Are any of you guilty of nimbyism - objecting to solar farms?

Callistemon I have been championing the use of tidal power for more years than I can remember, as has DH.

Fleurpepper

MaizieD

I rather think that people objecting to solar farms on fields are doing so on aesthetic rather than environmental grounds. As far ass I'm aware though don't pose an environmental challenge.

Though I agree that, as I said earlier, solar PV panels can go just about anywhere.

Certainly not my case. My objection is definitely on environmental grounds, bird and other wildlife habitat- makes absolutely no sense as long as we have billions of m2 of industrial, farming, public, private, etc, of roof surface.

And yes, it is ugly and ruins the countryside- but that is secondary to above.

While I was looking for pretty pictures of solar farms to show that they can coexist with some farming activities, such as sheep grazing, I came across a blog by someone who had been studying some solar farms for the effect on birds over a number of years and he had found that they had no adverse effect on bird life. They offered birds a food source and some protection against predators.

They can be underplanted with wild flowers for pollinators and I see no reason why they can't provide a habitat for small animals like mice, moles, voles, hedgehogs etc. I think that rabbits and hares would manage pretty well, too.

They don't look very good but they don't create barren deserts in which wildlife can't exist.

Though perhaps you have more information?

Yes, I remember your posts in support of tidal power on here, M0nica. DH too and he was very disappointed when the Severn Barrage project was shelved.
The Mersey has a high tidal range too.

I have a vague recollection from several years ago about an EU plan to build solar panels in the Sahara desert but Thatcher wanted nothing to do with it.

The Sahara desert isn't in the EU. I doubt if Maggie could have stopped them.

I'm all for solar and wind power. However I do think solar panels should be in place on all warehouses and similar before valuable farmland is used. We are a small island with an ever increasing population and we need to produce food just as much as we did in WW2.

I am not a NIMBY. I believe all should do their bit. Al should be required to tolerate solar farms including Tories in the balmy south of England.

MaizieD

Fleurpepper

MaizieD

I rather think that people objecting to solar farms on fields are doing so on aesthetic rather than environmental grounds. As far ass I'm aware though don't pose an environmental challenge.

Though I agree that, as I said earlier, solar PV panels can go just about anywhere.

Certainly not my case. My objection is definitely on environmental grounds, bird and other wildlife habitat- makes absolutely no sense as long as we have billions of m2 of industrial, farming, public, private, etc, of roof surface.

And yes, it is ugly and ruins the countryside- but that is secondary to above.

While I was looking for pretty pictures of solar farms to show that they can coexist with some farming activities, such as sheep grazing, I came across a blog by someone who had been studying some solar farms for the effect on birds over a number of years and he had found that they had no adverse effect on bird life. They offered birds a food source and some protection against predators.

They can be underplanted with wild flowers for pollinators and I see no reason why they can't provide a habitat for small animals like mice, moles, voles, hedgehogs etc. I think that rabbits and hares would manage pretty well, too.

They don't look very good but they don't create barren deserts in which wildlife can't exist.

Though perhaps you have more information?

But as I said earlier, land with solar panels can’t be used to grow crops, so they should not be placed on prime agricultural land when there are so many other options.

Agrivoltaics, apparently. ? Solar panels and crops on the same land.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrivoltaics

But as I said earlier, land with solar panels can’t be used to grow crops, so they should not be placed on prime agricultural land when there are so many other options.

Perhaps I'm not following this as closely as I should be, but who is saying that the farms that have been refused planning permission (as per the OP) were on prime agricultural land?

I thought it was just the general idea of solar farms that we were discussing?

volver

Agrivoltaics, apparently. ? Solar panels and crops on the same land.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrivoltaics

?

MaizieD

^But as I said earlier, land with solar panels can’t be used to grow crops, so they should not be placed on prime agricultural land when there are so many other options.^

Perhaps I'm not following this as closely as I should be, but who is saying that the farms that have been refused planning permission (as per the OP) were on prime agricultural land?

I thought it was just the general idea of solar farms that we were discussing?

Some of the proposed sites that had planning permission rejected were on prime agricultural land, sorry I didn’t make that clear. The problem being, not that you can’t grow the crops, but that you can’t use combine harvesters and tractors to crop them.

MaizieD

I rather think that people objecting to solar farms on fields are doing so on aesthetic rather than environmental grounds. As far ass I'm aware though don't pose an environmental challenge.

Though I agree that, as I said earlier, solar PV panels can go just about anywhere.

I disagree I'm afraid. Both solar panels and wind turbines are not environmentally friendly at all. Both in the materials copper, steel etc used to build them and the fact that they are not bio degradable. There are huge transport costs involved also. The average lifespan of a wind turbine blade is short and we are now seeing the problem of disposal
www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-02-05/wind-turbine-blades-can-t-be-recycled-so-they-re-piling-up-in-landfills

Both solar panels and wind turbines are not environmentally friendly at all.

You have to look at the lifetime environmental impact of, say, the turbine blades compared with carbon rich fuels or nuclear, versus the GW they can produce over a lifetime. And as the article says, in the EU the materials that make up the blades can be re-purposed.

