East Anglia planned pylons

[joebassman]

What are people's view of the pylons that are planned to be erected through East Anglia by the national grid to supply London?

Some of the pylons would go through the farm across the road from where I live, which the farmer is none to pleased about as they would go right behind his house.

Would an offshore alternative, that some are proposing, be a viable option?

Is the plan likely to happen?
I read that 13 MPs are opposing the planned construction of the pylons.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Would an offshore alternative, that some are proposing, be a viable option?

Probably more expensive and less easy to service. BTW, where are these latest pylons proposed to run to/from?

 

[joebassman]

Probably more expensive and less easy to service. BTW, where are these latest pylons proposed to run to/from?

There's an interactive map here. It would run from Norwich to near Grays.

Experience

experience.arcgis.com

 

[Bevan Price]

Personally, I think that pylons ruin rural areas, turning parts into industrial landscapes. Worse, some overhead power lines seem to get damaged every time UK has a major storm with high winds. Although the initial capital cost may be higher, I think it would be better if all electricity transmission lines were underground.

However, I suspect our "wonderful" government will ignore the objections and allow National Grid to erect 100+ miles of pylons & wires.

 

[Magdalia]

The National Grid already has various high voltage pylon lines in East Anglia, including the lines out of Sizewell nuclear power station.

Having pylon lines across East Anglia is not a new thing.

The proposed new pylon line is for transmission from offshore wind farms in the North Sea to London.

The line from Sizewell and the proposed new line meet at the existing Bramford sub-station near Ipswich.

The proposed new line is an inevitable consequence of the switch from fossil fuels to renewable sources for generating electricity.

Sixty years ago National Grid built high voltage pylon lines from the big baseload coal fired power stations in the Aire and Trent Valleys, and from the new nuclear power stations. Now they need to do the same from the offshore wind farms.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Personally, I think that pylons ruin rural areas, turning parts into industrial landscapes. Worse, some overhead power lines seem to get damaged every time UK has a major storm with high winds. Although the initial capital cost may be higher, I think it would be better if all electricity transmission lines were underground.

However, I suspect our "wonderful" government will ignore the objections and allow National Grid to erect 100+ miles of pylons & wires.

I think pylons add to the scenery of the countryside, although I understand if I'm in the minority there.

I think it'd be impractical and expensive to put all high voltage power lines underground, and that would likely increase power costs for everyone.

 

[Ediswan]

Personally, I think that pylons ruin rural areas, turning parts into industrial landscapes.

Much of the area concerned is already industrialised, the agricultural industry.

 

[High Dyke]

Personally I don't know why people dislike pylons. A similar objection has been raised in Lincolnshire. So, yes they probably could be made to blend into the landscape better, but would people prefer to see these structures or rather tolerate disruption to agricultural land when underground cables are installed?

I grew up with a pylon about 400 yards from my childhood home. Where I live now there's a large pylon towering over the houses behind mine.

Lincolnshire pylons: Campaigners criticise National Grid plan

Opponents vow to fight proposals to build a network of pylons through the Lincolnshire countryside.

www.bbc.co.uk

Campaigners have branded plans to build a pylon network across Lincolnshire as "disheartening" and "disrespectful".

National Grid said the structures were needed to transport electricity 87 miles (140km) between Grimsby and Walpole in Norfolk.

 

[tom1649]

Not many people would want pylons appearing near to where they live. However, there's a need to see the bigger picture. Any new transmission route adds to the resilience of the grid as a whole, as it's not just about moving electricity from A to B. Given the choice between more pylons and more blackouts, then many would choose the former when it came down to the wire.

 

[Jan Mayen]

How much extra would my electricity cost if new transmission routed were put underground. Anyone know, please?

 

[nlogax]

I think pylons add to the scenery of the countryside, although I understand if I'm in the minority there.

I think it'd be impractical and expensive to put all high voltage power lines underground, and that would likely increase power costs for everyone.

I agree with you though it's definitely a minority viewpoint.

It may be more acceptable to many if National Grid were to deploy their new T-pylon series at new sites. Less expensive than underground cabling or sending via an offshore route. I think these really look quite elegant.

