Representation by Jack Smith
- Date submitted
- 12 March 2022
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I would like to register my objection to the proposed Sunnica Energy Farm. Whilst I accept there is a need for greener sources of energy and that indeed solar power can be a key part of this the panels must be located in suitable locations on land and buildings with no other higher priority use. The location and scale of the proposed Sunnica Energy Farm is entirely unsuitable. The Sunnica Energy Farm proposes to construct 77 acres of battery energy storage systems (BESS) which will be the largest in the world. Should this scale of BESS be constructed so close to local villages with the risk that battery fire could pose? Battery storage is of course crucial to fully utilise the energy produced from solar panels but with significant uncertainty surrounding BESS fires and the general safety of BESS the proximity of large settlements has to be too great of a risk. The pollution and environmental risk is also significant given the proximity of the sites to SSSI’s and that they are within the catchment of the River Kennet, a crucial chalk stream in East Anglia. 2500 acres of productive farmland should not be covered in solar panels. The land has been chosen for its 3b status and its proximity to the Burwell sub station. The 3b status does not take into account the effect of irrigation. I manage a large farming business next door to the proposal on the same land quality, we achieve far above national average yields and the produce is sold to top specification in supermarkets such as Sainsbury’s and Marks & Spencer’s. As a business we grow 11,000t + of potatoes and our best quality comes from the land type that is proposed to be covered in solar panels. The land classification is not accurate with the advances in irrigation technology and other farming techniques we farm next door and I know that the land can sustain high levels of food production. If we translate our yields and sustainable rotations to the proposed land then these solar panels could be directly reducing UK food production by 39,000t of produce, this is unacceptable. The Sunnica Energy Farm should not go ahead. The debate should not be ‘food vs fuel’ but ‘food and fuel’. Create energy where we can economically and efficiently do so but more importantly grow food on the land that is most suited to do so. In this situation the land proposed to be covered in solar panels is highly productive agricultural land and should therefore not be covered in solar panels. The events in Ukraine have raised the issue of food security and this land is key to ensuring better food security for the UK, not in terms of wheat and barley but in terms of high quality fresh produce, potatoes, onions, carrots, and parsnips grown with highly accurate irrigation to the highest quality. The proposal is un-safe, un-tested, detrimental to the environment and detrimental to the UK’s food security.