (NDA report page 23)

Local stakeholders feel betrayed, because six years of dialogue with all interested parties on the best way forward for decommissioning led the NDA to state publicly that it would aim for clearance in 25 years. A recent local site end point consultation for the Bradwell Local Community Liaison Council resulted in local people wanting total clearance of the site. In denying the NDA funding, the Government is reneging on its promise to take stakeholders into account.

There are so many problems to be overcome in decommissioning these old stations – for example there is as yet no clear idea as to what to do with the graphite moderators of this plant. (NDA report page 18). How long is this plant to be mothballed for? What measures will be taken to remediate the situation?

We are further alarmed by the NDA thinking aloud that some money might be achieved from commercial operations, including building new nuclear power stations. (NDA report page 17). This is a disastrous idea, throwing one problem in to solve another, with as yet no idea as to how to deal with the nuclear waste.

The NDA is in a structural mess, not of its own making. As a body, run by Government, dealing with legacy wastes such as the magnoxes and Sellafield, it had respect from all, including local stakeholders. The Government has muddied the waters by adding commercial components to its work, with funding being contingent to a certain extent by these commercial operations.

We agree that the most intractable of problems, Sellafield and Dounreay, must have priority. However the package must be dealt with as a whole, or we leave future generations to clear up the mess we have made.

ENDS

E of England positive about nuclear? Added: 06 November 2007 09:24

HE East of England has become more positive about nuclear power as an energy option and is strongly in favour of wind power, a survey has shown. A poll, commissioned by EDF Energy ahead of today's Queen's Speech and a final decision by the Government on the nuclear power option, found a net 9% in favour of nuclear power stations in the region.



East Anglian Daily Times 5th Nov 2007

http://www.eadt.co.uk/content/eadt/businessnews/story.aspx?brand=EADOnline&category=Business&tBrand=EADOnline&tCategory=Business&itemid=IPED05%20Nov%202007%2016%3A14%3A24%3A900 E of England positive about nuclear?

Essex Wildlife Trust against wind farm Added: 03 November 2007 15:05

The Essex Wildlife Trust has lodged an appeal against the Earls Hall Wind turbine plan at St Osyth because one of the turbines is too near a bat population. The informal view is that it could be sorted out by a re-siting of this turbine.

East Anglian Battle lines drawn Added: 02 November 2007 10:03

The battle lines between East Anglian MPs over whether to build a new generation of nuclear power stations can be revealed by the EDP today . A poll of the region's MPs shows how some are preparing to defy their party line and vote against atomic power and how others believe we must have new nuclear power stations - such as a Sizewell C plant in Suffolk - to meet the nation's future energy needs.

East Anglian Daily Press 29th Oct 2007
http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/News/story.aspx?brand=EDPOnline&category=News&tBrand=edponline&tCategory=news&itemid=NOED28%20Oct%202007%2021%3A22%3A18%3A033 E Anglian Battle lines drawn

NDA plans in disarray Added: 02 November 2007 09:56

Union leaders are seeking talks with the Government over reports that clean-up work at defunct nuclear reactors in the south of England is to be halted as funding is moved to similar operations at Sellafield.

Nelson Leader 26th Oct 2007
http://www.pendletoday.co.uk/latest-north-west-news/Union-wants-talks-over-nuclear.3420828.jp

East Anglian Daily Times 26th Oct 2007
http://www.eadt.co.uk/content/eadt/news/story.aspx?brand=EADOnline&category=News&tBrand=EADOnline&tCategory=news&itemid=IPED26%20Oct%202007%2011%3A13%3A46%3A477

East Anglian Daily Times 27th Oct 2007
http://www.eadt.co.uk/content/eadt/news/story.aspx?brand=EADOnline&category=News&tBrand=EADOnline&tCategory=news&itemid=IPED26%20Oct%202007%2018%3A23%3A46%3A620

The GMB says seeking a private sector solution is delaying the clean up of old sites and the building of new stations needed for energy security and to lower carbon emissions.

GMB Press Release 26th Oct 2007
http://www.gmb.org.uk/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=96192 NDA plans indisarray

Bradwell to be mothballed? Added: 02 November 2007 09:53

Clean-up work at all of the defunct nuclear reactors in the South of England is to be halted amid funding problems at the Nuclear Decommissioning Agency, The Times has learnt. In its business plan, to be published next month, the NDA is expected to say that resources will be moved to Sellafield and that clean-up work will be suspended at the Sizewell A, Dungeness A, Hinkley Point A, Bradwell and Berkeley magnox reactors.

Times 26th Oct 2007

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/utilities/article2741526.ece
Bradwell to be mothballed?

