Representation by Paul Reeson
- Date submitted
- 23 February 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Site Location: I understand the siting of the proposed ‘Mallard Pass’ solar farm is driven solely by the location of, and accessibility to the newly constructed electrical substation located close to Essendine which currently feeds power to the main east coast railway. Scale of the proposed site: The scale of the proposed solar farm in the vicinity of Essendine and surrounding villages is absolutely astounding. With the potential to obliterate 1,144 acres of good local crop producing countryside for the foreseeable future by erecting an ocean of 3.3m high photovoltaic arrays (solar panels) and installation of their supporting infrastructure. To replace the good crop producing farm land with a 1,144 acre sea of 3.3m high solar panels in this particular location appears to be irresponsible and disrespectful. One major commodity in need of expansion in the UK is agricultural land to help make the UK more food secure. Landscape change The enormity of this project and consequential shattering visual impact will basically change our local rural agricultural Landscape into an Industrial-scape. Visible and audible for 365 days of the year. My wife and I live in Carlby, situated on the border of the proposed 2,239 acre total site area. We moved to Carlby 27 years ago because we enjoy living within, and being part of the countryside. Being able to walk along public rights of way and bridal ways that cut through the local countryside and woodlands. Being able to see and appreciate wild animals and birds up close were all major considerations when moving to this area. Electrical output, Performance and Efficiency: It has recently come to light that the estimated annual averaged output performance of this proposed solar farm will be only 11% of the published maximum output of 240Mw AC (350Mw DC). That is an average of 26.4Mw AC, which is 213.6Mw AC less than that promoted. This means 1,144 acres of valuable wheat/crop producing land would be sacrificed to site such an inefficient method of electrical power generation. What is the power for? I feel the national hunger for more electrical power is driven, not in the least part by a future demand to supply power to Data Storage facilities and for charging battery powered vehicles (EV’s). It would appear massive sites akin to the one proposed will be installed to feed this hunger with little left over for domestic purposes. Visual Screening: The 84 containers housing the transformers and inverters feeding into the substation/Grid would be very difficult to mask from view. More importantly, to screen, or hide from view the 1,144 acres of 3.3 Mtr high solar panels could never realistically be fully accomplished. The planting of any natural green screenage around the borders will take many years before it becomes anywhere near effective, which, by its very nature, will only contain foliage during the summer months being devoid of such in winter months. The effectiveness of any trees planted for the same purpose would be less effective due to its elevated foliage. Noise pollution: There is the potential for continuous noise day and night being emitted from the 84 containers housing the transformers and inverters which cannot be ignored. Battery Storage: It would appear Battery storage has been left out of the first phase designs. The cynic in me would suggest this is to help win the public over, only to be introduced at a later date with all the related potential safety risks involved with Lithium Ion batteries. Rewards v Cost: I feel rewards from this project will flow into very few pockets, namely the owners of the land from the rent being paid to them and the installation companies who will have left the scene to pursue the next big profit making project. To this point there has been no mention of financial compensation for the local residence in the form of subsidized electricity charges. The cost to the local environment being immeasurable for the foreseeable future. The local community having to embrace such a gargantuan change to our local landscape, visible and potentially audible 365 days of the year after completion. Not to mention the estimated two years of disruption during the construction phase. Carbon Capture: Crops currently grown on the proposed agricultural land play a significant role in catching carbon from the atmosphere which is a major contributor in the fight against global warming. As crops photosynthesize to produce their food, they remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and create oxygen we need to breathe. By replacing the crops with 1,052 Acres of solar panels will result in carbon capture being lost. On-going Maintenance: Noise, traffic, light pollution emitting from service and maintenance compounds will also be a concern and irritation. The proposed mitigation areas can only go so far in lessening the impact of such. Site boundary fencing: The fencing you are proposing to erect around the panelled areas to keep out undesirables will also serve to snare and capture wild animals leading to their eventual and inevitable demise. Will these boundaries be patrolled on a regular basis? Heat reflection: How much heat will be reflected/radiated back into the atmosphere from this very large 1,144 acre concentration of solar panels? Is it possible that the local climate could be affected? In other words a resultant ‘Micro climate’ causing less or more rain to fall locally. It would be very interesting to see the results of any risk assessments, failure modes and effects analysis, and or simulations that have been performed in order to demonstrate the impact of such a large area of solar panels, specifically relevant to this particular part of the countryside, its terrain and topography. Construction phase concerns: Environmental damage and impact during the two year construction phase. Road changes to accommodate the substantial increase in heavy haulage vehicles supplying the construction site. Noise, mud, dust, road degradation, artificial light, local air quality, decimation of wild flowers and roadside verges (many of which currently have the status of being protected). Impact on local traffic, cyclists, pedestrians, and horse riders to name a few. What would be the planned method to funnel in the machinery and equipment required to develop the site. I fear the impact on local villages and towns will be monumentally destructive and disruptive. As an example, Casterton College is sited on the Ryhall Rd in Great Casterton. How much disruption and inconvenience would the staff and pupils be subjected too during the school day? The road directly outside of the college gets very congested twice a day at drop off and collection times. In Stamford there is a 7.5 Tonne weight limit on the bridge which crosses the river Welland in the centre of the town. What devastation and major inconveniences are our local rural villages and minor roads to be subjected too if the heavy haulage vehicles are rooted through them as an alternative? De-commissioning: How recyclable is the equipment that is being considered for installation? What about the land left behind after such an event? Will the aftermath be then classified as ‘Brownfield’ land? Cyber Security: If this project did come to fruition, I raise a concern about any Chinese made electronic devises built into the proposed power generating control system which are connected to the internet. Built-in IOT (Internet of things) modules connected to a wireless network could open the gates to malicious intervention of the operating systems. What considerations have been given to safe guard against these built-in Chinese made modules affording the ability of disruption on a massive scale? Alternatives to Solar: At the Stage Two public exhibition event in Essendine on 25th June 2022, there was no evidence to suggest alternatives to photovoltaic arrays had been considered for this location. Why have wind turbines not been considered as an alternative to PV solar panels? The benefit of wind turbines over solar panels being they are more efficient, having the potential to operate day and night, during sun or rain (depending on wind availability). Spacing of turbines is an important consideration to obtain maximum efficiency, but the land beneath can still be used to produce food crops (bearing in mind the global shortfall resulting from the current Ukraine crisis). Available wind turbine options range from 0.25 to 10Mw AC. (250,000 to 10,000,000 watts) (published on the Siemens Energy website). Results from Topography, wind speed average analysis to name a few things would be able to determine just how many turbines and size would be required and where. In simplistic terms; three 10Mw AC wind turbines could produce 30Mw AC (30,000,000 watts) of power without having to sacrifice 1,144 acres of food producing, carbon capturing agricultural land. New Build Housing: Would it not be more practical and economic with land usage if it were made obligatory for all new house builds to include solar panels installed as part of the construction design? Any new factory and flat top industrial buildings should also include solar panels fitted to their roof areas. Nuclear Power: It was announced recently by the government that the production of Sizewell C Nuclear power station hast been given the go-ahead, predicted to produce 3.2 gigawatts of electrical power, enough to supply about six million homes. This surely helps towards negating the need for massive solar farms. Excess UK Generating Capacity It has also come to light that the UK has recently been transmitting three gigawatts of electricity to France these last three months to help them overcome a shortfall. Surely if we currently have this much spare generating capacity we don’t need this giant Mallard Pass solar farm.