Why the government must turn down Aquind's bid to lay cables through Portsmouth

Aquind wants to lay subsea cables between France and the UK, which would be landed in Eastney and then run through Portsmouth up to an electricity substation at Lovedean. The work to lay the cables would cause months of disruption in the city – but that is not the only reason why we believe the plan should be turned down.

Last week The News reported on the city’s campaigners who are remaining steadfast in their opposition to the scheme. We also published a letter from Aquind – which previously has not engaged in any dialogue with the city – to the people of Portsmouth. This is Let’s Stop Aquind’s response to the that letter.

TO THE OWNERS AND DIRECTORS OF AQUIND LIMITED

Let’s Stop Aquind acknowledges receipt of your recent letter to the readers of The News. It seems that you are finally recognising the depth of the opposition to your plans, but your letter raises more questions than answers, and the statements you made need to be examined.

Why did you request an extension to the Secretary of State's deadline for information?

You express gratitude for the recently granted extension, but is that because it gives you more time to apply for the permits and permissions in France that have so far eluded you? The SofS will want to

see end-to-end regulatory approval but the French remain lukewarm to your plans at best.

No guarantee of energy security

You claim that the Aquind interconnector would guarantee ‘energy security at night’ but wind turbines generate more energy at night, precisely at the time of the evening peak in demand, and in winter months. We need local and reliable sources of renewable energy not imported nuclear power. Offshore wind is reliable as the wind speed rarely drops below the minimum required for generation. There is no guarantee of energy security from the French nuclear estate, which is suffering serious maintenance issues, and France is committed to providing power within the EU, of which we are no longer a member.

We don't need the Aquind interconnector

Regarding your claim that ‘existing sub-sea cables aren’t enough for the future needs of the south of England’, the UK government has recently confirmed the 18GW power target from interconnectors, preferably direct from offshore wind farms (multi-purpose interconnectors) or the Xlinks combined wind and solar project planned in Morocco. Ofgem figures show that current capacity, approved projects and Xlinks would more than meet the requirement, so we don't need the Aquind interconnector and the damage it would cause our city and countryside.

Hidden agenda?

From the initial documentation, it was clear that your original intention was to import French nuclear power, but as the UK invests in renewables, have you now calculated you will make more money exporting our green energy to France? This would offer even fewer benefits to citizens than the paltry £3.15 a year from bills claimed on your website, and undermine all your arguments as to why we ‘need’ this absurd project. How would it benefit the UK if three to five per cent of our homegrown energy is exported through a privately owned interconnector? Or would the main profits come from the high-capacity fibre-optic communications network that you plan to run alongside the cables, even though it is not required as part of the project?

Disruption for years

You state that the ‘disruption’ caused by turning the eastern side of the city into a building site would be ‘temporary’, but the five-to-seven-year timescale of the project does not feel like temporary to us.

The vehicle movements and lane closures would paralyse business in Portsmouth, the traffic chaos would choke our city and further pollute our air, which has already been identified as dangerously low quality. The loss of green spaces and amenities such as sports facilities and parking would be long-term or permanent, and the blight caused by the huge converter stations required would last for decades.

No justification for environmental vandalism

Your plans threaten to disturb decades of toxic waste buried underground on huge sections of the route. At peak capacity, the cables themselves would generate electromagnetic fields harmful to humans and wildlife. The allotments would be threatened by inadvertent release of the chemicals used in laying the cables, and species such as wading and migrating birds may never return to the delicate shoreline habitat. The original decision not to allow the project was taken partly because the harms outweigh the benefits and that is still the case.

Why Portsmouth, when alternatives were not properly examined?

Your claims to ‘painstaking expert research’ regarding alternatives were questioned by the former Secretary of State and should be further examined by Mr Shapps. The extraordinary length of the cable both at sea and onshore could easily be minimised by different route options which have never been publicly analysed, as the research you refer to has been kept confidential even from the high court hearing during the recent judicial review.

Legitimate concerns about national security and donations

In your letter, you commented on the national security concerns voiced by both our MP's, whose views we endorse and trust. Does this mean that a public debate on these issues is now welcome or will your lawyers continue to threaten local and national publications for raising them? Aquind Ltd is privately owned by two foreign-born shareholders, both of whom were granted British citizenship, but the UK recently closed a citizenship scheme for security reasons. So is it not legitimate to question whether Soviet-born oligarchs would always have our best interests at heart?

All the donations made to the Conservative Party have been legal under our current rules, but did you really expect that donating £1.7m to the party and 38 MPs would not be commented on?

Given the scale of the donations, the number of ministers that have had to recuse themselves from the planning process and the fact that one of your directors is such a high-profile member of the party, is it surprising when people ask what the donations are trying to achieve?

Although we welcome debate, we question the timing of your letter as you have not previously shown any interest in dialogue with the city. We feel that you may have left it too late to win friends here, as our campaign is growing daily and Portsmouth is united against the Aquind interconnector across the political spectrum.

For the good of the city, our health, environment and democracy, we ask you once again to withdraw your dangerous plans.

To sign Let’s Stop Aquind’s open letter to Grant Shapps, click here