National Grid propose this

for Essex’s rural high ground

•

VAST:the maps that National Grid have provided for their proposed sitebetween the Waldergrave and Butlers Woods that sit beside the road from Sudbury to Halstead covers around 19 acres. Currently they say that they only need a type of substation that would fit onto around one acre of land, so what do they want the rest of the site for? Certainly we have found that many of National Grid's proposals are about far more than they say they are. In this case, UK Power Networks (UKPN), our local distribution grid operator wants National Grid to build a substation with twice the capacity National Grid are proposing. Are we therefore looking at a proposal for a huge industrial site in the countryside that will grow by leaps and bounds in future? The proposals are already there from UKPN that show the answer is YES. Read themhere.

•

UGLY:such a substation comprises hugeasymmetrictowersup to50 metres tall, gantries 15 metres tall, transformers in buildings the size of a house, switchgear in buildings the size of a factory. All of this is proposed for a field set on some of the highest ground in north Essex. Stand in the middle of the proposed site and the horizon is defined by the village of Alpheton, many miles away in Suffolk. Build such amonstrosityhere and it will dominate thelandscapefor miles around,decimatingthe natural beauty that is an asset for the rural tourism industry. Theuglinesswould not be restricted to one site. The substation would be connected to the existing distribution grid by a short cable terminated with yet anotherSealingEnd Compound, probably in an open field in full view from the local main road. And it would not just be visually ugly: it would hum. The transformers would vibrate and drive the clay ground on which they would sit and this could in turn propagate out and cause the homes in the surrounding villages and hamlets to hum.

•

UNNECESSARY:It is absolutely not the case that a new substation is essential. New transformers (if needed) could be installed in one of National Grid's existing substations - the nearest being not far away at Braintree. Atechnicallyfeasibleand economically sensible underground cable could then connect from Braintree to the distribution grid at a point near Castle Heddingham. This would also make it possible to rid essentially lovely villages such as Wickham St Paul of the pylons that blight them. Stour Valley Underground have put such strategies to UKPN and National Grid. Their response has been toexaggeratethe costs and land take for such solutions. But SVU have refuted this with solid evidence from the utility companies that actually carry this work out for NG and UKPN. Even the Energy Ministries consultants KEMA have stated that NG have inflated costs on this project. Put simply, a non substation solution is affordable, economic and from a technical standpoint, highly do-able.

•

INAPPROPRIATE:Our landscape is a vastly valuable asset for our local economy - now, and even more so in future. As you may have read in the national papers, our recent revelations of the natural beauty and related cultural significance of the Stour Valley landscape has lead to proposals from National Grid to make the appropriate and economically sound investment needed to underground their proposed connection in the Stour Valley and elsewhere. It flies in the face of common sense to then blight the gateway to this landscape area with a vast industrial site that will be visible right across this outstandingly important heritage countryside. Research shows that thepeopleof this country are willing to pay to avoid such blighting in high value landscapes. Any cost difference between a new substation and the environmentallyresponsibleunderground connection solution we propose is small when set against the total project costs.