In short, yes - because this would be incredibly hard to unpick. Looking at the elements they propose building early (presumably through a combination of permitted development and TCPA applications) it may still be possible to have an HVDC underground alternative *but* that would require a delay of the wider scheme until 2034, which seems unlikely given the acceleration of these components.
In short, yes - because this would be incredibly hard to unpick. Looking at the elements they propose building early (presumably through a combination of permitted development and TCPA applications) it may still be possible to have an HVDC underground alternative *but* that would require a delay of the wider scheme until 2034, which seems unlikely given the acceleration of these components.
In short, yes - because this would be incredibly hard to unpick. Looking at the elements they propose building early (presumably through a combination of permitted development and TCPA applications) it may still be possible to have an HVDC underground alternative *but* that would require a delay of the wider scheme until 2034, which seems unlikely given the acceleration of these components.
It’s starting to feel like more than just pre-determination of the solution, but actively eliminating any alternatives