Potential sites for new mega-solar farms

[SammyQ]

Terry in Somerset?

"20% of UK housing units (5.8m) were built before 2019 when property was typically built with solid walls"....

Ah, no. I think you will find - and builders etc please feel free to correct me - solid walls were phased out from the mid fifties on. There is no way in God's Heaven we were still on 9" solid walls in 2018.

 

[Blackswanwood]

No, the postponement was nothing to do with objections but simply many 'Matters of State' are automatically put on hold when a General Election is announced. Should point out that that link is for the Lincolnshire site. This is the link for Sunnica where the Inspectorate recommended witholding consent.

https://infrastructure.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/wp-content/ipc/uploads/projects/EN010106/EN010106-005902-Sunnica-ExA-Recommendation-Report-28-June-2023-FINAL-with Errata sheet.pdf

BSD rules !

The report is dated June 2023. Plenty of time for his predecessor to have made the call before the election was announced.

I’ve only skimmed it but again cannot see where he is ignoring all scientific advice.

I don’t know what BSD is but I’d maintain this is simply a minister weighing up the facts and making a decision. I’ve certainly not followed every recommendation put to me by my team at work.

 

[Richard_C]

Terry in Somerset?

"20% of UK housing units (5.8m) were built before 2019 when property was typically built with solid walls"....

I think he means 1919


https://www.statista.com/statistics/292252/age-of-housing-dwellings-in-england-uk-by-tenuree/

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Terry in Somerset?

"20% of UK housing units (5.8m) were built before 2019 when property was typically built with solid walls"....

Ah, no. I think you will find - and builders etc please feel free to correct me - solid walls were phased out from the mid fifties on. There is no way in God's Heaven we were still on 9" solid walls in 2018.

Looking again - cavity walls started to become common from 1920 (not 2019 typo) onwards - but the transition took several decades. Post WW2 most construction was cavity wall.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

The report is dated June 2023. Plenty of time for his predecessor to have made the call before the election was announced.

I’ve only skimmed it but again cannot see where he is ignoring all scientific advice.

I don’t know what BSD is but I’d maintain this is simply a minister weighing up the facts and making a decision. I’ve certainly not followed every recommendation put to me by my team at work.

Civil servants are often described as serial monogamists - intensely loyal in providing a service to whoever is in political charge.

It is an essential skill that they are produce a report which is capable of whatever interpretation a government minister wants to apply.

I can understand why emotions run high locally and on specific issues - but more generally there may be no right or wrong.

In this case the need for green energy generation is a high priority, it needs to be put somewhere, it is being funded (I assume) without recourse to government, wherever it goes someone will be unhappy. It is just politically necessary and expedient.

More important is why it should take so long to get approval - possibly 5 years + including development of the plan submitted. Protests and appeals may consume another 2 or 3.

No wonder the UK lags compared to other parts of the world if progress is continually hampered by extended barriers to decision making - delay does little to solve the problems - but seriously increases cost and reduces benefits.

 

[Spectric]

solid walls were phased out from the mid fifties on

I think the seventies was when housebuilding was cheapened up and solid walls were deemed labour intensive and more expensive along with cheaper matchstick type roof trusses, this process has continued as MDF was introduced until now when they are more shed than house. I reckon when the flood gates are opened up the property developers will just build on mass and quality will suffer even more, it will be the modern equivalent of the old post war prefab and at some point down the line will become the slums of the future.

 

[Fergie 307]

Agreed. We need to find a way to recycle them or use a different material. I’ve read recently how useful Hemp is and how under used. Apparently Henry Ford wanted to use hemp in car body panels?

On solar, this is interesting.

https://www.cpre.org.uk/news/rooftops-can-provide-over-half-our-solar-energy-targets-report-shows/

Just down the road from us there are several huge warehouses that have just been built. They are all oriented broadly east-west, so have an enormous combined area of south facing roofs. Not a panel in sight.
Obliging these sort of buildings to have panels, even if we have to subsidise the cost in some way, seems a no brainer. Likewise all new build homes. There are many more farms proposed across east anglia, many like the recent one using thousands of acres of good agricultural land. This doesn't seem a great idea long term.
The government could set an example. Look at the amount of land owned by the MOD for example. Most airbases have massive areas of land which is completely unused. Why not install panels in some of these locations, and on government buildings.

 

[deema]

Subsidies, handouts, support are all great buzz words along with cost of living, young can’t afford housing, lack of public services. The common theme, we lack foresight in planting money trees. Yep, if we want we have to put our hands in our pockets, and as long as that restricted to the top 1% everyone is happy?? But, they are already digging deeper than at any stage in the last century so, the burden has to creep down the tree and that’s as popular as a Conservative leader.
The cupboard is bare, we’ve already mortgaged the country and created a debt generations that are still unborn will be paying off. So, I think it’s time to get real and appreciate that there simply isn’t the money or public will to make the cuts to public services / handouts to fund the green revolution.

 

[woodieallen]

....

.... I’ve certainly not followed every recommendation put to me by my team at work.

