Hinkley Point C: Petition to protect fish in Severn Estuary
29th January, By Seth Dellow, Digital Reporter, 29 Jan 25
https://www.bridgwatermercury.co.uk/news/24893585.hinkley-point-c-petition-protect-fish-severn-estuary/
ENVIRONMENTAL groups have launched a petition to protect the Severn Estuary and ensure the new nuclear power station at Hinkley Point C is compliant with regulations.
17 groups including the West Country Rivers Trust and CPRE have joined forces to call on the Energy Secretary to ensure that an acoustic fish deterrent is installed at Hinkley Point C, with ‘comprehensive mitigation and compensation’ for all species.
It follows comments made by the Prime Minister, Sir Kier Starmer, in an article for Mail Online, which lambasted efforts to block major infrastructure projects, singling out opposition to the acoustic fish deterrent which EDF had originally proposed for Hinkley Point C.
Mark Lloyd, CEO of The Rivers Trust, said: “It is very disappointing that the Prime Minister was so disparaging and dismissive about the need for acoustic fish deterrents on the water intakes for the new nuclear power station being built at Hinkley by EDF.”
You can find out more about the petition here: https://bit.ly/40QeM24
EDF recently confirmed that the “only option currently likely to be accepted as a mitigation” is the creation of a salt marsh. It would act as an environmental mitigation for the harm the project would bring to 44 tonnes of fish.
A formal consultation on the salt marsh location was delayed earlier in January. Some residents along the Severn, including landowners and farmers, previously expressed their opposition to the plans.
Four possible locations have been proposed for a salt marsh along the River Severn, including Kingston Seymour, Arlingham, Littleton, and Rodley.
Plans were dropped for Pawlett Hams following opposition from residents and branded a “disaster” by Bridgwater’s MP, Sir Ashley Fox.
EDF has confirmed that its process for Hinkley Point C and the project “is working with local communities and stakeholders to find solutions that work for both communities and the environment.”
No comments yet.
-
Archives
- December 2025 (103)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
- January 2025 (250)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS




Leave a comment