Signed in as:
filler@godaddy.com
The Proposal (last update - November 2023)
The above map shows the proposed 232 acre site as at 21st September 2023. The orange and brown shaded areas are those that RES have set aside for displaced skylarks to resettle in. It also includes RES' latest plan to install two battery storage containers next to each inverter.
RES claim the farm would be 'capable of generating up to 40MW of clean, low cost energy, enough to power approximately 18,000 homes.' The site was chosen 'as it has good solar irradiation levels, lies outside of any statutory environmental, archaeological and landscape designations and is close to a viable grid connection' (i.e. Ilketshall St Andrew sub-station).
They state that the solar panels will be up to 3.6mtr tall (11 feet 7 inches) and the area would be enclosed by 2.4mtr tall deer fencing.
During the construction phase of their development RES are planning to direct most of the traffic for the western sector from the A143 through Flixton and along Hillside Road East onto the B1062 where they have managed to obtain an access point near Maisebrook Farm. The rest of the traffic will be sent along the A144 and then up Top Road and onto Tooks Common Lane and Clarkes Lane until reaching the access points at Rookery Farm (western section) or the track to the substation (eastern section). They have not said how the traffic will leave the development so, presumably, the drivers will be given a free hand to choose for themselves. Both sites will be open for deliveries between 0700 and 1900 Monday to Friday, and 0800 to 1600 on Saturdays.
RES have said that they will maintain all public rights of way and, if you stand in the middle of them, you will have a clear 5-6 metres on either side before encountering the 8 feet tall deer fencing and, five metres beyond that, their 11 feet 7 inch tall solar panels. They say this will be enough to preserve the sense of openness for anyone walking them.
To scale cross-section of a proposed public right of way through solar panels (based on information supplied by RES)
Site images now, and how they may look post development.
Panoramic videos of proposed development sites.
At 50+ acres this field is the largest part of the proposed Eastern development and not shown in the stills above. The video was shot from Hall Road near Furze Corner. Everything but the section in which the bungalow is enclosed could be could soon be filled with 12 feet tall solar panels - a great view for everyone, particularly the person in the bungalow. N.B. please view on full screen - the roof of the bungalow can be seen in the distance partially shielded by hedging
This high speed video was shot from the diagonal footpath in middle of the largest field of the proposed Western development. It is a 360 degree view of the landscape starting and finishing with the view of the Grade 1 listed Ilketshall St Andrew church on the horizon. As the crow flies the old workhouse also seen in the video (a Grade 2 listed building) is almost four miles from it.
It really is hard to imagine how this sense of openness can be maintained with twelve feet tall solar panels less than 10 metres away in any direction. One thing, however, is certain: - if the development goes ahead it will no longer be possible to stand anywhere and see the two buildings with just a turn of the head
View RES's proposal for yourself by clicking on this link
Our Response to the RES Proposal.
This is the response of the Stop Shipmeadow Solar Farm Action Group to the most recently issued ‘Information Sheet’ from RES about the proposed development. We have summarised their key points and given our views on what they say. The points they have NOT covered speak as loudly as those which they have.
RES avoid mentioning current planning policies related to the development of prime agricultural land. In summary, the best and most versatile (BMV) agricultural land should be protected from development proposals which are:
- Significant - 232 acres IS significant.
- Inappropriate - this development IS NOT appropriate for the setting.
- Unsustainable - new technologies will make solar (the least efficient form of renewable energy), redundant very quickly, water consumption is high and no viable recycling facilities exist
RES talk about climatic change and energy security but fail to mention that installing solar panels on brownfield sites, residential and commercial rooftops would improve both food and energy security.
Use of Agricultural Land
What RES Says:
1. Shipmeadow Solar Farm will not be a threat to food security because it enables sheep farming, which provides employment and supports rural economies.
2. Species-rich grassland provides a wide range of forage for sheep livestock.
3. Solar farms in the UK currently make up just under 0.1% of land in the UK.
4. The ground underneath a solar farm will recover - no requirement for cultivation, fertilisers or pesticides associated with intensive agriculture.