Nothing is free, as was said above. Compared with oil or gas, wind turbines win hands down.

And there's always Gummi bears.

phys.org/news/2022-08-turbine-blades-recycled-sweet.html

I knew there was a reason I didn't like them.

Makes sense to have all new builds, factories etc have solar panels, but no one seems to mention that unfortunately not all properties are suitable for them.

They need to face the right way, have the right pitch, not overshadowed by other buildings, trees, hedges etc.

We had solar panels installed a few years ago, we fitted the criteria, but I look around at other properties as I walk about, and think “That roof would be no good for solar”.

Calendargirl, The right pitch was something I never knew about until we tried to have solar panels installed on our roof. We are ridiculously well placed to have solar panels, but have been told ‘no’ by 3 different firms because of pitch.

There is nothing as inconsistent as planning, our local council has refused planning permission to develop a WW2 airfield, a brownfield site, then granted planning for housing on a similar area of prime agricultural land half a mile away.

volver I quote from your link
Agrivoltaics will only work well for plants that require shade and where sunlight is not a limiting factor. Shade crops represent only a tiny percentage of agricultural productivity.[1] For instance, wheat crops do not fare well in a low light environment and are not compatible with agrivoltaics.

Unfortunately in this country, the main crops grown in the fields that solar panels are placed in are field crops like grain, rape, maize etc and while sheep can be grazed. This article talks mainly about growing crops, lettuce and tomatoes that are green house crops in the UK and it seems to me would have high labour costs if grown on under panels. Would probably work in california where they have access to very cheap and abundant labour, but not in the UK where thereis a shortage of farm labour and concomitantly higher wages.

I agree about the problems of having crops that will grow in the shade M0nica. Also Casdon made a very valid point about the use of tractors etc.

GrannyGravy13

I think it should be a legal requirement for all new builds to have solar panels, along with water harvesting systems, triple glazing and top notch insulation.

Solar panels should be on factories, schools, hospitals any building really.

There is a huge solar panel farm in the North East of our County along with several wind farms. The nuclear power station has been taken off grid and is decommissioned.

There are new Building Regulations now in place for this.

Part L Building Regs will take effect from 1st June 2022 and aims to deliver a 31% improvement on current sustainability and energy efficiency standards over 2013’s building regulations. All new buildings have to make use of solar, better glazing and more insulation .

Solar and wind has my vote especially as it’s the cheapest way to produce energy. I’m surrounded by both here in Cornwall and have no objections to more going up.

volver

^Both solar panels and wind turbines are not environmentally friendly at all.^

You have to look at the lifetime environmental impact of, say, the turbine blades compared with carbon rich fuels or nuclear, versus the GW they can produce over a lifetime. And as the article says, in the EU the materials that make up the blades can be re-purposed.

Nothing is free, as was said above. Compared with oil or gas, wind turbines win hands down.

Think there are too many downsides to wind turbines to make them a viable alternative to fossil fuel production, the same is true of solar panels. Neither are a reliable source of power as today's electrical grid cannot store the electricity generated by them. That is a major disadvantage as reliability has to be the over riding criteria. These problems will be solved at sometime in the future but that is many decades away right now. The rushed " green" power agenda is delusional and we are already experiencing the fallout from that delusion.

In a word - rubbish.

The green power agenda is not rushed, this I know for a fact since I was working on solar panels and the impending energy crisis 40 years ago. What we are experiencing is the fallout from not rushing.

If you want to talk about the technical aspects of green power, I'm your woman.

M0nica

volver I quote from your link
Agrivoltaics will only work well for plants that require shade and where sunlight is not a limiting factor. Shade crops represent only a tiny percentage of agricultural productivity.[1] For instance, wheat crops do not fare well in a low light environment and are not compatible with agrivoltaics.

Unfortunately in this country, the main crops grown in the fields that solar panels are placed in are field crops like grain, rape, maize etc and while sheep can be grazed. This article talks mainly about growing crops, lettuce and tomatoes that are green house crops in the UK and it seems to me would have high labour costs if grown on under panels. Would probably work in california where they have access to very cheap and abundant labour, but not in the UK where thereis a shortage of farm labour and concomitantly higher wages.

The only practical crop with solar panels is grass, grazed with sheep, they will maintain the field and not damage the panels and structures.
If it is not maintained the surface will quickly return to scrub, bushes and small trees establish quickly, although it is shaded by the panels during the day all of the grass receives some direct sunlight. Production will be limited because no fertilisers will be applied so the stocking rate is low, nevertheless the opportunity for producing organic lamb is realistic.

There is also the opportunity to leave areas ungrazed for wildlife on a rotation while still preventing scrub growth.

Katie59 I quite agree, but the discussion was about growing crops.

The problem I can see with grazing sheep on good quality agricultural land, which will not go into a crop rotation, is high stocking rates and that the build up of sheep droppings will make good soil even richer and the rapid growth of grass and weeds fed by the droppings may make the land unsuitable for sheep grazing and difficult to crop as hay.

Land used only for grazing is generally poor quality and often acid soils, and grazing densities are low so that the benefit of the droppings to the poor soil sustains a steady crop of grass. Un fortunately land of that type is not often suitable for solar farms.