Representation by Isabel Cross
- Date submitted
- 11 March 2022
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I object to the Sunnica application and how it will impact my community Scale: This solar/industrial plant is ridiculously large, covering approx. 2,500 acres greenfield and prime food-producing land and blanketing several villages. • It will have significant impact on local communities when compared to multiple smaller sites across the country. • This location already has several renewable energy schemes operational or granted within a 15mile radius generating 450MGW, it is not appropriate to burden these communities further. • Spreading the scheme in-between villages increases need for extensive cabling and (<35miles) perimeter fencing amplifying the impact on the greatest number of people and settlements. • Every route in/out of some villages will be impaired. • Informal routes, paths and byways and recreation will be denigrated. Landscape will be transformed from traditional open agricultural area with visual connectivity to neighbouring villages to industrialised spaces dissecting our communities from each other. It could facilitate permanent land classification change at project end, altering landscape and cultural heritage of the area and national equestrian heritage forever. Grid-Scale BESS (Batteries): Lithium-ion batteries are susceptible to thermal runaway there is proof of catastrophic incidents; combustion of nearby structures, the emissions of quantities of highly toxic, life-threatening gases, such as Hydrogen fluoride. • BESS pose new and unique threats to communities, first-responders and wildlife. • Accidents are already occurring; 30 in the past two years globally, one in UK investigation withheld. (Orsted Liverpool 2020) • Other countries site Mega BESS Schemes away from people to mitigate known risk - No evidence is presented as to why more remote options for siting batteries have been excluded? • Engineering standards required to mitigate these dangers are insufficiently established for BESS these should be subject to Control of Major Hazards regulation (COMAH) • There is no regulatory authority taking responsibility for setting and enforcing safety standards of BESS, planning should not be considered without this • There is little experience of ‘life-time maintenance’, or replacement of this technology over time and certainly none by Sunnica. Sunnica, commenting publicly in their webinars say their technology is ‘a steep learning curve, a very steep learning curve’ and that they ‘will be very sorry if thousands of lives are lost’. This is no reassurance of engineering expertise or safety at scale. Other: • The area contributes to the food-industry-based economy and employment of the region there is no meaningful local employment in the Sunnica scheme • This land provides habitats for 100's of species, included protected Stone Curlews • There is no guarantee the land can be returned to it’s former agricultural use after 40 • There is no evidence of ethical sourcing; Solar PV and batteries likely from China are well documented as perpetuating slave labour • There is no fullproof plan to assure that decommissioning is funded from the outset • There is research that this scheme will never be carbon neutral and Sunnica have not demonstrated otherwise Health: The health impacts of this scheme mostly point to the lack of established measurement criteria on which to respond to health issues. As a first scheme ever of this scale in the UK should go over and above to examine health impacts on people. I would like to make further representation about impacts of health and mental health as there is insufficient room in this submission.