Hinkley Point C’s ‘fish disco’ actually works, researchers find

An underwater “fish disco” at Britain’s newest nuclear power station has been mocked as an example of the huge cost and bureaucracy involved with building things in the UK.But at least the new system, designed to preserve fish species, actually works.EDF, the developer behind Hinkley Point C plant in Somerset, on Tuesday said trials of the acoustic fish deterrent – underwater speakers that blast out sound to keep fish away, dubbed the “fish disco” – found it was “highly effective”.Tests at sea and in laboratory tanks by scientists at Swansea University showed that only a single tagged twait shad came within 98 feet of the device when it was switched on, compared to 14 when it was off.This suggested “an effectiveness of more than 90pc”, EDF said, although further trials will be carried out later this year.The fish disco forms part of £700m of fish protection measures planned for the nuclear power plant, which EDF said gave the site more marine conservation capability than any comparable site in the world.The findings by Swansea University were welcomed by activists, who said the results proved that ministers should not water down environmental standards for nuclear power.This week, a cross-party group of some 60 backbench MPs, including more than 30 from the Labour benches, joined nature charities to warn that any relaxation of standards would trigger “unnecessary and hugely damaging environmental regression”.However, they are being opposed by pro-growth campaigners and industry experts who have pointed to a government review that found nuclear developers faced a “fragmented” regulatory system that often imposed “disproportionate” demands with little regard to costs or trade-offs.Hinkley’s cooling pipes will suck in around 132,000 litres of water per second from the Severn Estuary to cool the plant’s two nuclear reactors once they are operational.According to the Environment Agency, this risks putting more than four million fish at risk of being killed. These include Atlantic salmon, herring, European sea bass and European eels, which are critically endangered.To mitigate the plant’s impact, EDF said it had spent £700m on fish protection measures, including a special intake pipe mouth costing £500m, a fish recovery and return system for £150m and an “acoustic fish deterrent” costing another £50m.The French state-owned energy giant said the effectiveness of these measures meant it should not have to also create a 900-acre salt-marsh nearby.Critics of the fish protection measures at Hinkley have branded them “regulatory madness”, arguing they have added huge costs and delays to the project for disproportionately small benefits.A review by the economist John Fingleton found the fish protection measures would save “0.083 salmon per year” along with “0.028 sea trout, six river lamprey, 18 Allis shad, and 528 twaite shad”.Sam Richards, of pro-growth campaign group Britain Remade, said: “Blowing £700m on fish protection for Hinkley Point C, including the now-legendary ‘fish disco’, is indefensible in the extreme.“This is just the latest piece of research that highlights the huge costs and delays Britain’s planning system and habit regulations foist on major infrastructure projects, for little gain.”Mr Richards also pointed to findings by Swansea University that salmon identified as at risk in fact avoid the Hinkley site.Salmon migrating to the Atlantic generally used the main channel “well away from Hinkley Point C”, researchers said. In two years, only two tagged salmon were detected within a kilometre of the intake pipes.Mr Richards said: “After years of delay and hundreds of millions spent, we’re told fish barely go near the intakes at Hinkley anyway. This isn’t environmentalism, it’s regulatory madness.”However, Matt Browne, of the Wildlife Trusts, defended the measures and accused opponents of misrepresenting the number of fish saved.Mr Browne said: “We are happy with the acoustic fish deterrent, combined with the other two measures.“What we would like to see is for EDF to stop belly-aching. This is a hugely important stretch of water for fish, including protected species, and yet there have been persistent suggestions that somehow this is all unnecessary.”Some 50,000 endangered eels alone were at risk of being killed each year without the measures, Mr Browne said.He added: “We say this is good news – it is effective mitigation and an example of the rules working as they should do.”Ministers are expected to set out plans for simplifying nuclear regulations in the coming weeks.