Dissolution plans for elsewhere Added: 24 October 2007 11:01

Brare is engaged in a stakeholder engagement exercise to decide whether Kavaerner's dissolution plant plans are suitable for Bradwell
Earlier this month Aker Kvaerner was awarded a £16m contract by Magnox Electric. The project involves the design, building and installation of a plant for the retrieval and encapsulation of wet intermediate level wastes (ILW) at Hunterston A Site in West Kilbride, Scotland.

Newcastle Evening Gazette 23rd Oct 2007
http://www.nebusiness.co.uk/business-news/latest-business-news/2007/10/23/nuclear-orders-boost-for-aker-tees-performance-51140-19994493/ Dissolution elsewhere

Bradwell wind farm allowed Added: 24 October 2007 10:47

Here is the link for the Appeal Document that has gone in favour of the wind installation

http://www.bradwell.info/docs/Decision.pdf Appeal decision Bradwell wind farm documentwww.bradwell.info/docs/Decision.pdf Appeal decision

Appeal decision document on Bradwell wind farm Added: 20 October 2007 15:36

http://www.bradwell.info/docs/Decision.pdf Appeal decision

Bradwell wind farm to go ahead Added: 11 September 2007 11:25

We are happy to announce that the appeal by the providers has been allowed, and that the installation of a group of turbines on the Dengie peninsula will be allowed.

Conservative Energy Strategy? Added: 23 July 2007 13:17

In November 2006 BRARE sent a report on nuclear economics to Colchester North MP Bernard Jenkin. As previous Shadow Energy Minister, we were eager to have his views on this paper. After a polite acknowledgement, we as yet have had no news. And this in spite of a recent reminder. Does the Conservative Party have an overall Energy Policy, we wonder?

Bradwell and decomissioning discharges into the Blackwater Estuary Added: 16 July 2007 10:51

A Best Practical Environmental Option study is underway to decide the best way of reducing the amount of, and disposing of, fuel element debris which has lain in the fuel ponds on site since the early days. This is part of the decommissioning (dismantling) process. BRARE is taking part in stakeholder input. One meeting has already been held, and another is scheduled for early September. The BPEO is on the Bradwell website at http://www.nuclearsites.co.uk/page.php?pageID=1327&PHPSESSID=6e2fe827d99de1668722082c8f6968d4

It is a complicated document - if you have any questions or want to relay any concerns, contact the BRARE web mail. Or ask the site. Your concerns do not have to be technical - the public have valid views on the wider aspects of how activity on the site can affect them.

National Stakeholder Group Meeting Added: 16 July 2007 10:44

BRARE represented Bradwell Local Community Liaison Council at the meeting above in Manchester. This meeting is a gathering of all site stakeholder groups with regulators, industry members, etc. Stakeholders can hold all parties to account over their actions. A detailed report will follow by early August.

British Energy difficulties for new build? Added: 08 July 2007 12:05

British Energy

British Energy could be forced to give up some of its reactor sites, denting its ambitions to host all of the UK's next generation of nuclear power stations. The nuclear generator has been in talks with European energy groups EDF, RWE and E.ON about forming a consortium to build the new reactors, which will be on existing sites. British Energy - part-owned by the Government - wants to sell its sites or exchange them for involvement in a consortium. But it has emerged that the Government could take back ownership of the company's oldest reactors. This could complicate British Energy's negotiations with potential partners if it cannot guarantee that it will retain all its sites.

Independent on Sunday 8th July 2007

http://news.independent.co.uk/business/news/article2744853.ece

British Energy sizes up Bradwell Added: 08 July 2007 11:56

New nukes,

Two of Britain's largest power com-panies, Scottish & Southern Energy and Centrica, have teamed up to submit a joint proposal to British Energy about building a new generation of nuclear power stations. It is understood that the duo are keen to partner British Energy in the event that the Government gives the go-ahead for new nuclear stations later this year. A British-led consortium would almost certainly be welcomed by the Government. Although neither Scottish & Southern nor Centrica generates nuclear power, they would be able to offer British Energy vital access to retail customers. Both already buy a proportion of British Energy's output. The proposal is one of a number being considered by the board of British Energy, led by chief executive Bill Coley. German power giants E.On and RWE and their French counterpart EdF have submitted proposals in recent weeks. Vattenfall, the Swedish nuclear company, is also un! derstood to have expressed an interest.

Sunday Telegraph 1st July 2007

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2007/07/01/cncentrica101.xml
Latest news is that they are about to have a chat with local politicians (BRARE editorial)

New nukes for East Anglia Added: 09 June 2007 10:31

Nuclear Siting

THE Government has indicated that it is “more likely than not” that Sizewell and Bradwell will house the next generation of nuclear power plants, despite MPs' fears that rising sea levels means the use of coastal sites is “asking for trouble.” During Commons questions a number of MPs raised concerns over the threat that global warming will have on costal communities and major buildings sited next to the sea. Labour's Rob Marris (Wolverhampton South West ) pleaded Trade and Industry Secretary Alastair Darling to look at the appropriateness of building on coastal sites. “It is likely that by 2050 sea levels will have risen by 40 centimetres at least and that storm waves will get higher,” said Mr Marris. “To use existing sites, most of which are on the coast whether in the South East or the rest of the UK, is asking for difficulty for future generations. I would beg you to look very, very careful! ly at the appropriateness or otherwise of coastal sites for new nuclear build.”

