Is there an alternative route?

A number of alternative routes were explored including running the cabling up the River Ribble. The reasons BP and EnBW are promoting the Fylde route is:

• Cabling through the ground is far cheaper than through water.
• They think the Fylde are a disparate group of towns and parishes who don’t always see beyond their respective areas, so they shouldn’t offer much cohesive resistance. Let’s prove them wrong, eh?
• One of BPs primary reasons for this route is securing construction and operations jobs, not government green energy ambitions and a response to climate change. Profits.
• National Grid doesn’t want to invest but is happy for hundreds of £millions being spent elsewhere to destroy the Fylde instead of an approximate £5-7million by them to upgrade an existing substation on brown belt land developed for projects like this, where there is already a wind farm coming onshore and the area would benefit from the regeneration investment.

The issue we face is that we must stop the project from progressing through the NSIPs process. Just because there is a better alternative that’s not enough for it to be stopped. So registering to have your say, and signing the petition is what the members of the public can do to show the proposed route is not acceptable. Hoping our action groups, councillors, politicians and professionals put together the necessary legally accurate responses to back up the word of the people.

The alternative route will probably only be considered if we get the current proposal stopped.

Hillhouse Technology Enterprise Zone

By choosing to bring the cables on land where cables from an existing wind farm are already in place, with a connection to the National Grid.

• Next to the location that will handle the ongoing maintenance of the wind farm assets themselves in a protecting harbour.
• On brown belt land designated for projects like this.
• It would help revitalise the industry in the area.
• A fraction of the disruption. A fraction of the cost.
• Springfields (Westinghouse) are seeking to develop large-scale hydrogen production at Hillhouse, which would be a good use of the spare capacity in the local area for local benefit. The current corridor only exports to the National Grid, with no local benefit.

Hillhouse Technology Enterprise Zone offers this but would need National Grid to invest, whereas they do not need to in Penwortham. But the investment needed would be a tiny fraction of the investment eaten up by the 30Km cable corridor cutting the Fylde in half, ruining farmland, livelihoods, and greenbelt land. The alternative route will be at least £450 million cheaper.

So that smaller investment at a more suitable location must be the sensible choice…

It’s all about shareholder profit rather than green energy. And the Government should not endorse that.