We cannot depend on fossil fuels (coal, oil and gas) in the long-term as they:

• give off greenhouse gases which are changing the earth’s climate, leading to long-term problems for humans and nature

• are highly polluting, which is damaging to human health and nature

• are a finite resource and are becoming too expensive, so more and more people cannot afford them, leading to fuel poverty

​​

​

Hydrogen gives off only water when burned and can be used as a direct replacement for most fossil fuel uses. The big problem with hydrogen is there isn’t enough that’s easy to get at and naturally occurring  to meet our needs, meaning we’ll have to make it.

Hydrogen can be made from water but it takes a lot of energy, which we’d either have to get from burning fossil fuels or from renewables. Using hydrogen, therefore, could meet some of our energy needs but only if we also fully commit to renewables like wind, solar and the rest.

Biomass means stuff that grows or waste from stuff that grows, such as trees, animal manure and food waste, all of which can be burned or converted to bio-gas using anaerobic digestion which can then be burned to generate energy.

Biomass is considered a renewable because other living things can grow to replace what has been used. However, unlike other renewables, biomass gives off greenhouse gases, which contribute to global warming. Although making ‘new’ biomass will re-absorb the carbon release in burning the previous material, this takes time – think how long it takes for trees to grow. 

So biomass, can only ever be a partial fix to the UK energy mix problem.​​​

​

The National Grid has been designed to carry electricity from power stations to where it is used. Changing where we generate our electricity from in-shore power stations to large offshore wind farms bringing their power ashore at a small number of places will place impossible loads on the National Grid, meaning we will have to redesign it at great cost to consumers.

Solar farms and rooftop solar can be installed much closer to where the energy is needed which means much less re-design work for the National Grid and, therefore, far less cost to the consumer.

It is inevitable that local renewable generation and local consumption, possibly linked to local tariff arrangements, will form part of the UK electricity  landscape in the future.

No, this is not true.

A solar farm leaves no permanent effect on land. It can be removed in a few days and the site reverted back to whatever use it previously had or an alternative. In a couple of years it would be impossible to tell that a solar farm had ever been there.

While it is in place, the soil also has a chance to improve its own micro-structures and fauna if it is not being used for intensive agriculture.

This is not the case with a power station – think about all the ‘brown field’ sites that we have to spend money on in order to clean up and re-use.

Like all electronic apparatus  solar panels and control systems contain lead (in the solder used to make electrical connections) and other rare metals.

These cannot leave the device when in use, but the equipment must be disposed of properly at the end of its use, either by re-use elsewhere or by proper re-cycling. The elements that can be recovered are of value (many are scarce) so there is a strong financial as well as legislative imperative to recover these. Given that these installations may have lifetimes of 30 or 40 years, the need for this recovery will increase into the future. Already, the scrap value of ‘old’ consumer electronics from your local recycling centre has increased several-fold.

The most obvious alternative sources of energy that do not give off greenhouse gases are:

• Renewables (wind, solar, hydro, geothermal, wave and tidal)

• Nuclear

• Hydrogen

Renewables can be used for most things we currently use fossil fuels for and are endlessly available – the wind is always blowing somewhere, the sun is shining, rivers are flowing, waves are forming in the sea and the Earth’s core is generating heat.​

While we can perhaps use nuclear as part of our future energy mix, we cannot rely on it as a replacement for fossil fuels. This is because existing nuclear power stations are nearing the end of their useful lives and new ones take a very long time to build, are hugely expensive and present significant risks.

We still don’t  have a good way of safely dealing with nuclear waste.

​

​

In the UK wind farms are now big business and wind turbines are very efficient at converting wind into electricity, so why do we need solar at all?

The UK Government has set targets for onshore and offshore wind capacity to be installed by 2030 and 2050.  These targets, together with some existing nuclear capacity, do not meet the likely total UK electricity demand. We will therefore need to continue to burn gas to make up the shortfall or turn to other renewable sources such as solar. It therefore makes sense to increase energy generation from all renewable sources.  In addition, offshore wind farms aren’t in the best location to provide electricity to all parts of the UK and sometimes the wind doesn’t blow. 

Solar panels are usually between 15 and 22% efficient, meaning they convert 15-22% of the sun’s energy that falls on them to electricity.

This is much less than wind turbines at 50%+ or a standard gas boiler at as much as 94% or even a standard car engine at between 60 and 85%.

Efficiency is an important consideration if you are dealing with a limited resource. However, wind and solar are free and readily available, whereas gas and petrol have to be found, mined, refined and transported – think of North Sea oil rigs, oil tankers, gas pipes and petrol stations – meaning their efficiency is much less than it may appear.

​​​​

​

No, this is not ‘tokenism’. 

During the life time of the solar farm, the land could, for example, be used for livestock grazing or bee-keeping, both of which can generate additional income for the land owner. The presence of bees and other pollinators is a good sign that biodiversity is improving. Or the land could simply be left to lie fallow or managed to encourage wild flowers to grow thereby invigorating nature.

All of these possible uses, without pesticide or fertiliser application, will allow the soil fertility and condition to improve and flora and fauna to flourish, increasing the biodiversity and health of the ecosystem.  ​

60% of our food is imported, land is being taken out of cultivation at a rate of almost 100,000 acres per year, and yields are declining due to the effect of global heating. Can we afford to lose more arable land to the development of solar farms?

Economics, consumer habits and expectations are the major drivers of food imports, not the proportion of land used in the UK.  The availability of best and most versatile (BMV) land may be more than enough if alternative crop varieties and new forms of growing (hydroponics etc) become commonplace.  Moreover, the land used for a solar farm can quickly and completely return to farming use if needed.

It is for landowners to decide how they manage and use their land.  ​The idea that good land is somehow ‘poorly used’ if it has a solar farm temporarily sited on it is not the whole story – the reasons for this are far more complex.  Many traditional forms of agriculture are not financially sustainable. We should be asking “why do landowners look to solar farms and other schemes as the only viable business for their land?”.