East Anglian Daily Times 7th June 2007

http://www.eadt.co.uk/content/eadt/politics/story.aspx?brand=EADOnline&category=Politics&tBrand=EADOnline&tCategory=zpolitics&itemid=IPED07%20Jun%202007%2013%3A03%3A27%3A887

The proposed dissolution plant June 6 2007 Added: 08 June 2007 19:52

There has been a lot in the papers about a proposed dissolution plant, and concerns about discharges into the Blackwater. Some of us have been having meetings with the Site Manager and the Environment Agency to find out the details. Nothing has been decided yet. A BPEO has been done (best practical environmental option). A member of the LCLC was present at this process. At the Local Liaison meeting on Wednesday, BRARE stated that the most effective form of stakeholder engagement brings the public on board right at the beginning. The station has consequently offered to work with several of us at the meeting on this, so that views from every quarter can be factored in. It will be a very long time before there is a decision of any sort.

Any enquiries or requests for more detail, contact BRARE.

Lights out in Essex Added: 21 May 2007 11:17

Tonight an experiment begins in Maldon and Dunmow. Essex County Council's energy saving scheme includes switching off street lights between midnight and 5am. If successful, this scheme will be extended throughout the county.

will local people get a say? Added: 21 May 2007 10:37

Planning

Major new developments including nuclear power stations and airport runways could be forced through as part of a major overhaul of planning in the UK Friends of the Earth said today (17 May). The proposals, details of which will be published in a Government White Paper expected next week, will leave affected communities with little or no say in how their area is developed. Friends of the Earth is calling on the Government to rethink its plans and introduce a planning system which allows people a say on the decisions that affect them.

FoE Press Release 17th May 2007

http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/press_releases/planning_white_paper_major_16052007.html

Bradwell LocalCommunityLiaisonCouncil meeting Added: 18 May 2007 11:43

The next one is on June 6th 10.30 am at Vaulty Manor, Heybridge. This is a public meeting and all are welcome to attend

Nuclear waste proposal coming to you Added: 02 May 2007 09:54

CoRWM's report "Implementing a Partnership Approach to Radioactive Waste Management", April 2007 is now available.

CoRWM website

http://www.corwm.org/pdf/2146%20-%20%20Report%20to%20Government%202007%20-%20final.pdf

This document shows that local councils will be invited to consider whether they would like a nuclear waste repository in their area.
Committee for Radioactive Waste Management advice on how to choose a nuclear repository sitewww.corwm.org/pdf/2146%20-%20%20Report%20to%20Government%202007%20-%20final.pdf

Land grab for new nuke at Bradwell Added: 29 April 2007 18:55

British Energy has told rivals wanting to use its sites to build a new generation of nuclear reactors to submit expressions of interest by the end of the month. The Government is set to publish its long-delayed energy White Paper in the middle of next month. It is expected to sanction new reactors to replace the UK's ageing plants. British Energy, in which the Government has a 65 per cent stake, owns the sites which are most suitable for development, making them hugely valuable. Once the Government gives the green light, British Energy wants to press ahead as quickly as possible with plans to be part of a new-build programme. It has been in informal talks with European rivals EDF, RWE and E.ON over the past six months about forming consortiums to carry out the work. So far, no tie-ups have been formed, but British Energy has told the trio to come up with concrete plans for how they would use the sites - and what they propose to give the nuclear generator in return f or providing the land. The Government could force British Energy to sell the sites to the highest bidder. The preferred option for the company, which the Government rescued from collapse five years ago, is for it to be given part-ownership of the new reactors in return for access to the sites. The generator would also like a role in operating the reactors.

Independent on Sunday 29th April 2007

http://news.independent.co.uk/business/news/article2494118.ece
Land grab for new nuke at Bradwellnews.independent.co.uk/business/news/article2494118.ece

Want a radioactive waste dump near you? Added: 18 April 2007 13:51

Nuclear Waste

Defra is planning a three-month public consultation this summer on how it should go about selecting sites for disposal of nuclear waste. The consultation, which will only be concerned with long-term storage sites, will seek ideas from interested parties across the UK on the best way to proceed. It is hoped that the system will end up being voluntary, with councils offering to host storage sites in return for financial and community incentives. Once the method for choosing the sites has been finalised, site selection including geological suitability will be made. The recently formed Nuclear Decommissioning Authority will be In charge of constructing and maintaining the facilities. Completion of the first storage facility could be as long as 35 years away.

