Offshore Wind Power WITHOUT Destroying the Norfolk Countryside

by Ray Pearce

Offshore Wind Power WITHOUT Destroying the Norfolk Countryside

by Ray Pearce
Ray Pearce
Case Owner
I am a retired RAF and professional pilot and have lived peacefully in Norfolk for over 30 yrs. I feel a public responsibility to try and save Norfolk's countryside from irrecoverable damage.
on 01st November 2020
pledged of £20,000 stretch target from 217 pledges
Ray Pearce
Case Owner
I am a retired RAF and professional pilot and have lived peacefully in Norfolk for over 30 yrs. I feel a public responsibility to try and save Norfolk's countryside from irrecoverable damage.

Latest: Dec. 31, 2020

Only the Judiciary can make sense of the chaos!

On New Year's Eve the Government's mishandling of the offshore issue rolled on when the Secretary of State (SoS) for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) announced his consent for …

Read more

I strongly support the use of renewable wind power electricity which is a wonderful progression for the people of the UK.  BUT, the transmission systems, built for the profit of private companies who are exploiting this valuable resource, will severely damage the environment they were supposed to save.

On 1st July 2020, the Secretary of State for Business Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) approved the Norfolk Vanguard Offshore Wind Farm - the of first of many offshore wind farms that will connect to the electricity grid by digging long cable trenches onshore, and, building huge industrial substations throughout rural Norfolk.  

I am challenging the Secretary of State's decision, by means of a Judicial Review, on a point of law.  

Significantly, on 2nd October I received an Order from the High Court Judge.

This is a very important stage to have reached. The Judge has read the outline of my barristers’ case and has decided that, as the Claimant, my grounds are 'arguable'  in Court at a Judicial Review.

It now remains for me to complete my representation on behalf of the Norfolk people, and, the environment impacted by this decision; we have our day in Court.


The for profit company Vattenfall, which is wholly owned by the Swedish Government has been given approval to build an offshore wind farm, Norfolk Vanguard and connect it to the UK's electricity grid at a substation some 56km inland.  Norfolk Vanguard and it's sister project Norfolk Boreas, plan to build two substation extensions immediately adjacent to the quiet village of Necton, constructing 4 huge buildings; each building is 19 metres high, 110 metres long and 40 meters deep!  The project is a profitable venture for both Vattenfall and the Electricity Grid Supply Operator (EGSO), National Grid plc.

Norfolk Vanguard is only the first of many offshore wind farms proposed by private developers in the southern North Sea – many of them wishing to come ashore in Norfolk and dig their way across the county to an inland grid connection point.

There is a better way!  All of the wind farms's transmission systems can be integrated into an offshore network, connected to coastal substations, with no requirement to industrialise rural Norfolk at all.


Rural Norfolk is under threat from plans to impose lasting environmental damage through the construction of massive inland substations with hundreds of kilometres of cable trenching, taking many years to install. The national infrastructure plans are to bring renewable energy from offshore wind farms ashore, and to build huge industrial electricity substations to connect the imported electricity into the electricity grid. There has been no strategic coordination of these plans, with substation connection points being allocated to developers on a ‘first come, first served’ basis by National Grid plc.

Vattenfall has made use of permissive Government legislation by making two separate planning applications, for one windfarm area, in three conjoined blocks, and, despite both Norfolk Vanguard & Norfolk Boreas ‘projects’ using the same cable trench, and connecting to the same substation location at Necton. The separate applications mask the huge cumulative impacts on the landscape and rural vista from the building of two substation extensions at Necton, but the Government's decisions on each application are being made in isolation.

In response to the ensuing chaos, on 15th July 2020, the Government set up an 'urgent' Offshore Transmission Network Review (OTNR). However, despite the certain knowledge of the impending review announcement, the Secretary of State for BEIS still made the decision to approve the Norfolk Vanguard Wind Farm project, but importantly, contrary to the advice from the Planning Inspectorate. This is the first of many offshore wind farms to be approved with 4 more either in planning or awaiting approval.

