Representation by Patricia Mitchell
- Date submitted
- 8 June 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
This is my formal representation to become an interested party and I call for the Planning Inspectorate to take particular note of the information in the first paragraph. Together with Map 1 which it has been necessary to post to you under separate cover as it could not be copied into my on-line registration comments, is to be included as part of my representation. My reference number will be noted on Map 1 to link it to the on-line submission. I will also include a hard copy of this submission for ease of reference:- Although my observations and objections relate to Island Green Power (IGP) West Burton 1, 2 and 3 (2,484 acres), it is crucial that I draw to the Planning Inspectorate’s notice three further solar projects; Island Green Power (IGP) Cottam 1, 2, 3a and 3b (which has already been submitted to the Inspectorate), Low Carbon Gate Burton Solar (also submitted to the Inspectorate) and Tillbridge Solar at the Statutory Consultation stage. Because of the proximity of each one to the other, being a few miles apart, it would be just and morally ethical for them to be evaluated /examined together not independently of each other. Combined they would be the largest solar farm complex in Europe, if not beyond, encompassing a colossal 10,000 acres + of Best and Most Versatile (BMVL) agricultural and productive farmland. However, in addition to the above details of a further project, Stow Park Solar 35MW, covering 160 acres has come to light this week from Luminous Energy which will border the proposed West Burton 3 site. For the Stow Park Solar Project to come forward at this stage in the same location as West Burton 3, in my opinion, raises questions for the Planning Inspectorate to look into this element further. The communities of 30 villages will be affected, (including mine which will be completely surrounded and overwhelmed North, South, East & West for miles) imprisoned by 4.5m (15ft high) tracking solar panels, highly dangerous BESS batteries, sub-stations, ‘shipping containers’ in the hundreds, security fencing, CCTV and all associated paraphernalia on both sides of the A1500 and the B1241 that I and others travel daily and the narrow, inter-twining country lanes between these 30 villages. I can think of no more a soul destroying, demoralising and depressing existence for all who will be affected by the solar development(s). Individually each Project is of such magnitude that combined they are almost 20 km (over 12 miles) from one end to the other with a perimeter stretching over 80 km (50 miles). The impact on the lives of the residents including my own family, my grandchildren, and the well-being and mental health of others by the cumulative nature of these solar developments will be appalling. We are facing industrialisation and annihilation of beautiful, wildlife diverse uninterrupted countryside and productive farmland around our homes - in the case of West Burton 1, 2 and 3 it will be for 40 years minimum. They will woefully dominate and devastate the landscape. This would be nothing short of environmental and psychological vandalism. An apocalypse. This is not a delicate balance in any shape or form between protecting rural communities and recognising the climate emergency. A consistent policy toward encouraging the installation of solar panels on industrial, commercial and domestic buildings and brownfield sites is needed and would negate the need for large-scale mounted solar farms which are destroying, not protecting the Natural Environment, landscape and eco-systems. New and more efficient domestic panels, including solar roof tiles, are becoming available being more cost effective and reducing bills. There are thousands of acres of commercial and industrial roof space in the UK able to accommodate solar panels. According to the BRE National Solar Centre, in 2016 there was an estimated 250,000 hectares (617,764 Acres) of south facing commercial roof space in the UK. Enough space to provide around 50% of the UK’s electricity demand. Imagine what the figures are in 2023 ! There are questions over the accuracy of the forecasts by Island Green Power for the amount of energy this project is likely to produce for the amount of farmland that is being plundered, particularly in the depths of winter when energy is most needed. On average solar can only deliver 11% of its stated output in the UK and on average the government says 5 acres of land are used for every 1MW of output. This makes Solar plants a highly inefficient use of land compared to wind. The applicant has provided no evidence for the actual carbon savings that this scheme will produce. Until we see this evidence then the scheme has to be seen as not being carbon neutral. Harmful: The risks of these proposals very much outweigh the hypothesised/speculated benefits put forward by Island Green Power. Harmful: The significant Loss of Amenity Use and Visual Impact affecting a far greater area than the boundaries of the scheme. 1. Loss of agricultural land is insupportable and loss of food production. We are a net importer of food. Lincolnshire is a food producing county. There is evidence that Grade 3b land is also capable of producing very high quality yields and therefore should not be dismissed as moderate quality farmland. 2. Loss of tenant farmers, their livelihoods and their homes / the effects on the economy of local agricultural and other associated business. 3. Cultural heritage impact: Lincoln is steeped in great architecture, history and heritage in abundance with a rich culture of food, festivals and family businesses – hotels, b&bs in the outlying villages, shops, transport and more which depend on tourism and visitors. At the site of West Burton 3 there are the remains of the Medieval bishop's palace and deer park. List Entry Number: 1019229 Stow Park Buried remains of a medieval palace of the Bishops of Lincoln, together with associated water features and deer park.12th C. The palace, moat, ponds and deer park formerly occupied an area of about 275ha. The surviving remains of the East and West Lawns (park pales) are protected. History dictates there are most likely further archaeological remains hidden beneath the extensive areas of farmland where the proposed West Burton 3 solar project is to be sited. 4. Harmful: Life changing disruption for 2 years (or 4 years) to the affected villages/villagers and visitors/travellers passing through with high risk for accidents to the public. Traffic, access and construction - narrow lanes around villages not suited to large construction vehicles, hundreds of LGVs, HGVs & Abnormal load vehicles (ALVs) and plant and machinery, Hundreds of workers from outside the area (60 miles away minimum) travelling to a site operational from 7.00am – 7.00pm daily. Intrusion of CCTV on such a scale not seen in countryside settings. 