What We Say:
1. The UK is importing record amounts of grain, oil, and similar foodstuffs BUT it is the third largest sheep meat exporter in the world. Replacing nearly 300 acres of arable farming with sheep farming, worsens UK food security.
2. Sheep farming is out of character with the North Suffolk landscape. This area is typically utilised for arable farming. Where livestock is farmed, it tends to be cattle, pigs or chickens. Natural England say: sheep grazing impacts biodiversity and the land will take decades to recover.
3. Sheep grazing will need to be rotational, so when sheep aren’t grazing there is a requirement for herbicides to control vegetation. RES fail to mention the use of herbicides.
4. RES look backwards not forwards. Between January and August 2022 alone, an additional 25% of total UK solar capacity was approved. There are already huge developments in the approvals pipeline, so the 0.1% figure quoted will be dwarfed very shortly.
5. Solar is already one of the least efficient renewable energy technologies. In less than 40 years it will most likely be overtaken by nuclear fusion and hydrogen. Recycling panels is not currently financially viable. Will they be left as decaying scrap, whilst the UK continues to import more food?
Solar Panels
What RES Say:
1. The solar panels they are proposing will be up to 3.6 metres or roughly 12 feet tall.
2. They allow increased generation in a smaller area.
3. The height is effective for the use of the more efficient bifacial panels.
4. Solar panels make no noise.
What We Say:
1. The 12ft panels will be almost as high as a double decker bus. This conflicts with what many were told at the public consultation.
2. If bifacial panels increase the generation of power, why do they still need nearly 300 acres of land?
3. Face to face at the public consultation, parishioners were told that bifacial panels would not be used. Now they are. Was this information withheld or deliberately misleading?
4. NOISE! While the panels themselves are silent, the original RES plan shows thirteen inverters. You can hear the noise these make by searching on YouTube. If you live nearby, you will hear them at night.
Ecology and Biodiversity
What RES Say:
1. There are no statutory environmental or ecological designated sites at the proposed solar farm.
2. To protect existing ecology, solar infrastructure will be set back a minimum of five metres from
existing hedgerow, rivers, drains and ponds.
3. Perimeter fencing is proposed to be deer fencing up to 2.4 metres high.
4. There is significant potential to enhance ecological habitats and deliver Biodiversity Net Gain. The site is capable of hosting a range of habitats including wildflower meadows, hedgerows, nectar-rich areas for pollinators and woodland.
5. RES will endeavour to maintain all existing hedgerows and trees. Any new infill hedgerow planting proposed, will be at least equal in height or taller at maturity than existing hedgerows.
What We Say
1. The Commons are a designated County Wildlife Site which DOES carry weight and protection in planning decision-making.
2. Putting panels 5 metres from hedgerows, ponds etc, is insufficient. (Great Crested Newts can travel up to 1 km to forage and find habitat.) There are no rivers nearby!
3. Deer fencing is 8 feet high to prevent the deer leaping over it, but they will try when following their ancient paths. Deer have been photographed trapped between fencing and caught in it.
4. Having the potential to enhance bio-diversity isn’t the same as actually enhancing it. What are the actual enhancements RES will make and how can they be measured? ~ The existing landscape already hosts a range of habitats including, wildflower meadows, hedgerows, nectar-rich areas for pollinators and natural woodland. ~ How long will a wildflower meadow last with sheep grazing on it? ~ Endeavouring to maintain existing hedgerows and trees, is not the same as actually doing it.
~ If a mature tree or hedgerow is in the way of the solar panels, what do you think will happen? ~ How long will it take for the new infill hedgerows to reach maturity?
Public Rights of Way & Permissive Paths
What RES Say:
1. RES understand how much the existing Public Rights of Way (PRoW) are valued, and their design will retain and protect all existing PRoW.
2. Solar infrastructure will be set back from the existing PRoW and permissive paths, with new and infill planting provided, to ensure the sense of openness is not compromised.
3. RES is exploring opportunities for improvements to the PRoW network, including the creation of permissive paths.
What We Say:
1. At a face to face meeting with an Action Group member, the RES Project Manager insisted that at least one PRoW was never used! This is totally incorrect, just like their comment about rivers on the site. Do RES know anything about the existing PRoW, where they go or who uses them? What does this say about their understanding of this area?
