Representation by Christina Rixon (Christina Rixon)
- Date submitted
- 17 March 2022
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
My grounds for objecting to this scheme include, but are not confined to: The alleged ineffectiveness of the project In ‘The Daily Telegraph’, 14th February, 2022, Charlie Brooks stated: ‘The solar panel element of this development is…a red herring. After all, this part of the UK gets only 1,600 hours of sunlight per annum. This scheme is actually about buying electricity off the grid during the day, storing it, and then selling it back during peak hours at a higher price’. According to the ‘Say No to Sunnica’ Campaign (henceforth SNS), the project would generate ‘huge profits for Sunnica’s Spanish owners’. But would the scheme generate enough natural energy to offset the enormous damage that it would cause? For example, according to SNS, university analysis shows that the project would ‘create more carbon in its lifetime than it ever saves’; The loss, perhaps permanent, of 2500 acres of arable farmland As I understand, if we destroy farmland, we may be more dependent on imports, leading to increased carbon emissions and arguably heightened vulnerability in politically uncertain times. Moreover, SNS asserts that there is ‘no guarantee’ that the site could, or would, be returned to ‘agricultural use’ when the farm closes in 40 years’ time. According to SNS, the site would become brownfield, rendering it ‘ripe’ for development; Harm to wildlife SNS observes that the project would remove ‘wildlife corridors’, disrupting feeding and nesting areas. Indeed, according to SNS, the local Wildlife Trust observed that the scheme was ‘the worst design they’d ever seen’; Destruction of beautiful views The beauty of the region would be greatly diminished, indeed partly destroyed. According to SNS, screening is proposed in some areas but sufficient growth of trees and shrubs would take at least 15 years. Moreover, SNS observes that some features, including the 77 acres of battery energy storage installations, could not be screened. SNS comments: ‘Elevated aspects, such as the world famous racing gallops in Newmarket, will look down over a vast sea of silicon and metal, in place of rolling green countryside’; Potential danger SNS states of the Lithium-ion batteries used in the three BESS sites, each of which would be placed near homes, ‘When these overheat these can go into thermal runaway; essentially a battery fire which emits highly toxic gases with the risk of explosion’, adding that there have been more than 28 BESS fires in the last three years. Furthermore, SNS states that Sunnica has ‘no experience’ of building BESS on the scale proposed, that is, the current largest in the world; Less environmentally costly solar power options having not been exhausted According to SNS, there is ‘a limit to the amount of solar power that the UK grid can manage’. The UK has not yet exhausted less environmentally costly options, namely installation of panels on suitable domestic and commercial buildings, which SNS asserts has proven successful in Germany, and erection of ground-mounted solar on brownfield sites which, according to SNS, is the preferred government solar strategy.