Energy and Climate Change CommitteeSupplementary written evidence submitted by Simon Bird, The Bristol Port Company

Proposed Severn Barrage

I gave evidence to your Committee on 10 January in response to the current investigation regarding the proposal by Hafren Power to construct the Barrage across the Severn. I listened carefully to the previous two sessions, in particular the evidence given by Peter Hain MP.

Mr Hain in his evidence stated that there had been consultation between Hafren Power and Bristol Port and that he could not understand why Bristol Port was so against the proposal, as shipping would not be affected by any Barrage. Mr Hain was incorrect in the points he made regarding Bristol Port, namely there had been no consultation, except for one brief meeting in early September, with his wife representing Hafren. No details on the Barrage proposal were tabled at that meeting or since. The only information regarding the proposed Barrage is what we have seen as part of the evidence submitted by Hafren Power to your Committee.

Yesterday, I met with Mr Tony Pryor, CEO of Hafren Power. He, along with his colleagues, is due to give evidence to the Committee next Wednesday. We agreed not to release the minutes of our discussion, but I would wish to make clear to you, and through you to the members of your Committee, that Bristol Port remains deeply concerned with the Hafren proposal and the impact it will have on the environment and this business. No details were tabled at the meeting; instead Mr Pryor suggested far-fetched “solutions” which he contended would enable the Port to have the same depth of water for shipping as we currently enjoy. I urge your Committee to question the viability and consequences of all such claims and not to be duped by fabrication and fantasy. Fundamental questions remain; in particular:

1.The loss of water depth upstream from a Barrage.

2.Level of increased sedimentation, resulting in further loss of water depth and the increased dredge requirement.

3.Lack of any detail regarding locks, location, dimensions, operational management and costs. It has been claimed the locks will only delay vessels by 45 minutes; there is no evidence to support this.

4.Job losses in Bristol and the South-West of England, against claims of 50,000 new jobs associated with a Barrage construction.

5.Why Hafren thinks the UK economy can withstand the loss of one of its few nationally significant deep water ports at Bristol.

I wish to put on record that the continuing statements made by Peter Hain and Hafren Power regarding a proposed Barrage has a destabilising effect on this business, as we seek to develop projects which are already consented and planned (two biomass power stations for Eon and Helius respectively and a Deep Sea Container Terminal), as well as with our existing customer base.

We believe the energy in the Severn Estuary is able to be harnessed by a number of alternative technologies, some of which are further advanced than the Hafren proposal, which will be far less damaging environmentally or economically. I would urge your Committee to investigate the alternative schemes and to press Hafren Power to make available all the details with the evidence of its Barrage proposal.

Yours sincerely

Simon A Bird
Chief Executive

January2013