Representation by Iris Nolan
- Date submitted
- 23 February 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I object to the Mallard Pass Solar Farm. In particular, I strongly object to the following points: - The size of the installation: The sheer scale of this proposal is simply overwhelming. It’s the equivalent of 1,400 football pitches, stretching over 4.2 miles from end to end, with a 25 mile perimeter. This is 8 times larger than the largest solar farm currently in the UK. This seems disproportionate to the size of the area in which it is planned to be located. The size has also recently increased by over 2,000 acres to allow for high changes for HGVs and abnormal roads – further destroying our beautiful countryside and impacting the environment and wildlife. I would question why these roads are needed, given Mallard Pass cite that they are building here due to the easy access to the grid. - Battery storage: This is an area of concern, particularly as global warming increases. We don’t know what the risks are of having batteries stored so close to homes and villages. The plan was to build a “MASSIVE” battery storage facility opposite the existing sub-station, but that has been “paused” for now. What does this mean, is it going to be built on the quiet? How can we be sure that these batteries are safe? We cannot! We’ve already had a number of fires this year, due to the unseasonably warm weather and don’t wish to add more opportunities for this to happen. Lithium-ion batteries have a chemical reaction when faulty, resulting in fires that are very hard to put out. These fires must be cooled with vast amounts of water, which is unlikely to be available at the site. They also emit large amounts of toxic gas, which can cause substantial explosions and impact the health local residents and wildlife. - The solar panels: The panels are very large and very unsightly – measuring over 10ft in height. It’s going to take quite a bit of hedgerow to disguise these bad boys! Why not consider locating solar panels on brown fields sites, or on fields by major roads e.g. the A1 etc. or on roofs of large buildings (e.g. warehouses etc.). Can you imagine the impact on the local countryside? Many of us have worked hard, our whole lives, in order to buy properties in these areas. We didn’t do this to buy a house that has a view of miles and miles of imported, visually unattractive solar panels. - Screening: Many of the proposed screening enhancements will take up to 15 years, or more, to provide a decent level of screening. What’s the proposal for now? We have many people who have retired to this area to enjoy the countryside. They could die before the screening is effective. What you are proposing is destroying the character and beauty of much of our local countryside. - Noise is a huge concern. The inverters and transformers that will be located across the site, in large and unsightly containers, emit significant and constant noise. What measure are in place to reduce this? What is the impact of this noise on local residents and on our wildlife? It’s simply not good enough. Piling of solar panel mounting structures up to 2.5m deep will be very noisy and very dusty during construction. The primary substation will also have tonal noise, higher than that experienced at night-time, which will affect residents, spoiling the quite in this oasis of calm. - Timeline: You anticipate the build will take 2 years. As an experience project and programme delivery manager; I know that it is likely to take even longer than that. Would you like to have a building site in your backyard for the next 2 – 3 years. The answer is most certainly “NO”. Well – we don’t want one either! And – it’s not just the next few years – it’s the next 40 years. This will impact our children and their children too. - Logistics: The impact on the local community in terms of additional traffic, noise, disruption, machinery etc. on small country roads and villages is going to be life-changing for the local residents. It is also going to impact school children, as the route off the A1 (the most logical one to use) goes past two very busy schools – which already results in queuing in the mornings and afternoons. Almost all of the areas impacted are reached by small countryside lanes, that will not support or sustain the size of the trucks that we are ALREADY starting to see appear. There’s also the predicted 400 employees to consider, all of whom will be calling on our local amenities. Stamford is stretched to the limit and will find it impossible to support a project of this size. - Recreation: Recreational activities will be impacted, as many people in this area enjoy walking, cycling and horse riding through our countryside. They will be severely impacted by the increased volumes of traffic and the nature of the vehicles involved. We will also find that our beautiful countryside walks have been replaced with a walk beside a very large, very unsightly industrial installation. - Loss of agricultural land: The government policy is clear that ground mounted solar should use previously developed land, contaminated land, industrial land and agricultural land of grade 3b, 4 and 5, not Best and Most Versatile (BMV) land. The selected solar panel area MPSF is proposing to use is 53% BMV land. The latest Government Food Strategy Policy paper June 2022 clearly wants to maintain agricultural production, not reduce it, particularly in the light of recent activities with Russia/Ukraine war and subsequent global impacts on food shortages and prices. An extract from the Daily Telegraph 12th February states: “An analysis of data from the solar farm industry has shown that developments currently in the planning or pre-planning stage would total 37 gigawatts (GW) of generating capacity. Critics said that if the proposals are given the go-ahead, it could take as much as 150,000 acres of agricultural land out of production at a time when Britain has less farmland in use than at any time since 1945.The country is already losing 99,000 acres of rural land a year to industrial and other uses.” - Impact on our Wildlife and their habitat: We have a lot of deer in this part of the world. They will no longer be able to run freely, as they will be faced with miles of security fencing, blocking their natural routes. Faced with a reduced area to graze, it is likely that they deer will cause additional damage to ancient woodland, and impact other species, as well as inflicting more concentrated damage to other farmers’ crops. Badger setts will also be impacted – as some are going to be removed altogether. This means that those that remain will have to navigate their routes though badger gates. Brown hares also risk losing much of their habitat due to security fencing restricting their access. This is an absolute crime. It’s our role to protect the wildlife, not to further destroy their habitats. We take great joy out of glimpsing these beautiful animals in their natural habitats. - Flooding: The creation of this large scale solar development will increase the flood risk to our roads and villages. Laying new tracks and access routes will cause compaction of the soil reducing the ability to absorb rainwater. The run-off characteristics of rainwater from solar panels is different to rainwater falling straight to the ground. Rainwater falls evenly over a wide area, the run-off of rainwater from the panels would be in concentrated amounts, like rain running into the gutter of a house. When rainfall is heavy, gutters are deluged with water and overpowered. The same is true for the solar panels except the rain would create water channels/gullies in the soil, causing further compaction of the soil, and ultimately speeding up the run-off from the site into nearby fields, roads, rivers and other vulnerable areas such as some local villages. - Archaeology and heritage: Archaeological remains dating to the prehistoric period are in abundance within this area and are likely to be found in proposed site. What has been done to ensure that these sites are protected? - Human rights: There is reported evidence of Uyghur forced labour used in the supply chain of [Redacted], the primary developer of MPSF. I have seen the letter on your website and whilst it says that they are doing all they can to stop forced labour, it does not state that this is not still happening. We cannot condone the use of forced labour in any circumstance.