Renewal and Regeneration News 17th April 2007

http://www.regen.net/pp/news/index.cfm?fuseaction=FullDetails&articleUID=6dcdaec8-1c6c-4cf3-abc4-9c10927a69f7&newsid=650821
Want a radioactive waste dump near you?www.regen.net/pp/news/index.cfm?fuseaction=FullDetails&articleUID=6dcdaec8-1c6c-4cf3-abc4-9c10927a69f7&newsid=650821

Bradwell site end point consultation Added: 04 April 2007 13:38

Bradwell Local Liaison Council, in accordance with the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority's guidelines, set about consulting the local population on how it envisaged the nuclear power site once it had been decommissioned. It commissioned a MORI poll, which showed that most people preferred the site to be delicensed and returned to nature.

The LCLC is in the process of issuing a statement to that effect.

New nuclear power station at Bradwell? Press Release Added: 04 April 2007 12:15

BRADWELL FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY



CONDEMNATION OF BRITISH ENERGY’S PLANS FOR A NEW NUCLEAR POWER STATION AT BRADWELL


This group of Essex residents condemns utterly the plans that British Energy has outlined for the Bradwell site.

Throughout recent years informal opinion within the nuclear industry in general regards it as an unsuitable site due to:

The inaccessibility of the site, with poor transport links
The area of the site and around the site being subject to future flooding

We share these environmental concerns.

We are further concerned by recent events that show that the Government is intent on pushing through new nuclear build without thought of the democratic process:

Its intent to modify planning laws so that local residents have less say in whether a nuclear power station can be built

The cynical attempt by this Government to bypass genuine public consultation as witnessed by the condemnation of the High Court, which agreed with Greenpeace and the Nuclear Free Local Authorities that the recent consultation process was inadequate.

The nuclear Emperor’s clothes are laid bare:

What we are seeing is:

£800 for every person in the UK in taxes to attempt to clean up the historic wastes of the nuclear industry

The honest attempts at tackling clean-up being hijacked by the nuclear lobby to use it as an excuse to build more new nuclear power stations

British Energy’s commercial desperation (to whose continued existence they must thank the tax payer) that means it has to promote a site that is manifestly unsuitable.

Where do we, the public, put our trust?

Bradwell fuel rods removed Added: 03 December 2006 09:52

Clare Spottiswoode, deputy chairman of British Energy said that, except for France and Finland, it is "highly unlikely" that any plants will be built in Britain or the rest of Europe before 2020. Europe is looking to the UK and will not undertake a new nuclear station until Britain does, she said. It will take until 2020 for the UK governments to put in place a proper planning regime and regulations for new construction. Platts Nuclear News Flashes 30th November 2006 Bradwell Officials from the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate and Civil Nuclear Security recently confirmed all fuel had successfully been removed from Bradwell Power Station - 99 per cent of the site's radioactivity. Work began on decommissioning the 50-year-old power station in 2002. The plant's two reactors were defuelled and 41,000 radioactive particles were transported to Sellafield power station in Cumbria.

Essex Chronicle 1st Dec 2006

http://www.essexchronicle.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?

Bradwell LCLC meeting 6 Dec Added: 21 November 2006 08:50

Bradwell Local Community Liaison Council meeting will be held on 6 December at 10.30am at Vaulty Manor Heybridge. The public can attend, and comment. Any queries, email the website.

Councils asked for nuclear dump sites Added: 28 October 2006 12:24

Every Council in the land is being asked to consider whether they have a store with the potential to house nuclear waste. Financial softeners will be part of the package.

Appeal lodged against wind turbine decision Added: 28 October 2006 12:18

Npower Renewables has launched an appeal against Maldon District Council's decision to refuse permission for 10 wind turbines on the Dengie Peninsula. More details to follow.

Bradwell meeting Mersea 31 Oct Added: 09 October 2006 11:10

The Mersea Island Association has called for a public meeting with the Nuclear Decommsisioning Authority, the Station and regulatory bodies to discuss the plans for decommissioning, and how it affects the area. It is to be held at the MICA Centre on October 31st at 7.30pm. Anyone who is interested is welcome.

Terror info denied Added: 10 September 2006 12:16

NUCLEAR industry officials have agreed to discuss access to “secret” Sizewell B documents following a claim that the public has a right to know the extent of the risk of a terrorist strike. Lack of public access to the documents - on the advice of the security services - was described by a leading environmental consultant yesterday as a “scandal”. Sizewell B, British Energy's flagship plant, is considered one of the high risk industrial targets for terrorists, although the company insists that the deliberate crashing of an aircraft on to the reactor dome is unlikely to lead to a catastrophic release of radioactivity. However, Pete Wilkinson, who runs a national environmental consultancy from offices at Halesworth, has expressed concern about the vulnerability to terrorist attack of another part of the plant - the concrete and steel-lined “pond” where highly radioactive spent fuel rods are stored. Mr Wilkinson, a member of the Gove rnment-appointed Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, has been unable to obtain access to documents assessing the risk of a terrorist strike leading to the loss of the 1,400 tonnes of coolant water.