But I'll wager that you never bragged about it.

 

[woodieallen]

.....

More important is why it should take so long to get approval - possibly 5 years + including development of the plan submitted. Protests and appeals may consume another 2 or 3.

.....

I recall reading a figure stating that in most infrastructure projects, 80% of the time is spent in the planning/permissions stage and just 20% in the build.

 

[Cooper]

As usual, policies dictated by ignoramuses and implemented by non-technical (generally) Civil Servants.

How do I know this? My oldest fried studied Classics at Cambridge, got 1st and worked for Dpt of Business & Trade or it's previous names all his working life!

No Science studied after O level and no Economy qualifications at all!!

He despised most ministers of any party as essentially grandstanding to their rabid adherents.

Phil

As a matter of fact my daughter works in the energy department and she has 2 Masters Degrees from Imperial College in Physics and Sustainable energy. I believe her colleagues are similarly qualified.

 

[glenfield2]

Those who benefit the most should shoulder their fair proportion of the cost. Will the young not have the most to benefit from net zero? Do the young have a ‘hall pass’ that means they are entitled to shout and protest about climate change but not be affected by the changes and costs needed?

I

Those who benefit the most should shoulder their fair proportion of the cost. Will the young not have the most to benefit from net zero? Do the young have a ‘hall pass’ that means they are entitled to shout and protest about climate change but not be affected by the changes and costs needed?

i think they are paying more than their share: they haven’t benefitted from huge rises in property values, as we in in the postwar generation have. Instead many can barely afford to buy or even rent a home.
They won’t again unlike many of us be retiring on salary based pensions. Indeed they’ll probably be working into their 70s.
They don’t have a health service that works and their taxes will still be paying towards the care of our ‘baby boom’ generation of geriatrics.
Those that went to uni will be paying back loans most of their lives.
It goes on.
They will benefit and so they should. They’re not benefiting from a whole lot else our generation has given them.

 

[Agent_zed]

Looking again - cavity walls started to become common from 1920 (not 2019 typo) onwards - but the transition took several decades. Post WW2 most construction was cavity wall.

They might have been cavity wall but that doesn't mean they were insulated. My house was built in 1955 with cavity walls but no insulation at all (it has been retro fitted a few decades ago).

 

[Chris152]

I

i think they are paying more than their share: they haven’t benefitted from huge rises in property values, as we in in the postwar generation have. Instead many can barely afford to buy or even rent a home.
They won’t again unlike many of us be retiring on salary based pensions. Indeed they’ll probably be working into their 70s.
They don’t have a health service that works and their taxes will still be paying towards the care of our ‘baby boom’ generation of geriatrics.
Those that went to uni will be paying back loans most of their lives.
It goes on.
They will benefit and so they should. They’re not benefiting from a whole lot else our generation has given them.

Agree completely. The idea that primarily young people should shoulder the financial burden is absurd - how about those who created the problem shouldering the burden? Of course young people will shoulder the burden, either financially if enough is done to mitigate manmade climate change, or physically if it's not - or both.

 

[Agent_zed]

They will benefit and so they should. They’re not benefiting from a whole lot else our generation has given them.

Whilst I'm not old enough to speak from experience, I would argue that the 'boomer' generation did have to live through things that people would cry about today, it's easy to forget what we have available today. My parents grew up in the early part of their lives in a house without a fridge or a TV. They didn't have double glazing or cavity wall insulation, They didn't have central heating and power showers. They didn't have memory foam mattresses or clothing so cheap it could be worn a few times and thrown away.
If they wanted music he had to save and buy records assuming they could afford a record player. If they wanted to learn anything they had to go to a library and hope there was a book on it or find someone who knew. They didn't have a telephone. There wasn't the 'pill' til 1960. 3 day weeks in the 70's due to energy crisis. It wasn't til the 80's there was an sort of maternity leave, there was certainly no IVF. MRI scanners only just started being used in the 80's and numerous other medical benefits in the past few decades. No cheap flights to Ibiza for a weekend partying.

I'd be surprised if the current generation want to go back to waiting for the coal man and wiping the frost of the inside of their windows, walking to a phone box to make any calls about the 1 of 3 TV channels they might watch that evening, so they can have cheaper housing (quite often living with grandparent(s)).

 

[Chris152]

Whilst I'm not old enough to speak from experience, I would argue that the 'boomer' generation did have to live through things that people would cry about today, it's easy to forget what we have available today. My parents grew up in the early part of their lives in a house without a fridge or a TV. They didn't have double glazing or cavity wall insulation, They didn't have central heating and power showers. They didn't have memory foam mattresses or clothing so cheap it could be worn a few times and thrown away.
If they wanted music he had to save and buy records assuming they could afford a record player. If they wanted to learn anything they had to go to a library and hope there was a book on it or find someone who knew. They didn't have a telephone. There wasn't the 'pill' til 1960. 3 day weeks in the 70's due to energy crisis. It wasn't til the 80's there was an sort of maternity leave, there was certainly no IVF. MRI scanners only just started being used in the 80's and numerous other medical benefits in the past few decades. No cheap flights to Ibiza for a weekend partying.

