Representation by Chippenham Parish Council (Chippenham Parish Council)
- Date submitted
- 16 March 2022
- Submitted by
- Parish councils
Chippenham Parish Council opposes the Sunnica Solar Farm development in the strongest possible terms. The council supports renewable, sustainable energy but this scheme is too big and in the wrong location. Polling of our community shows 91.8% of residents oppose the scheme. The parish council and wider community are particularly concerned about the following issues: • The size and scale of this scheme and its location amongst residential villages. This will have a severe and lasting impact. • The process and evaluation of the scheme is flawed as documented in the Landscape Consultant Report • Alternative sites were not adequately investigated • The process did not take into account all relevant factors known to the applicant • The methodology was based on a pre-determined outcome • The scheme has been driven by the need to find a 1000 hectare site but the individual sites are too spread out, hence the effects are felt over a much larger area than for a compact development • The BESS battery storage plan is of grave concern. The volume of batteries is vast (over 31 hectares). The proximity of these batteries to residential areas is dangerous. Fire could cause high risk of death with the fumes causing long term, serious health issues. • There is a lack of detail for the BESS compounds • There is no community benefit but a massive negative community impact • The reason for the scheme is to store off-peak energy in the BESS and sell it back to the National Grid at peak times. • Industrialisation of the countryside is very concerning. Replacing fertile agricultural land with solar panels is a false economy • The loss of good quality, irrigated, vegetable growing greenfield farmland. The reduction in the production of homegrown food weakens the country’s food security. The scheme uses some Best and Most Versatile agricultural land contrary to Government policy and applicants own site selection criteria • The proposal includes areas that are unsuitable on landscape and visual grounds, fails to follow best practice and underestimates the visual impact of the scheme. The proposed screening and tree planting will do little to mitigate the impact. The trees will take many years to mature. Even when mature, the trees and the sites will have a significant effect on our historic landscape • The 30 miles of security fences will be both an eyesore and also negatively impact on wildlife • There will be a colossal increase in traffic movements during construction. The road infrastructure will struggle to accommodate these extra vehicles and the negative impact for local road users will be unacceptable. • The green credentials of this scheme are questionable; the production, shipping and installation of the solar panels and installation will have a huge carbon footprint which will not be offset during the scheme’s lifetime. Verified by work a leading university • Loss of important biodiversity • There is a lack of planning and security bond for the decommissioning of this scheme. This could mean that equipment is left to rot in fields when the site is no longer active • Loss of agricultural jobs