East Anglian Daily Times 9th Sept 2006

http://www.eadt.co.uk/content/eadt/news/story.aspx?brand=EADOnline&category=News&tBrand=EADOnline&tCategory=znews&itemid=IPED08%20Sep%202006%2023%3A07%3A04%3A363
terror info deniedwww.eadt.co.uk/content/eadt/news/story.aspx?brand=EADOnline&category=News&tBrand=EADOnline&tCategory=znews&itemid=IPED08%20Sep%202006%2023%3A07%3A04%3A363

Oil burning over Added: 01 September 2006 08:10

Much to the relief of Mersea Islanders, Bradwell nuclear power station has announced that it has finished burning lightly radioactive oils and solvents for good. Any further material will go to be processed at Shanks.

Although a long-fought campaign did not halt the burning, it is to be hoped that the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority and relative bodies will have learned that local populations' views must be taken seriously, and that they must be fully consulted.

Nuclear waste transport Added: 22 August 2006 09:32

Waste Transport

THE Ministry of Defence has defended its decision to transport nuclear material through Essex villages without informing local councils about the timing or their content. Last week, after enquiries made by Sible Hedingham Parish Council, it was revealed that nuclear material had been moved through the village on more than one occasion, without prior notice to the authority.

East Anglian Daily Times 21st August 2006

http://www.eadt.co.uk/content/eadt/news/story.aspx?brand=EADOnline&category=News&tBrand=EADOnline&tCategory=znews&itemid=IPED20%20Aug%202006%2022%3A54%3A37%3A293
Nuclear waste transportwww.eadt.co.uk/content/eadt/news/story.aspx?brand=EADOnline&category=News&tBrand=EADOnline&tCategory=znews&itemid=IPED20%20Aug%202006%2022%3A54%3A37%3A293

Wind turbine news - St Osyth Added: 16 August 2006 11:45

Some weeks ago NPower asked Brare to look at a potential site at Earls Hall Farm, near St Osyth. It is for five turbines, to be dotted around quite a large area. I was impressed by their siting as being inconspicuous, and not affecting farming practices. 10% of Tendring District electricity could be generated each year by these turbines. As far as I can see the omens are good - local councillors seem in favour. NPower are holding an exhibition at St Osyth Village Hall, Clacton Road, on Friday 22 September at 2pm-7pm, and on Saturday 23rd September from 11am-4pm. Please go and support.

Bradwell Wind Farm

NPower will probably call for a public inquiry. More news anon. Latest excuse - the turbines would interfere with Southend Airport!!!!

Flooding risks affects new nuclear Added: 25 July 2006 10:03

Dangers in new nuclear sites

Sir: Chief scientist Sir David King has done a great public service in convincing top policy-makers, including the Prime Minister, of the dread threat of climate change, but he has done a serious disservice in merging scientific analysis with policy prescription, no more clearly than in his atomic advocacy ("We have no alternative to nuclear power", 13 July). In one area, his analysis of the impacts of coastal erosion and the threat of inundation from climate-change-driven, sea-level rise actually undermines his proposal to build nuclear plants, which Alistair Darling, the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry recently indicated to MPs would start being built on existing reactor sites.

Last December, Britain's nuclear-waste management agency, Nirex, published a report as part of their input into the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (Corwm)'s evaluation of the UK's nuclear-waste management options over the next 300 years.

Their summary of "Climate and Landscape Change" at coastal nuclear sites operated by the nuclear quango, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) demonstrates that eight of the 11 present sites - which include the favourite candidate sites for new reactors, Sizewell, Bradwell, Dungeness, Hinkley Point, Berkeley, Oldbury, Dounreay and Sellafield - are judged either "likely" or "very likely" to suffer from erosion or inundation or both.

Letter from Dr David Lowry in The Independent 25 July

No turbines at church Added: 15 July 2006 08:40

NO TURBINES AT CHURCH (Chelmsford & Maldon Advertiser)

THE COUNTRY'S oldest church will remain undisturbed in its isolated coastal position after plans for a wind farm nearby were turned down.

Maldon District Council threw out the application for 10 turbines to be installed at Hockley Farm, Bradwell, last Thursday, because it would "significantly detract from the setting of the church."

Historic St Peter's-on-the-Wall dates back to the 7th Century and attracts visitors from all over the world.

Members decided npower's scheme for 10 turbines - each 121 metres high with three-bladed rotors - plus ancillary equipment and a sub station would be too intrusive for the rural Dengie Peninsula site and ancient chapel. ...