Judging from the Terms of Reference of the OTNR, it appears likely that the Norfolk Vanguard project, the sister project Norfolk Boreas, and the Hornsea Three project  will be excluded from consideration and allowed to push ahead with their current onshore proposals. This is in spite of the imminent and likely conclusion of the OTNR in favour of an integrated offshore grid connections for all future wind farms. This is a destructive and unnecessary situation.


I have mounted a challenge to this threat, but I need your help by way of any amount of donation towards the £16,000  required to support my legal representation at a Judicial Review, in an attempt to save the onshore environment of Norfolk from irrecoverable damage.   I have the support of the  Necton Substation Action Group (NSAG) and have been endorsed and supported by lead members of the Norfolk parish movement for an Offshore Ring Main (ORM).  

I am the Claimant with permission from the High Court to proceed to a Judicial Review of the Norfolk Vanguard Development Consent Order (DCO) decision, which was made by the Secretary of State BEIS on 1st July 2020. 

On 12th August I applied to the Court of Administration and Planning for a Judicial Review to challenge the legality of  the Secretary of State for BEIS’s decision to approve the Norfolk Vanguard Wind Farm project.  An Order giving permission to proceed to a Judicial Review, to be heard in the High Court of Justice Queen's Bench Division Planning Court, was made by the Honourable Mrs Beverley Justice Lang DBE on 1st October.  The date for the hearing will be later this year.


If the Judicial Review is successful, then the Secretary of State’s decision to approve Norfolk Vanguard will be quashed and the Secretary of State will have to re-consider his decision.

It is hoped that such a  judgement would create a precedent, which would make it more difficult for the Secretary of State’s ability to approve the Hornsea Three project in December 2020, in its present onshore configuration.




I am an ordinary member of the public. I retired as a commercial pilot in 2015, and was formerly a Royal Air Force pilot with 22 years of service to my country. I intended to live peacefully with my family in beautiful rural Norfolk. However, since early in 2017, my family life has been adversely affected by the proposed and successive plans from multiple wind farm developers planning to dig long cable trenches across the county, and build massive industrial buildings in the countryside. The largest two of the cable trenches are planned to cross just 80 metres from my home but without any rationality between the different developers’ plans.

NSAG, mentioned above, is an unincorporated association that was established in order to scrutinise the grid connection plans made by the developer Vattenfall, with particular interest in the choice of grid connection location at Necton Substation. The Norfolk parish movement for an ORM, also mentioned above, is a group of almost 30 parish councils, representing communities that will be impacted by the substations, landfalls and cable routes for all the offshore wind farm proposals currently in or approaching the NSIP planning process. The movement has been actively calling on government to engage urgently in strategic planning of the massive expansion of offshore wind, and has been promoting the design alternative of an ORM within the NSIP process. Both NSAG and the Parish Councils participated in the consultations with Vattenfall and in the Vanguard planning examination. Several Parish Councils have also participated actively in the Hornsea Project Three and Norfolk Boreas public examinations.

To date, there are five such developments in various stages of consent or planning: Norfolk Vanguard (development consented), Hornsea 3 (awaiting consent), Norfolk Boreas (under examination), Dudgeon Extension (scoping report issued) and Sheringham Shoal Extension (scoping report issued). There are many more individual wind farms to follow.

The recommendation from the Planning Inspectorate after its examination of the application for Norfolk Vanguard was that the Secretary of State should not grant development consent to Vattenfall. The rational decision would have been to grant permission to build the Norfolk Vanguard wind farm and turbines offshore, whilst the OTN Review takes place (due to be reported by National Grid plc. in November 2020), and grant permission later for a connection to an integrated offshore transmission system, post the OTNR.

Norfolk Vanguard plans to dig a 56km cable trench across rural Norfolk and build two huge substation extensions, with four massive buildings on a hill dominating the landscape, adjacent to the rural village of Necton. Why when there is a better alternative!?

All of the offshore wind farms could connect to the electricity grid by way of an integrated offshore cable network known as the Offshore Ring Main (ORM). By way of a ‘reasonable alternative’, the ORM was introduced to the planning examination but it was disregarded as being irrelevant; this despite a similar integrated offshore network having been identified as having the potential to save £billions for the consumer during an industry study into offshore wind networks carried out by a National Grid consortium during 2015 (The Integrated Offshore Transmission Project (East) Report 2015).