 

[DarloRich]

Would an offshore alternative, that some are proposing, be a viable option?

no - at least not at a reasonable cost

Is the plan likely to happen?

yes - if they can build pylons through the vale of York despite VEHEMENT protests by solid old school tory farmer types in North Yorkshire they can do so in less attractive East Anglia.

 

[GusB]

There was a similar hoo-ha when they were building the Beauly to Denny connection. I was on holiday near one of the areas where the existing pylons were being replaced by the taller ones. At first the difference was quite stark because old and new were side by side; however, a few years on, the old ones have gone and I wouldn't have known any better if I hadn't seen their construction.

More recently there was a campaign to prevent a route through Aberdeenshire. Funnily enough, the local MP (and energy minister) has just been moved from his post after opposing construction in his own constituency!

UK minister for building pylons loses role after campaigning against them

Andrew Bowie wrote last year that concerns among his constituents about new pylons were ‘a priority’

www.theguardian.com

The UK minister responsible for the building of new pylons has been quietly reshuffled after it emerged he had campaigned against the structures in his own constituency.

The energy minister Andrew Bowie had been in charge of energy networks, including building pylons, since he took up his post in February 2023.

In July he wrote on the blog he runs for his constituents in West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine that concerns among locals about new pylons were “a priority of mine”. He met local anti-pylon campaigners on multiple occasions.

In December the brief was passed to the climate minister Graham Stuart. No announcement was made but a change has been made on the government website.


A freedom of information request by Politico found that Bowie raised potential conflicts of interest under the ministerial code, recording “a large number of energy companies and organisations working in or on behalf of the energy sector within the minister’s constituency and surrounding constituencies”.

 

[dangie]

How much extra would my electricity cost if new transmission routed were put underground. Anyone know, please?

This won't give a figure, but it might say why high voltage cables are not generally buried underground.

https://www.nationalgrid.com/sites/default/files/documents/39111-Undergrounding_high_voltage_electricity_transmission_lines_The_technical_issues_INT.pdf

 

[HSTEd]

Burying the cables necessary for the projected increases in electricity consumption would be enormously expensive, and in many ways more fraught than overhead lines.

At least the latter can jump over buried obstacles, whereas underground cables have to interact with literally everything in the way.

As for off shore, it ends up being a good way to spend an awful lot of money.

 

[dosxuk]

According to the plans, a significant stretch of the route will be buried where it goes around the picturesque "constable country" area south of Ipswich.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

How much extra would my electricity cost if new transmission routed were put underground. Anyone know, please?

My understanding is that undergrounding high voltage cables costs ~ ten times the cost of overhead pylons.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I think pylons add to the scenery of the countryside, although I understand if I'm in the minority there.

I think it'd be impractical and expensive to put all high voltage power lines underground, and that would likely increase power costs for everyone.

I agree with your view!

 

[joebassman]

Not many people would want pylons appearing near to where they live. However, there's a need to see the bigger picture. Any new transmission route adds to the resilience of the grid as a whole, as it's not just about moving electricity from A to B. Given the choice between more pylons and more blackouts, then many would choose the former when it came down to the wire.

I can see your point. I think from what I've heard is that a lot of local people's complaint is that the pylons are for London so they feel that they are gaining no benefit yet have to pay the cost. A bit like what happened with the reservoirs in Wales in the 60s to supply Liverpool.

Although that is only looking at the small picture. If the cables do mean less use of fossil fuel then they are gaining a benefit in enviromental terms.

Personally I feel it is what it is and I guess they have to go somewhere so no point acting as a NIMBY.

Burying the cables necessary for the projected increases in electricity consumption would be enormously expensive, and in many ways more fraught than overhead lines.

At least the latter can jump over buried obstacles, whereas underground cables have to interact with literally everything in the way.

As for off shore, it ends up being a good way to spend an awful lot of money.

Although they are burying some of the cable underground at Dedham vale as this is considered a AONB.

 

[nw1]

Out of curiosity: Is this line to link an offshore wind farm with London, or something else?

East Anglia has plenty of wide open space, I doubt it would make that much difference in the scheme of things however I can understand someone objecting if they go right by their house. However I agree with others that the bigger picture is important.

