SSEN Application Ref: ECU00005225 - QUOTE THIS ON ALL OBJECTIONS
Stop the pylons have set up an auto-filled objection you can send with a few clicks- you can access that below
https://stopthepylons.object.now/
You can also object in your own words in other ways
- By post: Write to Scottish Government Energy Consents Unit, Floor 4, Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU
- By email: Send your objection to [email protected] and copy in [email protected]
Don't forget to Sign up to Tracey's campaign by scrolling down to the bottom of this page and ticking the box.
THE DEADLINE IS 27TH OCT (Written submissions may be accepted after that date if sent before the 27th)
Suggested points to make:
· Need. The developers have failed to show a genuine need for the project. They deliberately confuse a national need to reinforce transmission capacity with a desire to use an old technology which has unacceptable and avoidable negative environmental and community impacts. They describe the project as Pathway to 2030, but there is no mention of building a new overhead line or substation in the Fetteresso Forest in the ESO Pathway to 2030 document.
· Failure to consider alternatives. The developers have failed to show that they have considered alternative technologies, especially upgrading the existing infrastructure first. SSEN are protecting a profitable data transmission business by not upgrading the existing pylons.
· Safety: The SSEN design includes unacceptable risks, including, but not limited to insufficient height of conductors creating electrocution hazard and induction corrosion effects on gas pipelines resulting in explosion risk. Major accident hazard has been scoped out of the EIA, showing a complete disregard to the safety of the public and their own workers.
· Health: SSEN have refused to consider the mental health effects on members of the public affected by their plan. They refuse to accept the risk of electromagnetic fields on members of the public, relying on old lenient non statutory guidelines instead of the limits required by the European Council. Health effects have been scoped out of the environmental impact report.
· Community effects: SSEN have failed to demonstrate a positive net community impact as required by NPF4, negative impacts on the agricultural, tourism and property development sectors have not been adequately predicted and mitigated. Effects on roads and communities caused by construction have been grossly under estimated.
· Cumulative effect: SSEN have failed to assess the cumulative impacts and honeypot effect of constructing the overhead line and substations. Similar projects elsewhere in Scotland have resulted in a tsunami of applications for wind farms, battery storage, hydrogen generators etc. several applications of this type are already in the planning system. The project is not just the construction of an overhead line, it represents large scale industrialisation of rural areas, against NPF4 policies.
· Environmental impact. The project was designed without any strategic environmental assessment, The effects on local ecosystems was not anticipated and the environmental impact report submitted with the application fails to adequately describe the baseline conditions or provide adequate mitigation.
· Consultation: SSEN have failed to adequately consult with the public, their failures to involve the public in decision making has been acknowledged by Ofgem . SSEN have failed to follow the Gunning Principles.