Maldon District Council say no to turbines Added: 14 July 2006 10:41

Letter from the Chief Planning Officer:

Further to your representation on the above application I can inform you that the Council has decided to refuse permission. In reaching this decision the Council has taken into account the provisions of the development Plan and all other material considerations, which include the comments made in your letter.

A copy of the planning decision notice, which sets out the reason(s) for refusing permission, can be inspected on normal working days at the Council's Offices in Princes Road, Maldon, between the hours of 8.30am to 5.00pm Monday to Thursday and 8.30am to 4.30pm on Friday.

Yours faithfully

James Doe
Chief Planning and development Services Officer

Colchester Borough Council reverses its decision Added: 30 June 2006 16:57

Colchester Borough Council has changed its mind over objecting to the wind turbine development at Bradwell. Here is the letter from the Leader of the Council:

Colchester Borough Council
PO Box 884, Town Hall, Colchester, CO1 1FR
Telephone (01206) 282222 DX 729040 Colchester 15
Minicom (Textphone) (01206) 282266

Councillor Robert Davidson
Leader of the Council



Phone (01206) 282244

E-mail patocabinet@colchester.gov.uk

Fax (01206) 282233
Your ref

Our ref RD/LB
Mr Jackson
Maldon District Council
Planning and Development Services
Princes Road
MALDON CM9 5DL
Date 29 June 2006


Dear Mr Jackson

Consultation on FUL/MAL/06/00291 proposed wind farm at Bradwell-on-Sea

As Leader of Colchester Borough Council I thought it only right to alert you to the fact that through our Local Development Framework process we will be considering the benefits of greener energy schemes in line with the government’s latest guidelines.

Our officer’s response rightly was based on our existing planning policy but I think it is only right that you should know that we would be highly likely to support an application such as this which will provide a carbon neutral energy source for us all.

I urge you to approve this application.

Yours sincerely





Councillor Robert Davidson
Leader of the Council

Critique of Colchester Borough Council's objection to Bradwell wind turbines Added: 28 June 2006 15:14

BRARE IS really concerned about the decision-making process that has led the planning officer to reject NPower's proposal for ten wind turbines at Bradwell. There has been a lot of attention given to this project in the Colchester Borough area, and there are many in the area, West Mersea in particular (who would be affected) who welcome 10 wind turbines as part of their landscape.

Time is of the essence, as there are two meetings at Burnham, on 3 July and 6 July, after which a decision will be made.

To show you these concerns, we have extrapolated areas from the planning officer's letter, and have commented in square brackets:



"I am concerned that this Council was not consulted regarding identification of principal viewpoints used to inform the study, despite the proposal having considerable visual impact on Colchester Borough." [CBC were consulted at the scoping stage of the EIA and had full opportunity to input into the consideration of viewpoints. Essex CC were also a key consultee with regard to viewpoints].



"The EIA should include clarification as to the methodology used to assess the validity of principal visual nodes to the southern end of the borough, any additional points identified (particularly Layer Marney Tower, Wigborough and Peldon) and submitted for analysis and if acceptable agreement." [Colchester BC have had over a year to request these viewpoints further to consultation at the scoping stage and only raise issues after the application has been submitted].



"The ES gives insignificant weight to landscapes designated international, national and local importance within the proposals ZVI, particularly those designated RAMSAR (international), Layer Marney Tower (national - Grade 2 registered parkland) SAC, SPA and SSSI. It should also give clear analysis of any impact the proposal may have on these protected areas for assessment." [ The ZVI (Zone of Visual Influence) is a tool for looking at where the turbines might be visible from - ignoring vegetation. CBC confuse landscape issues with ecological issues. The ES does provide an analysis of potential impacts on relevant designated sites. Layer Marney Tower is around 17km away?!]



"Colchester Borough Council objects to the application as it is considered that the proposal will have a significant impact on Colchester Borough in visual terms (particularly the impact of proposal on principal view points to the south of the borough) as the proposed masts will be seen as elements that would necessarily lead to a fragmentation of the skyline. This through introduction of prominent vertical, manmade, moving elements into what is a primarily a static, shallow strip of land to the skyline with a strong horizontal bias, currently forming a subtle division that fully complements the scale of sea and sky." [ Interesting description, but not convincing.]

Colchester Borough Council's objection to Bradwell Wind Farm Added: 26 June 2006 19:47

Contact Sue Jackson
Colchester Borough Council
PO Box 889, Town Hall, Colchester CO1 1FL
Telephone (01206) 282222 DX 729040 Colchester 15
Minicom (Textphone) (01206) 282266

Planning, Protection and Licensing



Phone (01206) 282450

E-mail sue.jackson@colchester.gov.uk

Fax (01206) 282598
Your ref

Our ref SJ
Maldon District Council
Planning and Development Services
Princes Road
Maldon
CMG 5DL
Date 19th May 2006




Dear Mr Jackson

Consultation on FUL/MAL/06/00291 proposed wind farm at Bradwell-On-Sea

I refer to the above application and apologise for the delay in replying and trust that the following comments can be taken into consideration.

