ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 เม.ย. 2022
- A new wave of vast solar farms is leading to opposition from rural communities who fear "industrialisation of the countryside".
The UK is seeking alternatives to Russian Gas and answers to rising fuel costs. Some alternative energy leaders believe the government's energy strategy was a missed opportunity.
Solar Energy UK claims just two years invested into new solar projects could provide three times as much energy as Hinkley Point C nuclear power station will when it's completed in 2026.
Sky's Science Correspondent Thomas Moore has the story.
SUBSCRIBE to our TH-cam channel for more videos: / skynews
Follow us on Twitter: / skynews
Like us on Facebook: / skynews
Follow us on Instagram: / skynews
Follow us on TikTok: / skynews
For more content go to news.sky.com and download our apps:
Apple: itunes.apple.com/gb/app/sky-n...
Android play.google.com/store/apps/de...
Sky News videos are now available in Spanish here/Los video de Sky News están disponibles en español aquí th-cam.com/channels/yne.html...
Sky News videos are also available in German here/Hier können Sie außerdem Sky News-Videos auf Deutsch finden: / @skynewsaufdeutsch6058
To enquire about licensing Sky News content, you can find more information here: news.sky.com/info/library-sales - บันเทิง
![[ไฮไลต์] มวยสากลฯหญิง รุ่น 66kg จันทร์แจ่ม สุวรรณเพ็ง ไทย vs แอลจีเรีย รอบรองชนะเลิศ | โอลิมปิก 2024](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/nt71uhZjn6Y/mqdefault.jpg)
I've been saying this for years. Put the things on roofs! Use the land to reduce food imports or to grow trees
Crazy to put solar on fertile land, it needs to be put on the roofs of industrial and residential buildings, close to where the power is consumed to reduce transmission losses and makes use of unused area instead of displacing other productive industry. The real cost of the energy must take into account opportunity cost of everything which is not being produced when it is installed on a piece of land.
100%!! Only reason to force these on fertile land is to STOP us all from having food.
Floating on water storage ,, mounted OVER water canals ,, and on MARGINAL land as they can benefit the growth of some vegetables
over parking lots . bonus is are cars stay cool
Perhaps if humans weren't so wasteful in the first place we would need neither as much land for food growth or solar panels.
@@jjackson3240 if companies built things that lasted there would be less waste.
Couldn't agree more! Solar belongs on arid land or on rooftops. Not where food can be sown or trees can be grown!
I agree. I would add that no people need to be living anywhere near fertile lands as well. Bus them or something else.
Energy firms only install on flat land, so any land has to be suitable, regardless of how fertile it is
@@cgdimension Fertile land should be reserved for growing vegetation or crops, flat or otherwise. There's plenty of roof area and arid land for panels to be installed on.
Raise the pannels & grow crops underneath them.
put it on unproductive land, cant be that hard
'Agrivoltaics' is an emerging technology that will no doubt become more common. Essentially, solar arrays are raised higher and accommodate crops or pasture below. Raising the engineered post and rack assemblies that support the PV panels will be more expensive, but adding income from crops will likely be more profitable for farmers and solar developers alike. Many crops thrive in medium levels of light and some are shade tolerant. The partial shading of the ground will also cool the soil surface and help retain moisture longer during the increasingly common heat waves and drought brought on by climate change.
Hopefully, agrivoltaics will be accompanied by regenerative agricultural practices that feature conservation tillage and continuous year round carbon and nitrogen-fixing cover crops with food crops planted right through the cover via seed drills. Disc harrows are old school and have nothing to do with protecting and enhancing soil health. Conservation tillage means using less machinery, lower wear and tear, less maintenance and labour costs, better yields and higher incomes for farmers. The bare churned up soil in field shown in the video is not appropriate for regenerative practices and, in fact, turning it over as indicated results in large losses of CO2 into the atmosphere, loss of soil structure and moisture, wind and rain erosion, and higher petrochemical dependency. Pity.
Geographically, Great Britain is at a latitude farther north than the part of Canada where most of the population lives (which is near the US border), and there are many cloudy days. So it's difficult to see why solar energy is viewed as a likely prospect for energy in the UK.
It's a fine source of energy no doubt but farmers point of view is also to be kept considered that its good to have this project on baron land for which both type of land can be used effectively.
Barren land in England is quite used up. Its hard to come by barren land that isn't being developed.
The owners of the land can make a decent amount leasing the land to energy firms without any their own investment which a field of wheat would cost to farm
Energy is in demand so land is used for energy.
Solar farms can be dismantled as quickly they got built.
