Hundreds of homes are set to be powered by the new solar farm
A stock image of a solar farm(Image: Ameresco)
The unveiling of plans for a new solar farm in the south of Bristol has sparked a lively discussion among Bristol Live readers, with many sharing their thoughts on the use of green spaces and the real beneficiaries of renewable energy projects.
The proposed solar farm, which is expected to provide clean electricity to approximately 500 homes, has prompted questions about food security, the loss of green fields, and whether this is the most effective way to promote clean energy.
A substantial solar farm is set to be built on the Dundry Slopes, on council-owned fields at the southern edge of Bristol. Bristol City Council and its ‘City Leap partners’ Ameresco have stated that the solar farm will generate 1.3 megawatts of electricity – sufficient to power 506 homes annually.
The farm would be situated in a field to the south of Hersey Gardens in Withywood, on the very fringe of South Bristol, as the land ascends towards the village of Dundry in North Somerset.
A council chief responsible for the environment at City Hall expressed his excitement at the proposal, stating that the collaboration between the council’s ‘City Leap partner’ Ameresco and the city council in Withywood ‘truly embodies the spirit’ of the partnership. The council signed a £1 billion agreement with Ameresco under Marvin Rees‘ Labour administration, with the main project between the two being the development of the Heat Network in inner city Bristol.
“We are thrilled to see the development of innovative projects like this in Bristol,” said Cllr Martin Fodor, the chair of the council’s environment and sustainability committee.
“Solar farms are essential in helping us achieve our goal of becoming a carbon-neutral city. By increasing the share of renewable energy in our grid, we can significantly reduce our reliance on fossil fuels. This project truly reflects the spirit of the Bristol City Leap partnership,” he added.
Bristol City Leap revealed they ‘carefully selected’ the location following a ‘comprehensive evaluation process’, which considered factors such as how straightforward it would be to link the site to the local electricity network.
Planning consent will be needed for the solar installation, but initially City Leap is establishing a public consultation process with residents in Withywood and Dundry.
One reader, 6470 writes: “Not in favour of these being built on land that can be farmed. When the war started in Ukraine we were told the cost of food would have to go up because we imported grain from there, now I have seen some land that can be farmed is being taken over by solar farms, why are we not putting the panels along the sides of motorways or railway lines or on top of tall buildings. Don’t know about the area where these are going so hopefully it is on a area where we can’t grow food for the nation.”
HanhamHeights replies: “This field has horses on it currently. Funny how no one complains about the ridiculous amount of land wasted on golf courses, private horse paddocks, and animal farming when they talk about ‘food security’. Yet suddenly one field powering 500 homes with clean energy is a crisis. It’s a weird argument.”
Dottertown asks: “How much do the people of Withywood benefit from this considering they’re losing the use of these fields?”
Magrathean believes: “Generally good news, but I disagree with farmable or any green land having solar panels on it. They should, by default, be put on people’s south facing roofs with the energy companies paying for them and the roof maintenance. That would meet with much public support.”
Dottertown adds: “I grew up playing in those fields with its easy access to Dundry, are kids still going to be able to do that? You”re not gullible enough to believe that nonsense about a community benefit fund are you?”
Covid-51 comments: “Another patch of green land they want to ruin in this area. We chose to live here because of the green space around, and BCC want to remove it.”
Othermeinnit says: “Isn’t this north facing? If you’re going to build on a field you should probably put houses on it, then put solar panels on them.”
HanhamHeights replies: “It’s not an either/or choice. We need both solar farms and rooftop solar. Relying only on rooftops is a logistical and economic nightmare. You can’t install and maintain panels on thousands of individual, privately-owned roofs as quickly or cheaply as you can in one well-sited field. We can’t let a utopian ‘rooftop-only’ fantasy get in the way of practical, large-scale clean energy generation that can be built right now.”
Grockel1 agrees: “Exactly, 500 houses having their own panels to reduce the need on the grid. Also add in battery storage and then grid usage cheaper/reduced based on number of panels and charging battery during off peak hours.”
Do you think that they should be building solar farms on green land? Comment below or HERE to join in the conversation.