The impact on the environment has not been considered holistically by either the Planning Inspectorate or the Government, with only the benefit to the Government’s net zero target having been given any due importance. Both Vattenfall and the Electricity System Operator (ESO) National Grid plc. have the potential to make £millions profits from the East Anglian windfarm projects with the Norfolk Boreas project planned to be built just one year after Norfolk Vanguard.

Vattenfall erroneously excluded several issues pertinent to both Norfolk Vanguard and Norfolk Boreas projects from Vanguard’s cumulative impacts assessment, deferring them to the Boreas examination, whilst claiming that the details available for Boreas were limited. However, during the ongoing Boreas examination, pressure has since been applied to the Planning Inspector by the developer, who now expects a positive outcome for Boreas due to the precedent set by the positive Vanguard decision. The two projects are inexorably linked and the cumulative impacts on the countryside, as a whole, have yet to be correctly and extensively examined.

There are other projects which will cause continued damage in Norfolk
– Ørsted's Hornsea 3 cables routeing from Weybourne to Swardeston (Norwich Main substation)
- Equinor's Dudgeon and Sheringham Shoal windfarm extensions from Weybourne (again) to Swardeston (again) despite these two windfarms being already connected to the grid at two completely different substations.

The further cumulative damage from Dudgeon and Sheringham Shoal have not been considered either. However, quashing the decision to complete the Norfolk Vanguard onshore transmission system will give the impetus for an integrated offshore design to be brought forward and save the onshore environment from the damage that all of these projects will cause.

The cumulative effects to the heritage and archaeology of rural Norfolk from both the Vanguard and Boreas projects (and Hornsea 3 if approved in December 2020) have not been taken into due account. For example: there is identifiable harm to the setting of a Grade I-listed Parish Church at Bradenham which was not given sufficient consideration or weighting by the Planning Inspector or the Secretary of State BEIS. Also, the Conservation Area surrounding the village of Cawston and its High Street will be severely impacted, not only by construction traffic from the Vanguard & Boreas development but also from the Hornsea 3 development, which is planned to be constructed at the same time. The additional traffic burden through this protected village is in the order of 222 HGV vehicles per day, for a prolonged 22-week construction phase. This is not acceptable!

We all have concerns for the global environment but there is a better, ‘greener’ option which has not been given sufficient emphasis and consideration by way of an integrated offshore transmission system or ORM.

Get updates about this case

Subscribe to receive email updates from the case owner on the latest news about the case.

Recent contributions

Be a promoter

Your share on Facebook could raise £26 for the case

I'll share on Facebook
Update 8

Ray Pearce

Dec. 31, 2020

Only the Judiciary can make sense of the chaos!

On New Year's Eve the Government's mishandling of the offshore issue rolled on when the Secretary of State (SoS) for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) announced his consent for the Hornsea Project 3 Wind Farm, despite the recommendation from the Planning Inspectorate not to do so.

You can read about the decision to consent the Hornsea 3 wind farm here:

Importantly, the consultation report made clear that:
"...the Examining Authority (ExA) recommends that the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (SoS) should not make an Order granting development consent for the Proposed Development.

The timing of the announcement is, in itself, questionable with the Global Pandemic, Brexit and seasonal holidays distracting people from other issues. 

This is the second recommendation in a row for an offshore wind farm where the SoS has ignored the ExA's findings to not consent the development ... Norfolk Vanguard being the first against which I have made my challenge. 

But, this second consent decision, flies in the face of the Offshore Transmission Network Review (OTNR) reported on just two weeks ago on 17th December.  The webinar slides for the OTNR Report are here:

The OTNR Report was made by the very same Government Department - BEIS - that compiled the SoS's 'Letter for Consent'.  

The imperative for why both Norfolk Vanguard and Hornsea 3 should be integrated into an OTN are clear in the OTNR Presentation at Page 16.