I'd be surprised if the current generation want to go back to waiting for the coal man and wiping the frost of the inside of their windows, walking to a phone box to make any calls about the 1 of 3 TV channels they might watch that evening, so they can have cheaper housing (quite often living with grandparent(s)).

I'm not sure you've quite grasped the enormity of the crisis young people are likely to face if nothing significant's done to mitigate climate change.

 

[Jacob]

Those who benefit the most should shoulder their fair proportion of the cost. Will the young not have the most to benefit from net zero? ....

So raise the money from little children?
Where would you start? With infant schools and see if any of them are earning a few pennies? Get them to fill out tax returns listing all pocket money and benefits in kind?
Interesting idea but there's a basic problem - they tend not have much money and even if in work they usually don't earn a lot!
In a civilised society the cost of societal improvements has to be born by those who have the wealth, whether or not they personally get any benefit.
In fact those most in need are generally least able to pay, and vice versa.

 

[John Brown]

Subsidies, handouts, support are all great buzz words along with cost of living, young can’t afford housing, lack of public services. The common theme, we lack foresight in planting money trees. Yep, if we want we have to put our hands in our pockets, and as long as that restricted to the top 1% everyone is happy?? But, they are already digging deeper than at any stage in the last century so, the burden has to creep down the tree and that’s as popular as a Conservative leader.
The cupboard is bare, we’ve already mortgaged the country and created a debt generations that are still unborn will be paying off. So, I think it’s time to get real and appreciate that there simply isn’t the money or public will to make the cuts to public services / handouts to fund the green revolution.

So what's the alternative, just give up?
Eat drink and make merry, for tomorrow we may die?

 

[Keith Cocker]

Another interesting tread. A few random observations.
The buried blades from turbines are a form of carbon sequestration. The resin and carbonfiber were once oil. Buried in the ground they may not rot but they will not be released into the atmosphere as CO2.
There have been several negative comments about the cost of insulation and solar panels. There were proposed regulations that new homes should be highly energy efficient and old homes insulated in the early 2000s, I believe to be implemented in 2016, giving ample time for the industry to adjust. Unfortunately the last government, elected with massive financial support from the property speculators (euphemistically described as builders), ditched them, as part of Cameron's getting rid of the green rubbish.
Energy efficient homes would have saved us, as a nation, billions rather than subsidising gas, when Putin turned off supplies after we rightly decided to impose sanctions.
As to the noise of wind turbines, consider yourself lucky to live in silent open unspoiled countryside wherever that may be. When I've had the occasional opportunity to relax in the country, there has usually the noise of traffic and agricultural machinery in the background. I've just been sitting in my secluded suburban garden in south east London, six miles from Biggin Hill private jet park, with a railway 200 meters away and quite a busy road 100 meters away and always 5 flights in the sky passing to and from Heathrow and Gatwick. I would like to let you know how peaceful it was and that I could listen to the wrens wittering in my hedges. A little woshing, not dissimilar to the sound of waves on the shore half a mile away will be easy for you to cope with.
If these simple changes to the production and use of energy go some way towards mitigating the undoubted ravaging of parts of our plant by extreme temperatures, out of control forest fires, devastating hurricanes and rising sea levels, in my opinion it is a price well worth paying.
One thing I’ve noticed about climate emergency deniers etc, happily not on this forum, is they are same people who don’t like refugees. Wars over water and desertification are driving millions from their homes, a tiny fraction of whom try to cross the Channel to reach Kent. If only to reduce the occasional tragic loss of life in the Channel I think it’s worth the effort to change our production and use of energy. There are also numerous other benifits.

Bravo. All very well said.

 

[Jacob]

Subsidies, handouts, support are all great buzz words along with cost of living, young can’t afford housing, lack of public services. The common theme, we lack foresight in planting money trees. Yep, if we want we have to put our hands in our pockets, and as long as that restricted to the top 1% everyone is happy?? But, they are already digging deeper than at any stage in the last century so, the burden has to creep down the tree and that’s as popular as a Conservative leader.
The cupboard is bare, we’ve already mortgaged the country and created a debt generations that are still unborn will be paying off. So, I think it’s time to get real and appreciate that there simply isn’t the money or public will to make the cuts to public services / handouts to fund the green revolution.

Complete and utter nonsense.
The distribution of wealth has been steeply upwards for a long time now, with inequalities getting ever more severe.
At the same time top rates of tax are at an historical low.
This is a major cause of our decline in world terms and a deliberate ideological tory policy.
It's also a major opportunity to claw back these ill-gotten gains and increase public spending.
"Wealth inequality is high and rising and more marked than income inequality. In the UK, the bottom 50% of the population owned less than 5% of wealth in 2021, and the top 10% a staggering 57% (up from 52.5% in 1995). The top 1% alone held 23% (World Inequality Lab, 2022)."

Google the topic - you will find page after page saying much the same thing https://equalitytrust.org.uk/scale-economic-inequality-uk/