Back to list Byers Gill Solar

Representation by Samantha Humble

Date submitted
10 May 2024
Submitted by
Members of the public/businesses

It takes approx. 200 acres to generate the same electricity by solar panels as ONE North Sea wind turbine. This represents a grossly inefficient use of precious land, whatever its quality. That said, the ALC have graded England and Wales land and given categories as Best and Most Versatile (BMV) and land with 1-3a and these ratings should be used when considering planning proposals. The areas proposed for Byers Gill fall within the top ratings. The total area of the combined 6 sites is approaching 2000 acres of arable land resulting in a loss of fertile farmland thereby reducing the UK’s valuable food production capacity and exacerbating food insecurity (now also critically affected by the ongoing war in Ukraine). This issue alone should be sufficient reason to ban solar farms on fertile farmland. In addition, the construction of solar farms requires the removal of top soil to a depth of 25cm, thus rendering 2000 acres useless as farmland after the 25 – 40 years of operation of the solar farms. Solar farms generate ‘ragged’ electricity because of the random incidence of clouds or overcast skies which restrict electricity generation from the panels. In addition the panels only work by day whereas demand for domestic electricity goes on for 24 hours. Hence the necessity for expensive battery storage which has very limited storage duration, as well as a propensity to burst into flames. With hardly any electricity generated during the winter months, the average energy produced by a solar farm is only 11% of the installed capacity of the panels. This is another gross inefficiency. In comparison, a wind- turbine generates over 40% of its rated output throughout the year. Being renewable does not mean being zero carbon. The embedded carbon footprint (ECF) of a solar panel is 50 gms of CO2 per kWh generated, while the ECF of a wind turbine is 7.5 gms per kWh. 50 gms is much further away from nett zero than 7.5 gms. Solar farms produce their maximum electricity in the summer when demand for electricity is at its lowest. Wind turbines produce their maximum electricity in mid- winter when demand for electricity is at its peak. The Government has already indicated its support for North Sea wind and its lack of support of solar farms by offering £225m of incentives for North Sea wind compared with £3.3m for solar at the recent Contract for Difference (CFD) auction. This indicates that Government is 7 times more confident in using wind power to meet zero carbon by 2050. Wind power expansion has been constrained so far by the depth of the North Sea. The recently announced Sea-Green project, just off the Scottish coast, set a world record for the length of the legs under their new wind turbines. But, now that floating wind turbines have been introduced, this opens up the whole of the North Sea for future wind turbine development. In comparison, the development of solar farms is seriously restricted by their profligate use of our scarce countryside. WIND POWER is the future for renewables. There are significant risks of fire and explosion from thermal runaway from Lithium-ion batteries. The storage for the Byers Gill sites combined will be one of the largest in the country. The explosion at the BESS facility at Carnegie Road, Liverpool was a result of a failure within one of the battery racks in one container which led to a thermal runaway which in turn produced gases within the container culminating in a large explosion with parts of the container being blown across the compound to a distance of 23m.The main fire took 6 hours to bring under control but the continual recycling of heat from the Li-ion batteries remained an issue and defensive fire-fighting continued on-site for a total of 59 hours. The fire and explosion were deemed to have been caused by the failure of one or more battery units, but the root cause of the battery failure remains unknown. The Liverpool site had only 3 BESS containers and this proposal will have significantly more. A fire suppression system had been fitted. The report stated there was a significant risk to emergency responders. Battery safety is a serious planning consideration for the Byers Gill submission, especially given the proposed close proximity to the local primary school! Other concerns include the large number of HGVs (daily) on a minor road network during construction. Over and above the construction plant traffic, there will also be a large volume of workers vehicles accessing the minor roads. Clearly the impact to all local residents will be significant. All the above implies the Byers Gill site proposals should not be granted a DCO on the basis they are not Carbon neutral, are relatively inefficient and do not accord with the government strategy as set out in the recent energy security strategy namely that large schemes should be sited on lower value land. Mitigation effects on the visual aspect will have little impact since trees any hedgerows or tress that maybe planted to try and limit the adverse impacts will have little effect through the early part of the scheme for at least 15 years. It would not be possible to mitigate every adverse effect due to requirements of the solar generation and it will have a major adverse and significant effect on the village of Bishopton which will be surrounded at every outlook. 4. NOISE Chapter 11 of the Environmental Statement – Noise & Vibration 4.1 Chapter 11 is prepared by AECOM. 4.2 There are a number of NPPF, NPS, EN3 and EN1 guidelines NPPF state “proposals should demonstrate they mitigate impacts such as noise”, “prevent new developments from contributing to or adversely affected by unacceptable levels of noise pollution”. The properties most affected by the noise are near Bishopton. Apart from the during the construction phase taking place over a long period, noise and vibration will come from inverters, transformers and switch gear. This is an adverse effect of the scheme. Taking all the above in to account how detrimental will this noise pollution be to the “Mental Health” of the residents of the farms and villages and the surrounding area.