5. Harmful: Noise and light pollution, poor air quality. Industrial size 4.5metre high Tracking or Static solar panels, 13.5metre high sub-station (s), converters the audible noise 365 days a year for 40 - 60 years from all the associated hardware and the effects of wind tunnel noise. Glint and glare issues from millions of solar panels (estimated 7,000,000 on all four proposed solar sites). IGP state storage batteries have a life of around 10 years, as a consequence there will be further periods of considerable disruption many times over to the communities during the 40 plus years as these are replaced on these colossal solar sites with even more noise emanating during the operational lifetime of the site (apart from during the years of construction and de-commissioning) which will affect all aspects of life including further damage to the ecology and bio-diversity of this area. 6. Harmful: Health and safety issues particularly the dangers of the highly volatile Lithium-ion batteries (BESS) and well catalogued explosions and fires, releasing toxic gas hazardous to health, to water and land, unable to be extinguished by water. The local Fire Brigade does not have the experience to deal with such fires and if they did it would still be a highly perilous event for anyone in the area with risk of life changing injuries. BESS batteries are not governed by the Health and Safety Executive. Failed to be addressed during consultation by Island Green Power. Lithium-ion, a rare earth metal requires vast resources and energy to mine and manufacture and the batteries are complex and dangerous. IGP do not state how or if these batteries can be recycled at the end of their use. 7. The very major changes proposed to the West Burton 3 site area contained in IGPs statutory consultation letter of 25 November 2022, which only a limited number of people received (I was not one of them) following their withdrawal from the West Burton 4 site is dreadfully woolly. Because of the scale of the changes to West Burton 3 residents in nearby villages should have been notified in much more detail, ie that the original minor substation and energy storage has tripled in size whereby the infrastructure footprint has increased from 1.4 acres to 4.5 acres, that the substation with busbars is a greater height now at 13.5m and a greater capacity from 132kV to 400kV, when most people will have little idea of what this will look like. It will be visible for miles around and will emit a constant high level hum. 8. The proposed substation as the crow flies is only a short distance from residents’ homes in Marton village, the village Primary School and Stow Park. Considering the danger of lithium batteries, which would be stored at the facility, this constitutes an unacceptable risk to life. There are well catalogued episodes of explosions and fires worldwide emanating from these batteries. Why is this equipment no longer being sited at the existing West Burton Power Station where it was originally proposed ? 9. I have hard copy evidence that Island Green Power’s ‘info@westburtonsolar.co.uk’ failed to take receipt of my emails which commented on their updated proposals and changes to the West Burton 3 site area and failed to respond to the messages I left on their project telephone line 0808 169 1858 asking them to contact me in regard to said emails. 10. Harmful: The scheme is harmful during construction and beyond to the ecology and bio-diversity of all wildlife, removal of hedges, trees, loss of flora and fauna which may never fully recover. The wildlife will not return…why would it with such disturbance taking place. They will migrate to other areas to nest, feed and feel secure. The rules for the protection and management of countryside hedgerows fall under The Hedgerows Regulations 1997 of England and Wales a UK Statutory Instrument (1997 No. 1160) which came into effect on 1 June 1997 and is government legislation which falls under the Environment Act 1995. It was created to protect hedgerows, in particular those in the countryside aged 30 years or older then why has IGP sought planning permission to remove / decimate circa 55 kilometers / 35 miles of hedgerows (and trees) on this solar site alone, notwithstanding mile upon mile of hedging on their 3,048 acres Cottam solar project ? Yet state they wish to minimise visual impact of the solar project(s) in their submission but fail to mention their action betrays our wildlife by destroying the habitat, the lifeline of woodland birds, insects, mammals, butterflies and so much more. Hedges are an essential part of the ecological system. They contribute to drainage, reduce atmospheric pollution and enhance mental health and well-being. As for planting wildflower meadows, they naturally grow best in soil that has low fertility and low nutrients not BMVL. 11. IGP’s Bio-diversity Net Gain Assessment to be delivered by the Scheme and how this has been calculated is hypothesis, not fact. 12. Concern re flooding occurring from run-off from the solar panels as some of West Burton 3 is sited on high ground. 13. Why so many miles of cabling trenches through farmland ? 14. Replacement hedges taking 15 years plus to grow to obscure solar panels is unacceptable ! 15. A Green Solution: Given all of the above - No ! Together with sourcing concerns for industrial scale solar panels (from China) and with its recorded human rights abuses and the carbon footprint to ship panels to the UK is definitely not 'green'. 16. Decommissioning and a further 2 years of disruption - who will oversee this to ensure the land is returned to how it was previously ? Who will ultimately provide the funding ? How do we know funding will still be available in 40+ years? What relic is this to leave for our children and grandchildren ? 17. Finally, the scheme is not temporary by any stretch of the imagination. Definition of temporary: brief, fleeting, passing, momentary – not 40 plus years ! My grandchildren will be more than half a century old before they see these green fields and the patchwork quilt of crops changing through the seasons again. People choose to live in the countryside because it is just that, countryside. A place of sanctuary and calm. A wonderful place to be but who will come to live here if all there is to see is solar. What happens to all the people affected by these projects when a fall in their property prices ensues and no-one wants to buy their home. The harm will be lasting. Our countryside provides an idyllic backdrop like no other, covering the magnificent counties of the UK. We must defend and safeguard our countryside for the future or there is no future for the countryside. I maintain the right to add or amend my representations should new information become available. Patricia Mitchell 7 June 2023