Food resources has to be number 1 priority plus farmers rights then energy should be kept in considered.I think that rocky surfaces will be an excellent place for installation plus they provide more durability if installed properly.
Why it can be build over large parking lots? It would give shade for cars and people underneath.
Cost, point blank, it's cost. That would add to upfront cost and maintaining the system.
Sensible idea bound to be rejected!
I'm more concerned about the increase of subdivisions and city expansion onto fertile land.
Exactly what they don’t want to admit is the biggest problem.
This is a big problem in my country Philippines. Real estate companies buying bug parcel of farmlands and made them idle until they can convert them into subdivision o commercial establishments. Now, we are net importer of our staple food, rice.
They should be on hills. Not farm land.
I totally agree. Solar farms and wind turbines should only be allowed on totally infertile land ie desert and clay.
In my country, we have 10 ranks of farmland with rank 1 virtually nonexistant and rank 10 utter wasteland. Ranks 7 and bellow cannot be used for solar farms.
Plenty of rooftops in the UK to use! I'm in the solar industry and using up viable farmland and green spaces is ridiculous.
The obvious place to put solar panels is house roofs, of which there are over 20 million, and at a guess no more than 5% currently have them. (Those that do have annual electricity bills at least 25% lower than without), and also the places the farmer mentions - warehouse roofs, brownfield sites etc. It's not great to be using farmfields that could grow food, but on the plus side, although very ugly, they are sort of temporary, and at some point in the future the land can be restored quite easily for farming or forestry. This is in contrast to the thousands of hectares of productive farmland that every year is concreted over for housing, due to a massive and fast rising population. Once this happens the farm land is permanently lost.
5%!
I'd be surprised if it more than 1%..
And if the idea is to reduce energy usage or fossile fuel usage I'd bet 50%+ of homes have no or very minimal insulation.
What I don't understand is why these solar farms are not being put on the roofs of all the huge warehouses that are all over the place these days. Surely it would make far more sense to put them there rather than on good land. The government really needs to get a grip and develop a coherent policy.
Really , well who would have thought that, with out , Department for Environmental Food and Rural affairs Minister , paying a think tank , to come to the conclusion, we need to pay a very large amount of money to a environmental consultancy firm , to conduct a very expensive study , to confirm that putting solar panels into arable land isn't really a good idea . Fk me who's actually in charge that couldn't work it out instantly, land for food vs land that's not useful for any other purpose , that may mean, how about we stick some solar panels on it , next we will discover they were fixed facing north to north east for the duration they were on the land.
Right?? I've been complaining about that for years! If they really wanted to fix our problems they'd do it; but no, let's sit around and appoint more committees and think tanks and research dollars for things we know how to fix! Too much Gov't telling us what we can and can't do with our lives~
Just put a solar tree on every street lamp. Trading food for a subpar power station of the worst quality doesn’t help us. They’re not even using the good solar equipment. This is insanity.
yea just like they could have induction parking spots instead of those fking charging stations.
The farmers are correct. We have lots of ways to get power but food needs good soil.
Totally agreed waste of good soil but wind is also deadly gif birds. Use deserts for solar
When the entire world is facing famine, food shortages and global supply chain crisis... The British government is paying the farmers to stop farming...
This is happening all over the world... They are destroying the poultry and livestock too.
And people trust the government, nice 🤣
The great reset
The floods and droughts make farming unprofitable for many who turn to solar schemes for income
I work in the sector, this is true only on areas not affected by desertification. Why would tou build a pv park on land that is not sun dried? Usually the government forbids this.
Stick the panels in the desert
Windmills are a joke too
I have land . I interested to install solar panel but don't have more money to install this system. If available any other facilities.
How many of those 7gw do we get at night?
No doubt they would rather have subsidies to grow corn for bioethanol which really is a total waste.
yep meanwhile the price to feed chickens has gone through the roof, why, no corn, why. cuz bioethanol and fking solar.
Yes it’s a waste ,especially when it could be used to grow food and help prevent a shortage ,solar panels should be at top of city and residential building and where it does not effect and waste land that can be used for survival as does it not defeat the object ?
Agreed.
Just installed a large 100MW operation in my area on flat productive land. Granted the area has been known to flood once every 10 years it still seems a waste. They could've turned it to a tree farm or kept it in production...
We should have solar panel on all roofs in UK . Instead of sinking money in fertile land.
Not all farms are "fertile" anymore. See the efforts by "Sadhguru". Our soil is in danger of being lifeless and without nutrients.
