Would it be worth the extra billion?
£1.9 BILLION. That's the cost of putting cables under the Bristol Channel, as revealed this week by National Grid.
The firm, which has faced fierce opposition to its plans for 37 miles of 400kv pylons from Hinkley Point to Avonmouth, published the figure after coming under pressure from the region's MPs.
-

It is substantially more than the £656 million cost of building pylons overland, which would sit in one of two corridors already chosen by the company.
Although 25 towns and villages in North Somerset would be affected, Nailsea is one of the most vulnerable, with some houses already within spitting distance of 132kv cables.
Mother-of-two Fiona Erleigh, 45, of Kingshill, spokesman for newly founded Save Nailsea West, exclusively told the Mercury: "We are in a unique and unenviable position living under the existing lines in west Nailsea.
"Some homes here have bedrooms that are less than five metres from pylons.
"It's far too close when you can hear lines crackle and hum."
Mrs Erleigh's group has been set up to fight alongside the older Save Our Valley group, which has faced accusations of only trying to defend Corridor 2, thereby forcing the pylons on the people of west Nailsea.
She said: "We'd prefer National Grid bury power lines undersea or underground, so everyone can enjoy the farmland and fragile nature of Nailsea Moor, which is home to a variety of wildlife including bats and others.
"We have been offered a dreadful choice by National Grid. None of us would vote for lines in unblemished Corridor 2, but we don't want the new double-height pylons in Corridor 1 either."
There is an offer on the table that would see, for an extra £42 million, the existing cables in Corridor 1 moved away from houses.
Mrs Erleigh continued: "We feel cornered into voting for Corridor 1 in the hope that National Grid and Western Power can be urged to move the existing lines away from our homes."
MP John Penrose, whose Weston constituency covers Congresbury, has campaigned for the release of the undersea costs for more transparency.
Mr Penrose said: "I am delighted that National Grid has started to publish this data.
"Local people are rightly concerned about the environmental impact of these new pylons so we need to make sure that every option has been considered properly.
"Now that some of the relevant data has been provided, people can compare the pros and cons of each route and how the power company came up with the shortlist."
For more information email SaveNailseaWest@hotmail.co.uk.
A MARCH is taking place in Yatton on Saturday in protest against pylons being installed in the village.
Campaign group Yatton Against Pylon wants to raise awareness of National Grid's intentions.
The march takes place at 10am from Horsecastle Chapel to Yatton precinct, where leaflets giving information on the proposals will be given out.







4 Comments
by Francis Cousins, Wrington
Friday, December 25 2009, 10:54PM
“Mary Ashbee, Mark Martin, Greta Lewis, Les Fido.
Yatton needs you now.”
by Richard Croucher, Yatton
Sunday, December 20 2009, 7:01PM
“There is another better option. Use superconductor cables under the ground as is being done in the USA right now. 3 times more efficient than overhead so will pay for themselves. No more intrusive to install than a gas main so can go under the M5 embankment.
They say they have costings for the overhead route but I have seen no one surveying our local fields to see how difficult it will be to erect the 153ft towers. How much do they weigh. Do they realize they will need to build a road and bridges over all the rhymes just to get their machinery on site.”
by AJ, Tickenham
Sunday, December 20 2009, 10:25AM
“Yes it's small beer compared to many similar capital projects, it's a long term investment so this is the way the cost should be viewed. If it were to be pylons then we would be left with the visual damage for ever.
I still think the M5 central reservation route should be considered.”
by Durham Bubb, Clevedon
Saturday, December 19 2009, 12:08PM
“Yes of course its worth it. I am not directly affected by this proposal, but we have to remember that overland pylons are both an eyesore, and are extremly susceptable to weather. Were as the undersea route is not, plus the undersea route is bound to be cheaper to maintain. Also I suspect that they are boud to be heavily loading the undersea price, even if they were not there is the cost to human life of the health risks, the loss in value of effected properties for which presumably no compensation would be paid. And finally even if this price is correct its just a matter of an extra £1.77 per person taking the country as a whole to pay for the undersea route. In my opinion the land route is an absolute no starter.”