The following diagram from the OTNR presentation shows what East Anglia would look like in 2050 if the 'Status Quo' (radial transmission connections) were maintained (Note: a Key to the diagrams is at the end of the update): 

Please take note of the "Capex (Capital Expenditure) Costs" and "Landing points" - East Anglia is hidden under the number of radial connections.

Here is what could happen if "integration" were delayed to 2030:

A small reduction in "Costs" and a large reduction in "Landing Points."  However, there would still be a large impact on East Anglia from cable trenches, building of sub-stations and industrialisation.

Here is what the transmission of offshore electricity could look like if the Government took responsibility to ensure that all of the wind farms off the coast of East Anglia were integrated into an OTN starting in 2025:

That is: an 18% reduction in Capital Expenditure and a reduction in landing points from 105 to 30 by commencing the integration of offshore wind farms in 2025. From the diagrams this would include Norfolk Vanguard, Norfolk Boreas and Hornsea 3.  However, despite the certain knowledge that there is a better option, the SoS BEIS has still consented to the radial, point-to-point, Hornsea Project 3 connection.  This decision is contrary to the findings of his own Department and without sufficient regard for the Examination Authority's recommendation not to do so.

I fail to understand either the logic or so called reasoned arguments for which the SoS has based his decision to consent Norfolk Vanguard, and now the Hornsea Project 3 with the full and corroborated knowledge form the OTNR that, to do so, will cost more and damage the onshore environment!  Therefore, only the Judiciary can make sure that the SoS's reasons for making both decisions are legal and of sound judgement.  

The diagrams demonstrating how things would look by 2030 if an early adoption policy were implemented are even more compelling.

The following diagram shows the current plan to achieve the Government's target to achieve 40GW by 2030, but, using point-to-point connections:

The following is what could be expected if the current "consented" wind farms were integrated commencing in 2025 through the "Pathfinder:" project:

Importantly, these diagrams are produced by National Grid Electricity Supply Operator (NGESO) for the BEIS Department's own OTNR Report.  Therefore, as head of the BEIS Department, it is unfathomable as to why the SoS BEIS consented to Hornsea 3 after the details from OTNR webinar had been made public!?

Nevertheless, the Hornsea 3 consent decision has demonstrated the Government's intent.  Only the Judiciary, by way of Judicial Reviews, can stop the chaos that will ensue if the integrated option for offshore wind farms is not adopted forthwith.  

It is hoped that there will be a further Judicial Review challenge from the Wildlife Trust or RSPB against the Hornsea 3 consent decision.  However, it is now vitally important, with continued support for my Claim, that the Judiciary review the details for the Norfolk Vanguard consent decision on 19th and 20th January.

Please support my Claim in any way you can, for instance:

  1. Write to your MP with your concerns.
  2. Write to the Department for BEIS and question why the SoS is still consenting direct transmission connections from offshore to onshore.
  3. Tell others that the OTN is a better, less environmentally damaging, more cost effect and more efficient way of bringing offshore renewable energy onshore.
  4. Help me bring my Claim to Court with a donation.

My resolve for the New Year is to see the Judicial Review through; please help me if you can.

A Happy and Safe New Year to all!

Update 7

Ray Pearce

Dec. 18, 2020

The Tide for Offshore Wind has Turned

It has been a busy week for the Offshore Wind industry with the Government's Energy White Paper and separate webinars for the Offshore Transmission Network Review (OTNR) and Offshore Coordination Project (OCP); both projects have been mentioned in previous updates.

The Energy White Paper can be read here:

Page 80 contains details of welcome interest to our campaign to save Norfolk where the Government says:

The current regime for connecting offshore wind farms to the onshore grid has encouraged single point-to-point connections. Each project has a separate cable route and associated onshore infrastructure. We recognise the impact this is having on the coastal communities which host this infrastructure and will act quickly to take the necessary steps to address the situation, particularly given our ambition to have 40GW offshore wind by 2030. We have launched the Offshore Transmission Network Review to improve the delivery of transmission connections for offshore wind generation. This will consider the full impacts on affected communities, particularly on the east coast of England, while making sure the whole of the UK benefits from a more strategic approach.