2. More than one of the PRoW actually cross through the proposed development site which will have 3.6m high panels in it, as well as being surrounded by 2.4m deer fencing.
3. People have enjoyed the setting from the existing PRoW for generations. No amount of permissive paths can compensate for the loss of openness. Even the new permissive paths will have the solar farm on at least one side. How does this provide a sense of openness?
4. Many of the PRoW commence, end at, and/or cross the roads and lanes around the proposed site. The increased traffic volumes will present a greater risk to the safety of all road users.
Construction Traffic and Access
What RES Say:
1. The construction phase the Solar Farm is anticipated to be approximately 12 months.
2. There will be peak traffic flow for short periods of a few weeks, for equipment delivery. The majority of the construction phase traffic will be personnel getting to and from the site in vans.
3. There will be a Construction Traffic Management Plan for the safe movement of construction and delivery traffic, and movements will be limited to avoid morning and evening peak times, ‘where possible’. A delivery route is being planned in consultation with Suffolk Highways but has not, yet, been confirmed. RES will consult with Suffolk Highways and the Parish Councils to ‘mitigate’ traffic disruption.
What We Say:
1. RES are one of the biggest solar farm construction companies, so why can’t they be more definitive with their timescale? They said it could take ‘up to 24 months’ at the public exhibition. With many solar farms of 100 acres taking 12 months to build, how could a site of 300 acres be built in the same time? More personnel and traffic movements maybe?
2. What is ‘a short period of time?’ RES think 40 years is temporary!
3. Will their Traffic Management Plan include a one-way system? Res learned about ‘Quiet Lanes’, increased traffic during harvests and road verges at the public consultation from residents, NOT from their own site visits! What does this say about the effort they put in to determining the real impact of their proposal? They can’t get to, or from the site without using narrow, single track roads, some of which are designated Quiet Lanes. (Clarkes Lane, Mill Lane, Banters Lane) They acknowledge that there will be disruption, but this won’t just be traffic related!
Depleting Scarce Water Supplies
What RES Say:
1. New and/or infill planting will minimise potential visibility, as well as provide a plentiful source of food and shelter for a range of fauna.
2. RES are unable to confirm the quantity or type of planting, but new planting will take the form of both native hedgerow planting and woodland planting and may be a mix of mature and immature plants.
3. It is not possible to quantify the amounts of water required to maintain new and/or infill planting, as it will be subject to climatic conditions and the plant species.
4. Water will be used to clean the panels typically twice a year, subject to weather conditions.
What We Say:
1. The panels are 3.6m high so they WILL be visible! They will be seen from many private homes, historical buildings, PRoW and both main and secondary roads around the site.
2. RES can’t confirm the type of planting, but then they say planting will be native hedgerow and woodland with a mix of mature and immature plants that will provide food and shelter for a range of fauna! What fauna will benefit, and how?
3. RES can’t quantify the water required as it depends on climatic conditions but their ‘Information Sheet’ states ‘climate change means more droughts’! This means copious amounts of water will be needed to establish and maintain planting. RES have developed sites before and know the volumes of water involved, but they don’t want to be open about the amount needed in an area still classified as being ‘in drought’.
4. The proposed site is surrounded by dusty arable farming environments and dust impacts solar panel effectiveness. It is hard to see how a bi-annual clean will be sufficient. RES avoid saying how much water is needed per clean, as it is measured in millions of litres! Where is this water going to come from?
Benefits to the Local Economy
What RES Say:
1. When constructing the project, they seek to maximise inward investment, through the use of local contractors.
2. However, given the specialist nature of some of the equipment, it is inevitable that RES will need to source equipment from a wider supply chain, which may be within the UK, Europe or worldwide.
What We Say:
1. RES confirmed at the public exhibition and in one-to-one conversations outside of that event, that they typically use specialist contractors who they deploy on most of their builds.
2. In a nearby proposed solar farm of over 100 acres, the number of local people to be employed is two. As RES have stated that the site will be constructed in ‘approximately 12 months’, it doesn’t amount to a lot of inward investment.
