Representation by Chloe Barker
- Date submitted
- 17 March 2022
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I adamantly object to the plans submitted by Sunnica. With so many unanswered and inadequate plans some of the reasons I object are: *The installation of the development will bring an unacceptable level of disruption, inconvenience and disturbance to local residents. The activity and noise would have a detrimental effect on the tranquility of the area. We would be subject to unbearable noise pollution, dust pollution and be impacted daily due to road closures, footpath closures and increased traffic. *Loss of arable farmland leading to decreased food security. If we are unable to preserve farmland for food production we increase the need to ship imports therefore contributing to carbon emissions. *No guarantee the land can be returned to agricultural use for 40 years due to potential contamination therefore more likely to be lost to development in the future. *Alternative locations for solar plants of this size should be sought on brownfield sites or panels placed on rooftops of new developments to avoid degrading the greenfield land. *Considerable health & safety concerns due to the size of, and the power stored in the batteries. They are highly unsuitable for such proximity to residential properties or within rural villages due to their fire hazard. Battery energy depots worldwide have experienced numerous fires in the last 3 years. What are the health risks related to the toxic fumes residents will potentially be subjected to? Are there evacuation plans? *What information has been provided regarding the safety of the high voltage underground cables? *The overriding majority of local residents are opposed to the scheme. Sunnica brings limited community benefits. No meaningful local employment. Property prices are likely to be affected. *The solar farm would dominate and change the landscape. We chose to live in a rural area. Sunnica will engulf us in industrial development. *Wildlife would be detrimentally affected by the development including loss of species to the area. *Are plans are being rushed through to take advantage of meeting the government’s net zero targets rather than ensuring a suitable and desirable green energy scheme is in place? *How can the scheme be ‘green’ when production and importation of the panels has a huge carbon footprint. University analysis states that Sunnica will create more carbon in its lifetime than it ever saves.