And ravaged by yearly flooding and droughts, growing produce is a huge risk for the farmer if the weather annihilates the crop they have spent a fortune on
If we could standardise the solar panels therefore making mounts universal that would be great for future usage.
We need a diversified energy grid. Nuclear, solar, wind, hydrogen, and yes gas and other fossil fuels until the capacity of ‘clean’ energy has been built to a level where it can meet demand.
NO NUKES! They're burying billions of METAL barrels of nuclear waste that last 10,000 years in places like old underground salt mines [Germany] even though they're deteriorating rapidly. Great! Pretty soon we'll have radiation at our dinner tables~🥵
Obviously solar power has a furniture. And solar panels are and will become more efficient. They will work perfectly well in the UK and Northern countries placed on roofs of houses and industrial areas. However countries that have the most exposure to sunlight will be the best places to generate electricity. Southern Europe and north Africa have more than 300 day of clear skys. This would mean they would be the main providers of energy?
those panels can be clear too. so green houses.
Agreed, but here's the thing: Solar farms are built near where the energy is used, cities, because building transmission lines is expensive. They want to build on flat land, that's not scrub land, because that means they don't have to clear the land which is an added cost. I get irritated every time I see the new 'solar farms' going up on former cotton fields, but with rising costs to operate real farms, I can't blame the aging farmer population for cashing in while they can. Developers will give them more money for the land. Few can afford TO farm, much less buy a working farm outright. That was always true, which is why homesteaders had to do the backbreaking work of clearing new cropland over the years. So yes, it's a waste, but so many things are. To the people thinking this needs to go on roof tops, that's great for that individual homeowner. These farms are huge. The one going in near San Angelo in Texas, is supposed to supply 40,000 homes with electricity. No idea if they have a storage system figured out, because they're not telling us squat about the project, and we live here.
All good points!
Not always, I know of a solar farm here in Oklahoma that the energy believe it or not goes to Maryland, which is entirely no place near the solar farm 😐🥺😐
Why dont we use every roof top available???
Many countries raise the pannels & grow crops underneath them. Double bubble🤔
Solar panels should be put above the thousands of out door car parks across all countries instead. We need to find ways to use land properly.
We should start with all the existing roofs everywhere first.
@@TheWebstaff people can’t afford it
It's stupidity
Where dose this new mineral come from …mmmmm
Put on roof tops or down the highway median but wasteful of land
Just two feet higher and it would still be useful for grazing sheep. Beyond that agrivoltaics would be a better solution to still farm crops. More costly to install but can retain a large proportion of the fields potential yield.
grass will eventually die under these panels cuz no Sun!
@@deneseburrell just look agrivoltaic and don't say stupid things
@@SlowhandGreg how about not being rude? no wonder this World is so fucked up with snarky people like you~
It is and it isn't, a lot of fertile land is over farmed, solar panels are temporary, they won't be there forever only until better forms of power are found so in a sense its giving the land plenty of time to recover and rejuvenate for future farming. Also the owners of the land are making money leasing to the energy companies with no cost to themselves. Farmers are going to have to diversify how they make money and what they grow as the climate changes and demand for produce changes, such as changing from livestock to dairy and such.
Duh!!!
Farmers are correct
This has to be the stupidest dumbest thing anybody could do right now!!!!
Solar is wonderful, but so is eating. We have to put each thing in the correct place.
Yes it is.
Only once every single new build and industrial building is fitted with solar panels as standard will I support Solar in fields
Growing corn for ethanol is also a complete waste.
Facts !!!!
*We Don't Need Farmland OR Food.!*
Use It To Heat 2000 Houses for
*ONE WHOLE HOUR* instead.
( sounds like a good trade to me... )
There is an easy solution to this... It's called Agro solar and simply explained it pushes solar some meter over the ground so plants can grow below it. And it helps even to save water, cools in the summer and warms in the winter and produces more energy because of the cooling effect for the panels - it's pretty cool.
That sounds like a good idea, but what about sunshine?
@@deneseburrell With proper spacing between rows of panels and enough height, sunlight can pass through. It is being made in USA and China but solar developers seldom implement them because of inefficiency in land to solar panel ratio and the added administrative responsibilities in maintaining the agro part.
@@deneseburrell it's spaced so the sun shines at least at some hours in them... And there more and more Glas solar panels which allows more light through it. If I remember correctly, it was first tried in Germany with much success. But there are still some bureaucratic hurdles, because land can be only used for agrar or for energy production. And one downside is because of the spacing it produces a bit less energy, which makes the payback time longer. So some changes need to be made to make it sustainable for farmers. Another downside is - not all plants can planted under them - but still a lot of potential
The fastest and least expensive way to lessen dependence on nat gas is to improve energy efficiency of buildings (particularly before next winter). To have the best outcome should do all the various things that can help.
yeah.
