Representation by Lucy Frazer MP
- Date submitted
- 14 March 2022
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I make this submission as the MP for South East Cambridgeshire, representing my constituents. This scheme will directly affect three villages in my constituency and indirectly affect significantly more. Whilst residents are not opposed to solar energy they are concerned about the huge scale of this project, which will change the fundamental nature of the land and local area. I am concerned about the poor quality of information provided about the impacts of the proposal, which I believe is insufficient to enable the DCO application to be determined. Some of the areas where information is lacking are set out below. The project is being developed on agricultural land, including on land which is best and most versatile. The application does not provide sufficient data to substantiate Sunnica's classification of the soil. I am concerned that Sunnnica has not evidenced biodiversity net gain. Instead, I have concerns that the proposed site will affect natural, biodiverse habitats. I am concerned that the scheme, when the whole life carbon cycle is considered, may not contribute to the Government’s commitment to achieve net zero emissions by 2050. The proposed farm will also cause additional harms for my constituents: it will fundamentally alter the landscape; disrupt local highways, especially during construction; and segregate a number of villages in the area. I am concerned as to whether sufficient attention has been given to the risks from the proposed Battery Energy Storage System technology. The close proximity of the proposed farm to residents, and the huge electrochemical energy set to be vested in the facility (2.2 GWh), mean that these issues need to be carefully considered. In addition I am concerned about the plans for decommissioning. According to Article 7.7 of ‘The Infrastructure Planning (Electricity Storage Facilities) Order 2020’, battery storage can only be included within a Development Consent Order as an ‘associated development’. However, because Sunnica’s battery storage capacity is so significant, it is possible that the battery storage is in fact the ‘host’ project. If so, it appears the battery storage element should instead be considered through the conventional planning application process.