The Paper goes on to mention the benefits of integration:

Initial outputs from the ESO, delivered as part of the review, have shown that taking a more coordinated approach could deliver up to £6 billion in consumer savings by 2050, significantly reducing environmental and social impacts on coastal communities. This analysis showed benefits not just for the east of England, but also Scotland and Wales.

The final paragraph is very welcome for us, as follows:

In order to start delivering these benefits, we will encourage projects already in development, where early opportunities for coordination exist, to consider becoming pathfinder projects. This will help inform the design of the enduring regime. We will consider changes to the current regulatory framework which enable developers to implement innovative approaches, including on anticipatory investment. For the 2030s and beyond, we will redesign the current regime to incentivise more extensive coordination and minimise environmental, social and economic costs. 

This last paragraph demonstrates the “political will” to make the change that we have been waiting for!  

There is now no reason for any offshore wind farm to push ahead with onshore infrastructure when the Government has enabled them not to do so.

With the above knowledge, it is now vitally important that the decision to  consent Norfolk Vanguard is 'quashed' at the Judicial Review substantive hearing - 19th and 20th January - and the developers, Vattenfall, are given the opportunity to opt into the offshore integration for both the Norfolk Vanguard and Norfolk Boreas projects.

Please share this information far and wide (link below) as people may not be aware that the Government have made policy to allow for the integrated offshore solution which will be better for Norfolk, the East of England and the whole of the UK.

Moving forward, I urgently need the final amount of funding to pay for my representation and Barristers in the High Court on 19th & 20th January.  I realise things are tight with the impact of the pandemic and Christmas being between now and the substantive hearing but any thing you can do to help with this vital issue, however small, is very welcome.

Thank you for your support, 

The Tide has Turned!

Update 6

Ray Pearce

Dec. 7, 2020

Onshore Damage From Offshore Windfarms

As the date for the substantive hearing for the Judicial Review (JR) agreed by all parties for the 19th & 20th January 2021 approaches, I wanted to share some images of the potential damage the Norfolk Countryside is facing.

By way of example, above is a Google Maps picture of the Hornsea Project One cable trench across Lincolnshire.  The digging started in 2016 and finished in 2019.  The land was "reinstated" according to the developer!  For scale, the trench is wider than a motorway when compared to the roads.

The above are the Hornsea Project One and Two substations at Killingholme in Lincolnshire.  These are HVAC substations which are half the size of the planned HVDC substation at Necton!

The Triton Knoll wind farm (875MW) is much smaller than Norfolk Vanguard (1200MW) and Boreas (1200MW) which comes ashore on the Lincolnshire coast.  The area just off the beach has been "reinstated".

The above Triton Knoll substation is at Bicker Fen.  Here is what the developer RWE says about the development:

"A major engineering challenge, the onshore cable route requires the installation of over 57km of undergrounded High Voltage AC cable, consisting of two circuits of three cables – a total of over 360km of cable. Significant infrastructure has been constructed to support the work, including a network of temporary construction compounds (TCCs), haul roads and access tracks, designed to minimise impacts on the local area. The onshore cable route stretches from Anderby Creek to a new Triton Knoll Onshore Substation at Bicker Fen in Lincolnshire ..." 

Note that the developer admits that this is "Significant Infrastructure".

Environmentally, offshore windfarms will have to be operational for many months, maybe years, in order to mitigate the climate impact from significant infrastructure, such as: digging hundreds of kilometres of cable trenches; manufacturing hundreds of thousands of tonnes of copper, steel, plastic and concrete; and thousands of journeys by diesel powered plant and support vehicles. Therefore, building the proposed onshore infrastructure would actually contribute, more immediately, to the climate’s “point of no return, exacerbated by the loss of carbon-absorbing agriculture, hedgerows, trees and wildlife habitat.

Norfolk is facing 5 off these industrial developments but there is no need.

