The National Grid is consulting about proposed routes for a new grid connection to serve Wylfa B (if built) and the offshore Celtic Array. The consultation can be seen on their website. The preferred option is a overhead line along one the following corridors:
There was a subsea HVDC option, but that would have cost more. I'm always surprised when those who support the construction of Wylfa B and associated infrastructure, then turn round and oppose wind turbines on land, normally on the grounds it may keep the tourist away. Or those who oppose wind turbines on land but think that the more expensive off shore wind farms are better, forgetting that a grid connection would also be needed for them.
As for Wylfa B, whilst I have no problems with nuclear power, it seems it's now too expensive as a viable option if we want to keep the cost of electricity down, and not forgetting the line of new pylons buzzing away as they cross the landscape.
As for Wylfa B, whilst I have no problems with nuclear power, it seems it's now too expensive as a viable option if we want to keep the cost of electricity down, and not forgetting the line of new pylons buzzing away as they cross the landscape.
1 comment:
Agreed – subsea cables is the obvious choice for Anglesey. The consultation procedure is insulting to the population of Anglesey. Even the National Grid Senior Project Manager, revealed in a meeting to councillors 9th October 2012 that “If I was living on Anglesey I’d want undersea cables as well.” A chance then for our councillors to unite and promote the interests of those who actually do live on Anglesey.
For or against Wylfa/windfarms – the pylon/subsea cable option is a separate choice and doesn’t affect the outlook for Wylfa/windpower either way. For subsea cable, the proportionality of the cost impact on the UK consumer is minimal compared to the economic, tourism, agriculture, environmental, social and health impact of pylons on the people of Anglesey.
The above-mentioned pylon option is the National Grid’s “preferred option”, not the people of Anglesey’s “preferred option”. A farcical consultation then. OFGEM, which regulates the National Grid, holds the view that, “Consulting interested parties is a vital part of the process…It ensures that policy making is open to influence … It should also improve the quality of our decisions, enable progression towards a solution by consent.” Hear! Hear!
The National Grid hasn’t consulted us until it give us the opportunity to answer the simple question – “what is your preferred option – subsea cable or pylons?”
In fact the pylon corridor question is a smoke-screen, since anyone baited into indicating a preference on the feedback form (there’s no option to say ‘none of the corridors’) has also inadvertently put a tick in the box for the National Grid to ‘take forward’ the pylon option.
Can we expect the MP and AM to call them to task on this very blatant public hoodwinking.
Post a Comment