Think again about pylons plan, campaigners tell National Grid
CAMPAIGNERS fighting plans to erect a new 400,000-volt power line across the North Somerset countryside are calling on National Grid to go back to the drawing board.
The calls have been made after an independent report revealed the cost of undergrounding cables is not as expensive as the energy giant first estimated.
-
The report, commissioned by the Infrastructure Planning Committee (IPC), looked at the costs of various options for installing the new power line from Avonmouth to Hinkley Point
It analyses the whole life costs of installing and maintaining new high voltage transmission circuits under the ground, under the sea and over ground.
National Grid says the line – a large section of which will cross the North Somerset countryside – is needed to bring electricity onto its transmission network as part of the Hinkley C Connection Project.
The preferred route for the new line – which will mainly follow the route of the existing 132,000-volt line on the western fringes of Nailsea – was announced by National Grid in September.
It said the new line would be mainly overground, but it would consider putting the cables underground "if the economies were right".
The IPC ordered the independent report – published by the Institute of Engineering and Technology and consultants Parsons Brinckerhoff- after concerns that not all options for the newline had been properly investigated or costed.
The report agreed with National Grid that the cheapest option for the new power line was overhead cables, but it also put the costs of undergrounding the cables at between £10.2 million and £24.1 million a kilometre.
National Grid said the costs of underground cables would be 12-17 times more expensive than overhead lines, while the report reveals undergrounding would actually be four to six times more expensive.
Campaigners say National Grid needs to revisit the undergrounding option and look at burying all cables along the 37-mile proposed line.
Nailsea Action Against Pylons Action Group spokeswoman, Fiona Erleigh, said: "This report brings very good news. The report clearly shows that National Grid's costs were out-of-date.
"At the initial public consultations on the Hinkley C Connection in autumn 2009, National Grid quoted underground cables to be 12-17 times more expensive than overhead lines.
"In this report, the relative lifetime costs show undergrounding being only four to six times more expensive. "This is a significant drop, making underground cables much more affordable."
Campaigners calculate the cost implication to consumers of putting all of the Hinkley to Avonmouth route underground would cost consumers 30 pence annually per average household.
Mrs Erleigh added: "This is a trivial cost to preserve our landscape for future generations, to bury the blight of giant pylons and remove the fear of negative impacts on the health and homes of our communities in North Somerset."
National Grid has until 2013 to submit its proposals to the Government and a final decision will be made by the IPC. The energy giant said it would be carefully studying the report over the next few weeks.
15 Comments
View all
by roly12345
Wednesday, February 08 2012, 2:10AM
“I wonder if the power could be transmitted wirelessly using quantum entanglement?”
by brisguide
Tuesday, February 07 2012, 11:59PM
“nimbys strike back”
by BristolJB
Tuesday, February 07 2012, 10:00PM
“@JohnM269 Of course the cables can be buried, it will just cost loads more and also be worse for the environment as additional energy will be required to force cool them. Please elaborate on where these 'other countries' are that you talk of?”
by Banjo9
Tuesday, February 07 2012, 6:32PM
“Here Here Dungbob !
Get the Cables underground In fact get all cables underground, this is all about excessive profit by" Bullying Greedy" multi national companies .......just quick cheap option and greed ! at the exspense of the long suffering customer.”
by JohnM296
Tuesday, February 07 2012, 5:37PM
“@BristolJB - Not actually public money if its being recovered from the users via a charge on their electric bills. Cable technology is improving all the time with better insulation materials. Clearly the cables can be buried as the costs have benn studied and it is being done now in other countries. I do agree that a wider tract of land is disturbed during installation, and some of that is affected afterwards (if that is what you meant by "you can't physically dig the holes to space the cables as far apart as they are fixed on pylons") - but the long teerm benefits are worth it I think. I guess we are just coming from opposite sides so will probably not agree on the value or undergrounding. Suggest we leave it at that.”
by BristolJB
Tuesday, February 07 2012, 4:50PM
“@John M296 – In current economic climate £850 million of public money to trench 40km of cable seems like a bad investment IMHO. With regard to the new cable technology you talk about, there is no new cable technology. The problem with burying 400kV power lines is that you can't physically dig the holes to space the cables as far apart as they are fixed on pylons. It all comes down to the laws and relationships of thermodynamics, electrical conductivity and magnetism, which are the same now as they always have been.”
by JohnM296
Tuesday, February 07 2012, 3:58PM
“@BristolJB - I still think your maths are wrong - the investment "life" would be shorter than 150 years. It still makes it a low cost per year overall compared to the benefits for all. To say you can't stand in the way of progress when you are supporting the use of arcane technology is wide of the mark imho. New cable technolgy allows undergrounding to be achieveable (already being used in other countries in preference to pylons) - now that's progress!”
by BristolJB
Tuesday, February 07 2012, 2:33PM
“I doubt National Grid would be willing to underwrite the cost on the basis of a repayment over 130 years of operation. True, the actual cost per year is less, but the figure of 30 pence as claimed by the campaigners is totally ludicrous. Perhaps the residents and campaigners could find the £850 million between themselves? Sorry to those affected by the pylons, but you simply can't stand in the way of progress.”
by JohnM296
Tuesday, February 07 2012, 2:16PM
“@BristolJB - But they would not expect to recover all the cost in one year, would they. The cost would be spread over the life of the installation, hence the lower cost.”
by dungbob
Tuesday, February 07 2012, 12:55PM
“pylons have been a blot on our landscape for years, purely because of profits and the urge to squeeze as much money out of consumers as possible. About time that the cables were put underground.”