Representation by Lisa Stubbs
- Date submitted
- 1 March 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I live in Essendine in Rutland but do not have any of the proposed area directly next to my house. I have attended local meetings and read information provided and on the basis of the information I have obtained I object to the proposals. 1) We need to use solar panels for energy, but they should not be sited on agricultural land. They are not farms they are factories. There are many brown belt sites where they could be put, including the many disused airfields in this area, they should be put on all new homes and buildings, and encouraged to be added to existing ones. This would not be so profitable and it is unlikely that the companies [Redacted] would be interested in doing this, however I feel that the government should be less concerned with profit and more concerned about doing the right thing. The recent conflict in Ukraine has highlighted the need for us as a country to be less dependant on other countries for our food. We should be strengthening our food production capabilities and not losing substantial areas of prime agricultural land. 2) Not enough consideration has been given to the protection of wildlife and their habitats. All wildlife should be considered not just protected species. The fences will affect the wildlife, even though a corridor is being made along the river the animal's movements will be disrupted. We see deer on the land behind our house, the deer run down the field across the proposed boundary. Any fencing along the boundary would obstruct their path. The vast expanse of land proposed to be covered by the solar panels will reduce the hunting land available to birds of prey such as red kites and buzzards substantially. 3) I have recently learned that compulsary aquisitions are being requested. I was not made aware of this at any of the consultation meetings that I went to. Mallard pass say that they hope that they won't use them - they wouldn't be applying if there wasn't a possibility they would use them. This covers a path and cycle path used by children, among other reasons, to get to and from school in Ryhall, There is also a drainage ditch along the side of the road where these aquisitions are requested, digging these up could cause flooding. 4) During the meetings Mallard Pass confirmed that the solar panels cannot be recycled, the only way to dispose of them will be in landfill. We are talking about 470,000 panels 3m high, with toxic chemicals. If the proposals are approved I feel strongly that the contract should include the disposal arrangements when the panels are no longer useable, who should be contractually responsible for arranging it and meeting the cost, and which landfill site they will go in. Including who will take over the responsibility if any of the companies go out of business. Similarly contractual obligations should be made to return the land to farm land when the 40yrs has passed, and housing / building should not be allowed on the basis that the land has had a non farming use. 5) Traffic during construction, The information states that the majority of existing access points are currently agricultural access points that can accommodate large, heavy agricultural machinery. The farmers use these on occasion, at a time that the farmer feels that the weather and the ground is ok, the machinery is not in these areas day in day out whatever the weather in the way that the construction traffic will be. To someone sitting at a desk the roads are 'A' roads. But, eg A6121, these are busy roads with one lane each way, limited opportunity for overtaking, and many rush hour queues, Stamford and Bourne have many delays. The additional construction traffic along these routes will cause significant delays and affect not only the communities but also local businesses. 6) Construction time - Mallard pass have stated that construction will take 2 years, however they have confirmed during a consultation meeting that if construction needs to take longer then it will take as long as it needs, there is no limit on the construction time. The proposed route will go past Casterton Community College, not only will the increased traffic cause significant delays, it will make the road less safe for pedestrians and traffic such as bicycles, many of the students walk or cycle to and from school. It has been mentioned that the lorries will be asked to avoid starting and finishing times - this is unlikely to happen for example when a lorry has travelled from a port it is not going to be able to plan the time it travels through Casterton. 7) We are told that the solar panels will help the environment, however also that it will take 2-3 years of use to counteract the energy / carbon usage of making and transporting the panels as they will be made overseas. Add to this the 2years or more of continual lorry journeys and machinery usage, there will be a very adverse affect on the environment for a very long time before any advantage is made, and then the panels will end up in landfill. 8) No profit from these solar panels will be seen in this country. The energy will be cheaper to produce than other methods, however the foreign companies involved will receive the going price for it, these foreign companies will receive all the profit. 9) I strongly back my MP [Redacted] in her request to have [Redacted] sanctioned, and therefore banned from operating in the UK, due to their links to human rights abuses. They have been implicated in benefiting from the forced labour of the Uyghur people and it is outrageous that they should be allowed to operate anywhere, particularly in the UK. If this proposal is agreed the exact details of who why where and how the panels will be made and transported should be obtained and MUST NOT be connected to forced labour of the Uyghur people, or be connected to company [Redacted] that has been formally sanctioned by the US commerce department.