The Government’s urgent Offshore Transmission Network Review – OTNR, announced on 15th July, identifies £6 billion of savings for the UK consumer by the integration of offshore supplies. The Offshore Transmission Network, often referred to as the Offshore Ring Main, is fast becoming a reality and where any sustainable growth is placed. The OTNR has established that:
“A targeted innovation strategy in the UK, along with support for early commercial use, could help support this progression and establish the UK as a world leader in offshore grids.”

There will be a webinar update for Offshore Transmission Network Review, on 17th December 10am to 12 noon, which you can listen to by registering here (tickets are free!): 

There is still over a month to go to the substantive hearing for the Judicial Review (JR) of the Norfolk Vanguard decision but I have only raised half of the money I need to pay for my legal representation at the ow two day hearing, which has doubled the amount  of money for the hearing! 

If you know of anybody in your circle of friends who can help me with the funding by making a donation, please share the link through your social media.

Thank you for your interest and support.

Update 5

Ray Pearce

Nov. 24, 2020

Suffolk Enters the Fray

The National Infrastructure consultations for the next set of windfarm developments to impact East Anglia commenced in Suffolk on 6th October.   The National Infrastructure Planning Examinations for the East Anglia One North & East Anglia Two Windfarm Projects will run consecutively.  

You can view the relevant consultations here:

The issues are the same as we experienced in Norfolk for the Norfolk Vanguard, Norfolk Boreas and Hornsea Project 3 consultations.  That is, amongst the many issues: loss of habitat, damage to the environment, impacts on wildlife, adverse impacts on local people and businesses, impact on heritage, loss of archeology, impact on tourism, on and on ... !  Of note, National Grid plc.are still absent from the proceedings for the National Infrastructure developments which are responsible for and have brought about.

However, I recommend to anybody wondering about how all these issues will impact people's lives, to watch the video that the Suffolk Energy Action Solutions - SEAS - group have made.  These are real people dealing with the real world issues that offshore wind development is presenting them with.  The video is here:

Whilst I am the Claimant for the Judicial Review (JR) of the Norfolk Vanguard Windfarm consent, it is heartening to know that I am not a lone voice against the severe impact offshore wind farms will have on the onshore environment where we all live.

There are many challenges ahead, not in the least combatting the recent 'Detailed Grounds for the Defence and Resistance' served by the Defendant (SofS BEIS) and Interested Party (Norfolk Vanguard Ltd.) which has taken me weeks with my lawyers to review, but, with your continued support, I remain undaunted.

Please share the link by email and on social media (FaceBook, Twitter, Instagram etc.), including the updates,  so that the message is distributed far and wide throughout the UK.  The message is not only mine but that of many people from Norfolk and Suffolk, indeed throughout East Anglia, with the same or similar concerns in order to promote a holistic review of offshore wind power electricity generation for the benefit of people and the environment.

Update 4

Ray Pearce

Nov. 1, 2020

Sunday Telegraph Business Article - 1st November 2020

Today, Sunday 1st November 2020, there is an article in the Sunday Telegraph Business news section titled:

The Power Cable Row that Lies Beneath a Shift to Offshore Wind ...

You can read the article here:

"Residents in Norfolk claim their way of life is under threat in the name of clean energy ..."

This is a break through in the effort to spread the word and bring the issue from so called "green' developments, that in reality cause damage to the environment, to the nation's attention.

It is not just rural Norfolk that is under threat, similar developments off the Suffolk coast, also with radial transmission systems being developed by Scottish Power, will have equally damaging consequences for the environment.  I fully support the people of Suffolk in the own campaign to stop this folly and wish them the very best with their submissions to the planning examination for East Anglia One North.

You can read about the East Anglia One North Infrastructure Planning Examination here:

The main point is that the whole of East Anglia will be criss crossed by successive trenches and power cables.  There is a solution - the integrated 'Offshore Transmission Network'.

Please lobby your MPs to contribute to the debate in order that there is a holistic review of Offshore Wind before it is too late.

Please share my campaign to bring the Judicial Review of the first of the East Anglian Wind Farms - Norfolk Vanguard - to a substantive hearing in the High Court.

Thank you for your support.

