A PIPELINE of power would cost £1.2 billion, National Grid claim, making pylons from Hinkley Point their preferred option.

More information came out of a meeting with the power giant in Bridgwater on Tuesday, with the decision-making Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) acting as peacekeeper.

Peter Bryant, senior project manager of National Grid, admitted "something had been missed down the line" during the first phase of public consultation on connecting the proposed Hinkley Point C power station to Seabank in Avonmouth, Bristol. He expected planning permission to be sought from the IPC in 2012 at the earliest.

But the audience challenged the claim that four undersea cables to bridge the 37-mile gap would cost £1.2 billion, compared to 47-metre high pylons costing £190 million.

Fiona Torrens-Spence of No Moor Pylons called the cost "ridiculous" and pointed out that a similar project in the Netherlands cost less than 550 million euros (£473 million). She said: "We really would like to see some independent costs of the undersea route. We don't think the figures you've shown stack up."

Ian Liddell-Grainger, Bridgwater MP, said he spoke on behalf of Dr Liam Fox, MP for North Somerset and the new defence secretary. He said: "He feels strongly that the consultation has been inadequate and the undersea option needs more work and the IPC needs to do more information gathering."

On a personal note, he asked what would happen to the existing three power lines coming out of the electricity-producing Hinkley Point B and the major substation at Westonzoyland Road if power was transmitted undersea.

A National Grid representative answered that if that happened, four cables would connect to four convertor stations at the power plant. These stations would be the size of a DIY store. The substation would remain unchanged.

Peter Gregory of Mark Parish Council challenged National Grid to admit it failed to meet community standards in consultation so far, that the next round of consultation would not just be presentation, and that all the options would be tested for feasibility, affordability and safety.

Mr Bryant answered yes three times in return and said: "Consultation is a two-way dialogue. Unfortunately we are left with making the difficult decision, a balance of the environmental, engineering, community and economic. But what it's not is the X-Factor – it's not a vote."

But not everyone in the audience was against National Grid's plans. One man, who did not want to be named, said: "I think National Grid are exceedingly patient and some people should be ashamed of their behaviour. I think the only solution is overhead. People should get over it."

Doug Bamsey, corporate director of Sedgemoor District Council, said colleagues would be speaking to the Department of Energy and Climate Change today to urge the Government to issue good guidance so that details of electricity transmission became the heart of debate at the decision-making level, and not policy.

No end date for consultation was given, and the IPC said it was at the discretion of National Grid as to when they thought enough had been done.

Ian Gambles, director of operations for the IPC and chairman of the meeting, made clear that the independent quango was impartial and would only consider the plan when it came before its commissioners.

He described the meeting as effective and said: "People came with strong feelings on the proposals and we were able to explain the IPC's process. I think National Grid were able to answer some questions and will have to take some away, reflect and go on with their consultation. We are glad to give the community a chance to engage with National Grid."