Environment & Consumers
What RES Say
1. The switch to renewables will lead to reductions in electricity bills for all consumers.
2. The solar farm can produce green energy for around 18,000 homes every year.
3. Estimated business rates from the solar farm will be £130,000 pa. They believe solar schemes should provide meaningful benefits locally and they want to work with the local community to gain feedback on their priority projects and aims in the area, which the solar farm may be able to support.
What We Say
1. There is no evidence that the switch to renewables will lower bills. Since 2012 the share of UK renewable energy has increased from 20% to 35% but consumer prices have RISEN. This is because the energy price cap dictates prices to the consumer. If the cost of energy generation falls but the price to consumers remains static, the only beneficiary is the electricity generator. Also, demand for electricity is expected to increase (source - National Grid’s future energy scenarios).
2. Solar isn’t as green as the industry wants you to believe, if the full supply chain is examined. The estimate of 18,000 homes is based on current household consumption, NOT future demand from things like ground and air source heat pumps; electric car charging points; household air conditioning; and consumer electronics. There will inevitably be more household electrical energy consumption in the future. Why aren’t RES honest about the number of households this scheme will actually power in the future?
3. Their business rates statement omits to mention that the rates benefit East Suffolk generally. It does not acknowledge the loss of business rates from those established businesses who will suffer due to the impacts of the solar farm.
Glint and Glare
What RES Say
1. Solar panels are not highly reflective surfaces as they are designed to absorb sunlight and not to reflect it. A Glint and Glare assessment will accompany any planning application and will consider potential impacts on ground-based receptors (residential dwellings and roads) as well as aviation.
What We Say
1. There are numerous images online showing glint and glare from solar panels. If there were no potential problems, East Suffolk would not be asking for a Glint and Glare assessment to be undertaken. It is another confused statement from RES and what appears to be misinformation.
Grid Connection
What RES Say:
1. The proximity to a viable grid connection helps large-scale solar to remain the cheapest form of new electricity generation. The substation at Ilketshall St Andrew does have sufficient space and capacity.
What We Say:
1. RES didn’t look at any nearby brownfield sites and admitted they’d make less profit if they did! Solar farms are typically sold to companies like Shell, BP, EoN, EDF who are making record profits. RES appear to be only interested in easy money whatever the impact on the landscape, land use or the communities they disrupt. Cheaper electricity generation means more money for the generators (RES) not necessarily lower bills for consumers.
Solar & Modern Slavery
China's share of all the manufacturing stages of solar panels has grown, and now tops 80%. China is also home to the world's 10 top suppliers of solar PV manufacturing equipment.
What RES Say:
1. RES are committed to ensuring that modern slavery does not exist in their supply chain.
2. RES support applying the highest possible levels of transparency and sustainability throughout the value chain.
3. RES commit to the development of an industry-led traceability protocol to help to ensure their supply chain is free of human rights abuses.
4. RES expect anyone in the supply chain to adhere to UK law on aspects related to quality, safety and ethical standards.
What We Say:
1. RES are not able to say they are 100% certain there is no human slavery in their full supply chain.
2. RES support applying the highest possible levels of transparency and sustainability. How does their ‘support’ translate to tangible action and how will they measure transparency and sustainability?
3. RES are committed to developing a traceability protocol. If it’s being developed - then it doesn’t exist today, does it? So, what is happening in the meantime regarding traceability?
4. Suppliers are expected to adhere to UK law. How exactly does that apply to Chinese companies operating a workforce in China? They will take notice of Chinese law - not UK law. What is RES doing about making sure their expectations are met?
The scale of forced labour in solar panel manufacturing was made public a couple of years ago. Before this, the solar industry was happily importing Chinese built solar panels, asking few, if any questions.
Facts about RES
RES (Renewable Energy Systems) is the world's largest independent renewable energy company developing, constructing and operating wind, solar and energy storage projects for their clients around the globe.
What RES Say:
''RES is a leader in the development of renewable energy and energy storage, with a track record of initiating projects from scratch. In addition to developing our own projects, we also offer this service to our customers. We develop projects to ensure maximum value."