I am concerned that this Council was not consulted regarding identification of principal viewpoints used to inform the study, despite the proposal having considerable visual impact on Colchester Borough. The EIA should include clarification as to the methodology used to assess the validity of principal visual nodes to the southern end of the borough, any additional points identified (particularly Layer Marney Tower, Wigborough and Peldon) and submitted for analysis and if acceptable agreement.

Colchester Borough’s Landscape Character Assessment (2005) appears not to have been included in the ES. This, as with the national and county based assessments, should be included, with clear assessment of effects of the proposal on Landscape Character Areas (within the ZVI) Key Characteristics for assessment. This should be seen as particularly important as it would appear to be the only District/Borough level LCA with the proposals ZVI.

The ES gives insignificant weight to landscapes designated international, national and local importance within the proposals ZVI, particularly those designated RAMSAR (international), Layer Marney Tower (national - Grade 2 registered parkland) SAC, SPA and SSSI. It should also give clear analysis of any impact the proposal may have on these protected areas for assessment.




Continued……………………………………….
Page 2










Countryside Conservation Areas (CCA) should be recognized within the ES where they are justified through independent study, as within Colchester Borough where CCA’s have been assessed (using nationally recognized methodology - Countryside Agency guidelines) within Colchester Borough Councils ‘Review of Countryside Conservation Areas in Colchester Borough’.

The ES should include the impact that the proposal will have on Layer Marney Tower, nationally recognized as a Listed Grade 1 and the West Mersea Conservation Area, giving clear analysis of that impact for assessment.

Colchester Borough Council objects to the application as it is considered that the proposal will have a significant impact on Colchester Borough in visual terms (particularly the impact of proposal on principal view points to the south of the borough) as the proposed masts will be seen as elements that would necessarily lead to a fragmentation of the skyline. This through introduction of prominent vertical, manmade, moving elements into what is a primarily a static, shallow strip of land to the skyline with a strong horizontal bias, currently forming a subtle division that fully complements the scale of sea and sky.

Please take the above comments into consideration when the application is determined. If any additional information is submitted I would be pleased to receive a copy.

Yours sincerely





Sue Jackson
Principal Planning Officer

Bradwell wind farm decision meetings Added: 22 June 2006 14:01

Bradwell Windfarm Application to be Considered by Members of Maldon District Council


20 6 06

Maldon District Council has announced that two special meetings will be held to consider the application from NPower Renewables Ltd to site a Wind Farm at Hockley Farm, Bradwell on Sea, Essex.

Maldon District Council’s South Eastern Area Planning Committee will be the first to consider the application at a special meeting on Monday 3rd July, which will be held at the Council Offices, Princes Road, Maldon starting at 7.30pm.

A special meeting of the Planning and Licensing Committee to consider the final decision will then be held on Thursday 6th July 2006 also at the Council Offices in Princes Road, Maldon and also starting at 7.30pm.

Bradwell Local Community Liaison Council meeting June 7th Added: 23 May 2006 09:44

The public is invited to attend, and air your views, and suggest ideas, at 3 Rivers Golf & Country Club 7 June 10.30am. Contact us for more details. Last minutes at: http://www.nuclearsites.co.uk/page.php?pageID=1285 Bradwell Local Community Liaison Council minutes

CPREssex says no to wind farm Added: 23 May 2006 09:20

The latest magazine from the Council for the Protection of Rural Essex has come out against the wind farm. If you are a member please write a letter with your views.

Bradwell to have new station? Added: 19 May 2006 10:44

Concerns are growing that Bradwell could once again be home to an active nuclear power station.


Essex Chronicle 18th May 2006

http://www.essexchronicle.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=170875&command=displayContent&sourceNode=170757&contentPK=14493057&folderPk=91138 Bradwell to have new station?

Contamination at Shoeburyness Added: 07 May 2006 11:05

Essex

A preliminary report into Ministry of Defence firing ranges and bomb testing areas at Shoeburyness has called for a more detailed study of contamination.

BBC 6th May 2006
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/essex/4980660.stm Contamination at Shoeburyness

Windy idea Added: 05 May 2006 09:56

To avoid further controversy and expense over the Horkesley Park scheme, why not try a new idea altogether? To make commercial use of the site, avoid extra traffic and visitors and be environmentally sustainable how about setting up a wind farm? There must be wind at the top of the hill, the sails are elegant, there are few people living nearby to complain about possible noise and it could assist in solving the looming energy crisis.