Sadly people from UK never travel to places like Austria or Poland to read their building codes.
Buildings below certain energy class cannot be developed anymore in Poland - that means both insulation and energy source.
It is very good education and i suggest doing it even faster .
Also municipal heat plants, so popular in Germany, Poland etc - some doing co-generation. That is another big homework to do.
Many view this as "communism" but they forget municipal heat network is actually a market - many heat grids are capable of both - delivering heat and taking heat away. In any case it is like arguing installing AC in a car is communism because all passengers profit from work of one engine and AC heat exchanger reaches -20C - as cold as in Moscow.
Flawed reasoning gives flawed life.
Who'll pay for it all, tax payers funding private individuals? Good luck with that.
Total waste of fertile land. Also the UK needs to switch back to good ol horse and buggy days. Horse crap could be used for fertilizer too.
Shy news needs to talk about Ecosia they are a search engine that plants tress
Well obviously
Why aren't we building up with solar skyscraper of solar panels
Why not just line the sides of motorways with these
Use the roofs
lunacy
I agree. There’s plenty of warehouses and buildings that can be used. Incentivise business building owners to fit via feed in tariffs and viola. Big chunk of countryside saved.
Why can't we float them in the sea?
They are an eyesore.
We have only 12 yrs. to save the planet if not farmland doesn't much matter because most crops won't survive meaning a hell of a lot more famine and death than this little bit of acerage.
I HAVE SAID SOLAR FARMS TAKING UP VALUEABLE FARM LAND.
roof tops is best.
Farmers must be phased out...for their GMO foods
The Caption says it All 😂
Its the farmers choice. No one else's!
industrialisation of the countryside should be for the production of growing and producing food. what is wrong with using the hydroelectric power / motion generators on rivers, dams, waterfalls estuaries or old fashioned water courses which ran the thousands of mills . I would rather see more better well designed wind turbine mills in our coutury side than see fields of solar panels or even develop new technologies or improve old technologies that people have used this force for millennias. perhaps everything is pointing back at the mechanization technologies of old that didn't need computers or electricity or even batteries to produce movement and power.
even if it cost 10 pound to power 2000 homes for 1 hour its not likely our electricity bills will go down companies will just eat up the profits and our bills will go up next year
Probably not, because people now have the options of being energy independent. Imagine if 20% of the population installed their own solar and batteries ( this will probably happen over the next 20 years). The electricity suppliers will lose 20% of their market, they will lose profits. If they increase prices too much they will lose market share faster.
Vast desert without rain saudi.
That's why most of them are looking for places like on top of old coal mines to build them
Put them on top of the roads! How much area is the M1?
It's the farmers land, surely he can do what he wants?
Is this not more a comment on how difficult it is now for farmers to make good money.
Farmers are not well supported by this government at all, and many are leaving the profession, and or selling their land for housing.
Personally I would like to see it farmed if possible, but if it's not economically viable, this is probably a good option.
are they....hell,,,,,proof?...opps i meant hail!
Farmer is 100% correct
Why can't we put them in the roads like solar roadways did!
Oh wait..
Yeah let get them on the roofs.
Stack it 2,5 metres off ground
the planet's population is going to starve but fk it, solar! we can eat food in the metaverse instead. that's how that works right?
Clean and secure LOL
UK is a huge innovation center of the world. Glad they can figure out how to stop use Russian gas.
The slow end of farming as we know it will be tales of the past come the near future.
They should be floating offshore.
“Solar farms are a waste” says farmer, while throwing away “ugly vegetables” to artificially jack up the price of food.
Transcendence anyone? Like it's necessary....
Put them on buildings roofs ffs.
As Nancy Pelosi says, "it's a free market"
Like it here do to all the government money
Nuclear fission energy is the way to go
🤮
Farmers aren’t know for their intelligence.
Put them in the desert
yes farm land should be saved for growing corn! at $2.50 per bushel the farmer will be billionaire in no time!
Its so small an area that its completely insignificant in the scheme of things. Bad farming practices are far more significant in reducing the amount of viable farming land.
LEAVE OUR FARMLAND ALONE
Total waste - even if they built wind farms on fertile land electricity prices wouldn’t go down. What’s the point with reusables if they don’t have any effect on prices. How can ‘ wholesale prices ‘ of wind and sunshine ( not that we have much of the latter ) go up? Proof of the energy companies greed !
Your stats are horribly under reported. This is more of a con job than meaningful reporting.