I don't think pylons are that unpleasant anyway. In places they literally go right over the South Downs (for example) and I've never had a problem with them, because they've always been there. Might help that I've always lived within less than 5 miles from a line of 400kv pylons (the big ones), throughout my life, so I'm used to them being part of the rural landscape.

 

[joebassman]

Out of curiosity: Is this line to link an offshore wind farm with London, or something else?

East Anglia has plenty of wide open space, I doubt it would make that much difference in the scheme of things however I can understand someone objecting if they go right by their house. However I agree with others that the bigger picture is important.

I don't think pylons are that unpleasant anyway. In places they literally go right over the South Downs (for example) and I've never had a problem with them, because they've always been there. Might help that I've always lived within less than 5 miles of a line of 400kv pylons (the big ones), throughout my life, so I'm used to them being part of the rural landscape.

Yes, I believe the line is to link the offshore wind farm with London. Fortunately, they won't cause so much issue for my house as they are on the other side behind the farm but we are friends with the farmer across the road and he said the pylons will go right past his kitchen window and across his land.

There are trees between so we won't really see them from our house, but I do feel sympathy for the farmer and the pylons are going to cut through several villages, I believe.

This petition reckons an offshore grid would cost £5bil whilst the pylons proposal would cost £7bil.

In the East of England this saves £2billion versus the current piecemeal approach & reduces overall infrastructure by 50%.​

The Dutch, the Danes and the Irish are already doing it. ‘Plug and play’ is better for wind farm developers, too: they plug straight into an offshore island, which in turn connects into a sub-sea grid.

Technical - Pylons East Anglia

pylonseastanglia.co.uk

 

[PTR 444]

Surely pylons have the advantage over other fixed infrastructure that they can turn 90 degrees to avoid sensitive areas and NIMBYs. If there were so many objections in one particular area, couldn’t an alternative route be drawn up?

 

[nw1]

Surely pylons have the advantage over other fixed infrastructure that they can turn 90 degrees to avoid sensitive areas and NIMBYs. If there were so many objections in one particular area, couldn’t an alternative route be drawn up?

Indeed, it would, at a guess, be possible to design the line so it doesn't get too close to any significantly-sized villages, for example - given that East Anglia is by all accounts fairly sparsely populated.

 

[swt_passenger]

Do offshore wind farms not get connected into the higher voltage levels of the grid? Surely they just feed the total national load, and it’s wrong to argue against this on the basis it’s ’just for London‘?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Personally, I think that pylons ruin rural areas, turning parts into industrial landscapes. Worse, some overhead power lines seem to get damaged every time UK has a major storm with high winds. Although the initial capital cost may be higher, I think it would be better if all electricity transmission lines were underground.

Damage to 132kV and above pylon routes in storms is extremely rare. If your referring to 11kV rural wooden pole routes thats a fair comment. These will be 400kV steel pylon routes

However, I suspect our "wonderful" government will ignore the objections and allow National Grid to erect 100+ miles of pylons & wires.

Maybe but only after years of planning enquiries and endless environmental reports in other European countries they just get built whether you like it or not at least here there is a process that allows some influence over routing

 

[dangie]

The world (not just the UK) uses pylons. There has to be good reasons for it. My link given back in Post #14 explains more.

 

[Lost property]

I think the aesthetics of pylons would be a welcome addition to what is one of the most bleak, depressing and desolate areas of the UK.

I have no fond memories, and certainly in winter, of East Anglia, only to be leaving the area.

 

[nw1]

Maybe but only after years of planning enquiries and endless environmental reports in other European countries they just get built whether you like it or not at least here there is a process that allows some influence over routing

I have noticed in the more upland areas of France, pylons have a tendency to simply march up steep mountainsides rather than go round them, though that could simply be because the mountains are higher and more extensive so it's hard to go round them. Or they are originating from a hydro-electric station, which by their nature are more likely to be found in upland areas.

 

[joebassman]

Could they not at least paint the pylons green to help them blend in a little?

Although for some reason, as a kid, I always felt a certain amount of mystique looking up at pylons.

Maybe the intertwining patterns.

 

[PTR 444]

Just curious, will they be using the new style T-pylons for this route?