Letter Essex County Standard May 5 2005

50 years ago Added: 29 April 2006 10:35

It emerged at a public inquiry that the proposed atomic power station at Bradwell, if built, would probably be doubled in size in the years to come.

An engineer from the Central Electricity Authority, which proposed to build the £25 million power station, told the hearing at Bradwell that additional sites would be harder to find in the future.

The inquiry was told that only 32 objections had been received from Bradwell itself, a far larger had come from people living across the estuary in Mersea.

(Essex County Standard)

Chernobyl fall-out over NE Essex Added: 26 April 2006 15:49

BRADWELL FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY

www.brare.co.uk


PRESS RELEASE

Chernobyl cloud: new research shows possible effects on NE Essex

The upcoming twentieth anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster has prompted a series of reports on its lasting effects. The International Atomic Energy Authority published a report in the autumn that downplayed these effects. This spring Greenpeace International published a report detailing results by Russian scientists that showed massive chronic health problems that have been passed on to future generations. Independent scientists Ian Fairlie and David Sumner concluded similarly in their report.

Today Bradwell for Renewable Energy (BRARE) has received information by respected statistician and former government scientist John Urquhart that pinpoints NE Essex ( part of NE Thames Health Authority) as having been affected by “black rain” (rain containing radioactive particles) which covered parts of Britain shortly after the event.He points to an increase in neo-natal deaths (birth to 4 weeks) during this period that mirrors the pathway of the cloud. His comparison of neo-natal deaths in parts of Essex that were not rained upon show a startling change in statistics. For example in Tower Hamlets, where rain did not fall, there was a drop over the two previous years. In areas where the rain fell there was an overall increase of 23%. Over NE Essex as a whole, where the rain fell there was an increase.

This report is not making wild accusations: it is laying the information out for all to see. Urquhart asks the relevant authorities to consider his findings, and in the light of their explorations, to revise the assumptions upon which the public’s safety is based.

BRARE’s position

The Chernobyl accident is the greatest public health hazard to date. Throughout the last twenty years research has been patchy and subject to political manipulation.

People in NE Essex need to know the truth about what has happened. We need the questions this report poses to be answered by the relevant authorities. We will never know the full impact of this accident. We can only be witnesses as the ghastly tale unfolds through the generations. But we can use improved knowledge to re-evaluate public risk and refine safety legislation.


ENDS

For a copy of the report, or details, contact BRARE

Bradwell wind farm support document Added: 18 April 2006 12:45

BRADWELL FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY

www.brare.co.uk

Bradwell Wind Farm Application 06/00291/FUL



This Essex-wide group, known informally as BRARE, would like to support the above application.

We have led the way in encouraging renewable energy in this region by inviting local councillors and Members of Parliament from Harwich to Southend to petition the Crown Estates in support of offshore wind farms in the area. We were therefore delighted when permission for establishing a wind farm at Gunfleet Sands was given. As far has we know, this is the first time a community has proactively advocated a specific method of energy supply. Gunfleet is a valuable contribution towards renewable energy requirements in the East of England, according to Government, and Maldon Council’s policy.

We therefore gladly recommend the establishment of a small number of turbines at the Dengie Peninsula. This is an ideal spot for wind generation. Some might regard these turbines as a form of intrusion. But it is our view that, compared with the neighbouring defunct nuclear power station, and the resultant decommissioning issues, together with the ever-onward march of global warming and its consequences, wind turbines are of light environmental impact.

Furthermore this small site will supply electricity to between 8,100 and 10,600 homes, a third of all homes in the Maldon district. Our experience is that the general public often feel powerless in front of such enormous challenges. The Dengie Peninsula and surrounding area are very likely to be affected by flooding and erosion, which will change the landscape for ever. This small installation gives the people of Maldon the ability to offset CO2 emissions on their own account. There is the added bonus in that the installation would give some income to farmers in the area. Local employment would be created during construction, thus boosting the rural economy.

We therefore urge Maldon Council to accept its responsibilities under Government policy, and grant permission for the installation of this wind farm.

French television visits Bradwell area Added: 29 March 2006 12:31

The week beginning 27 March Channel 3 TV, a French current affairs channel, interviewed the main protagonists on the fight over wind turbines and nuclear power. BRARE was able to give its opinion.

NPower submits application for 10 turbines at Bradwell Added: 13 March 2006 15:46

NPower has submitted a full Environmental Statement for plans to build 10 wind turbines on the Dengie Peninsula. These turbines would provide enough clean electricity for the average annual needs of 8.000-10.000 homes each year. The draft East of England Plan, published at the end of 2004, sets out a target of 14% of the region's electiricty needs to come from renewable sources by 2010. It is anticipated that 10% of this target would need to come from onshore technologies. It is now up to the planning committee of Maldon District Council to assess and approve the scheme.