Update 3

Ray Pearce

Oct. 12, 2020

Damaging the Environment from Happisburgh to Necton

Norfolk is rich in archeology and ancient history.  

Archaeological excavations on Happisburgh Beach have revealed that ancient humans lived in Britain more than 800,000 years ago, making them the earliest northern Europeans.

The landfall site for the Norfolk Vanguard cable route is Happisburgh on the North East Coast of Norfolk. You can read about this community here:

Some of the earliest recordings of Necton are mentioned in the Domesday Book of 1086.  Here, it is recorded as “Nechetuna” in the Hundred of South Greenhoe, and was under the control of Ralf of Tosny, otherwise known as Raoul De Toeny.

The site for the huge substation for Norfolk Vanguard and its sister project Norfolk Boreas is adjacent to the village of Necton. You can read about this community here:

Norfolk's archeology is under threat from multiple cable trenches planned to be dug across the County.

In between these two Norfolk communities will be a cable trench 60km long, 45m wide and around 2m deep similar to the above photograph but much wider.  Farmers will suffer similar damage from Happisburgh to Necton 60km away.

After the cables have been buried the developers claim the land will be re-established.  The following photographs are of a cable trenche that has been "re-established"!!

The claim that the environment is not damaged by cable trenching is just not true!

Help me to bring about a change and STOP THE DAMAGE FROM CABLE TENCHES.

If you know a Norfolk farmer share these pictures with them and ask them to PLEDGE TO SAVE THE NORFOLK COUNTRYSIDE

Update 2

Ray Pearce

Oct. 12, 2020

The Damage from Cable Trenches

Windfarm Developers claim that the impact from the proposed cable trenches is low. and that they can mitigate any damage.  Meanwhile, farmers have made clear that there will be lasting cumulative impacts from disturbing millions of tonnes of fertile earth, making it unusable for decades as arable land due to the destruction of microbiology and soil structures that have taken centuries to establish.  The loss of ancient hedgerows and archeology will also be an impact.  As will the unquantified heating and magnetic field effects from the huge capacity cables.

There will be a loss of carbon absorption from the plant life removed by the trenching whilst tonnes of Carbon Dioxide will be released into the atmosphere from the smelting of copper for the cables, aluminium for the cable screening, plastics for the cable insulation, never mind the fossil fuel consumed by huge trenching machinery.  The substation buildings, each the size of the pitch at Wembley Stadium, will be made of reinforced concrete creating more atmospheric pollution further contributing to Climate Change and well before the turbines start producing renewable energy.

The cables will be pulled through industrial plastic cable ducts which will be left in the ground after the life of the windfarm they serve has expired (25 years); this pollution of the Norfolk countryside will remain for centuries to come. Meanwhile, you and I are squashing plastic bottles and making sure we recycle as much plastic as possible to avoid plastics going to landfill.

There is a better way by integrating the renewable energy wind farms together, offshore, whilst leaving the beautiful Norfolk countryside be.

Please Pledge and Share to help me at least challenge the cumulative impacts of the Norfolk Vanguard Wind Farm at a Judicial Review.

Update 1

Ray Pearce

Oct. 8, 2020

Permission Granted for Challenge to Norfolk Vanguard Windfarm

Hello and welcome to the campaign for justice to help save the Norfolk Countryside from unnecessary damage.  If you haven't done so yet, please read the details on the main campaign page, then 'Pledge & Share'  if you would like to help fund the Judicial Review.

If you have pledged to the fund, thank you for your support, I am grateful for each and every pledge. Also, please continue to 'Share' the link via social media:

As you know, I am raising funds to support the very best Legal Representation I can in order to have a Judicial Review of the Secretary of State for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy's (BEIS's) decision to approve the Norfolk Vanguard Windfarm.

I have been asked about the Legal Representation your pledges will support. Please see the link below for the' Press Release' from my representatives at Francis Taylor Building Chambers who will argue the case in the High Court.

I hope you can help me raise the funds to see the Judicial Review through.

Thank you for reading and for any further support you can give.

Get updates about this case

Subscribe to receive email updates from the case owner on the latest news about the case.

    There are no public comments on this case page.