Representation by Sarah Lawrence
- Date submitted
- 12 March 2022
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
From all that I have read and seen on the matter, I believe that Sunnica is a scheme that provides no direct local benefits: - No local jobs - Extensive disruption during construction – increase traffic on roads during construction - Imported materials used in construction - It is a foreign-owned company Instead of reducing carbon, it will will add to the carbon footprint in the following ways: - Extensive use of concrete – which is polluting and energy intensive to produce - A massive flow of traffic through a rural area – all lorries using diesel, with the added problem of fine particulate pollution - It involves the destruction of good agricultural land. REDUCING plants which are an essential part of the carbon cycle. - Importing of the batteries and other materials will have a huge carbon foot print Sunnica will destroy the environment as the agricultural land will never be reclaimed. It will also: - Destroy natural habitats for wildlife - Erode our self-sufficiency in food production - Increase the risk of flooding due to lack of drainage (replacing arable land with acres of concrete) I believe the scheme that is ethically unsound: - It is likely to use solar panels imported from China and built using slave labour - Rare earth minerals needed for batteries are often mined by workers in unsafe conditions - There is little consideration for local residents, who will not be benefitting from the project.