The analysis by the planning and development consultancy Turley revealing that an increased number of planning applications for solar farms have been refused in recent years is widely interpreted as evidence of nimbyism, inflicting higher bills on customers and environmental damage (Solar farm plans refused at highest rate for five years in Great Britain, 25 August).
But did Turley identify why those applications have been refused? Perhaps there has been an increased number of inappropriate applications trying to jump on the sustainability bandwagon for purely commercial reasons?
The village where I live has been the subject of a planning application for a large solar farm squeezed into a gap between an area of outstanding natural beauty, a conservation area and ancient woodland. It has been recommended for refusal by planning officers due to the “significantly harmful” impact it would have on the landscape.
When the applicants were asked why they had chosen this location, the reason given was that they needed sites close to settlements to make it cheaper to connect to the electricity network.
There are huge areas where solar farms could be built without negatively affecting landscapes or communities, but solar farm promoters are not interested as the necessary network infrastructure is not in place, making sites too expensive to attract investors.
Don’t criticise local communities for resisting solar farms in inappropriate places. Instead, push for rational and proactive government policy to facilitate renewable energy schemes that don’t harm our landscape.
Barbara Chillman
Ramsden, Oxfordshire
• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication.
