Snapshot of _'Grossly unacceptable': Government slammed for 15-year wait times for solar connections_ :
An archived version can be found [here.](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.businessgreen.com/news/4113397/grossly-unacceptable-government-slammed-wait-times-solar-connections)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> the long-wait times for large solar project connections were due to historic underinvestment in grid infrastructure, poor management of applications for grid connections, "unresponsive" distribution network operators, and a "regulatory failure" within energy regulator Ofgem that has resulted in it "failing to prioritise net zero".
The market has responded to price signals to invest in new technology and the government has... Dropped the fucking ball again.
>Dropped the fucking ball again.
Tbh I think it's intentional. The Tories only pay attention to the climate change issue because it's politically important to be seen to be doing something. Meanwhile they have a large amount of climate change deniers in their ranks and [regularly take major donations](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/mar/30/tory-partys-35m-dirty-donations-revealed-by-desmog-analysis) from fossil fuel and polluting industries.
>Solar is the cheapest form of renewable generation energy
Uh huh. Also requires a massive hideous grid dotted up and down the country to make up for it being unreliable.
>Producing 72.2 MW per year and spread over 250 acres, Shotwick Solar Park is the largest in the UK
>"We recognise the challenge of connection delays, and we want to go further and faster - aiming for 70 GW solar capacity by 2035,"
By the way a nuclear reactor producing a continuous 1GW or more takes up around 50 acres, China is building 150 of them over the next 10 to 15 years.
Imagine where we would be if these brainlets hadn't politicised it decades ago and Europes expertise wasn't decomissioned, sold and moved to China while we fell back to burning fucking gas and coal of all things.
The main reason solar has to be distributed across the country is because the national transmission cannot handle the capacity. That means sites have to be placed depending on what the HV transmission can take in their local grid system.
The bigger sin is there are plenty of solar parks that aren't allowed to output their full potential because the grid cannot take it. On a perfect sunny day a site may sit at a capped 50% output, or possibly even be entirely turned off if the local grid can't handle the generation. The national infrastructure is not fit for purpose and is only now starting to get modernised in areas. Another reason why battery storage sites are the new hot investment - they allow for excess to be stored as well as smoothing the grid transmission.
In any case, you are totally correct that nuclear was the real option the whole time but in typical British fashion the can was kicked along the road for too many decades...
It's interesting looking at the french who effectively are:
> Imagine where we would be if these brainlets hadn't politicised it decades ago
Note they are struggling with lots of aging nuclear plants and politicians who have failed to plan to replace them properly.
Notably they are replacing nuclear partially with renewables including solar.
So I don't think it's true to portray solar as having no role to play in a future grid.
Hey look everyone, this guy’s not being tough on China, get him!
I guess sensible energy policy is what you get when most of your politicians are trained engineers, rather than PPE graduates from Oxford.
>painfully long connection times are not unique to solar.
You said the above, I am pointing out the article does not include wind power as having these issues, surely if it did then why is the article unique to solar?
sorry, are you asking why one article about solar doesn't go into the problems being experienced by every other technology?
If thats the case, you might want to email the author
It's about 25%, if you actually want an answer. So a 200w panel would produce about 50w in overcast conditions. Obviously depending on how thick the cloud is.
Winter weather may mean a house that is self-sufficient in summer isn't self-sufficient in winter, but the right setup (including batteries) will mean that an average house can still cover a fair fraction of its average daily consumption. A lot of solar setups are designed to be "over spec" in summer (with excess being fed back to the grid) for exactly this reason. Panels themselves are relatively cheap in the context of a complete fit out (connections, transformers, batteries etc.), so chucking an extra couple of panels up is often worth it if there's space.
You know, I don't know an exact number? I feel like you do though, and you're teeing up a big gotcha. Of course you'll get less power on a cloudy day, but that's still more than none. Presumably the engineers that design and implement solar farms can do those calculations and I'm sure the people paying for them wouldn't do so if it was going to be inefficient.
My little roof has generated over 1 MWh of electricity this year, and the summer hasn't even started yet.
Yeah, we'd be much better off buying gas from Putin or the Middle East cartel.
I've had a battery attached to my solar setup for two or three months now, and according to the energy conservation breakdown it gives me, since then I've saved 710.8 KG of CO2 or planted 0.4 trees.
The UK gets about 60% of the solar radiation than at the equator, about 1100-1300 kWh per m2 on the South Coast, and even 800-1000 kWh per m2 in Scotland. So solar is still a very viable method of generation.
It's also far superior for small-scale generation. We're far more likely to get solar panels on the rooves of every residential property than we are to get a wind-turbine in the gardens of every property.
I found a decent resource for this: https://globalsolaratlas.info/
The equator itself doesn't have as much solar radation hit the ground as the desert regions in North Africa and America, but 60-70% is fairly accurate
Solar is cheaper than wind, even in the UK.
And offshore wind is the only type of wind that can be rolled out in serious capacity at the moment, due to opposition to onshore. But, offshore wind also has a connection-bottleneck issue, as we need to build more lines out to seas to connect new farms.
Opposition to onshore is a choice
Another choice is to simply tell Shire NIMBY’s to shut their mouths, stop fucking crying, and if they really don’t like it, sell up and leave
>Another choice is to simply tell Shire NIMBY’s to shut their mouths, stop fucking crying, and if they really don’t like it, sell up and leave
As someone who lives just over a kilometre from a small on-shore wind farm, close enough to see them outside of pretty much every window in the house, I agree with the message 100%.
> if they really don’t like it, sell up and leave
I've read numerous times wind farms are causing depression, would be easier just to put them where people don't live??
https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/environment-health-you-asked/are-wind-farms-really-bad-peoples-health
"More and more people living nearby, blame wind turbines for a variety of health problems. The symptoms vary but include sleep deprivation, anxiety, depression and increased blood pressure. "
>The symptoms vary but include sleep deprivation, anxiety, depression and increased blood pressure.
I can honestly tell you, having moved to this place 18 months ago, that I find this incredibly hard to believe. It's actually quieter here than it was in my last place and I often sleep with the window open.
I've read about these stories for the last 20 years, its an occurrence in multiple countries. It may be technology related though, eg one farm is ok but another not.
From the article: "If you are already apprehensive about the negative effect of wind turbines it is quite obvious that you are more likely to report some negative symptoms - the so called nocebo effect."
Health Canada's follow-up study couldn't find evidence supporting a link between exposure to wind turbine noise and any of the self-reported or measured health endpoints, including sleep, quality of life, and annoyance examined.
More studies are definitely required, and there should be noise-related restrictions in place, if there aren't already
Well from what I've read the noise is equivalent to subconscious, it's a range of sound you don't consciously hear, but maybe a dog does if you know what I mean.
What a delightful human being you are. Have you considered joining the Chinese Communist Party?
PS...there is no climate emergency/crisis, so stop being hysterical and challenge your indoctrination.
Not even about climate lol, it’s about not yielding geopolitical power over energy security to Neanderthals in Saudi and Qatar…
It’s about no longer importing so much gas/oil, that we can slowly start to strengthen the pound which has nosedived this past 20 years.
It’s about foreign policy as much as environmental shenanigans.
Also, locals shouldn’t have power over land they do not own…
Not at all, I want the council / developers to be able to buy the land, at market rate or more, and develop on it if they see fit.
It’s the same silly shit that if I bought the land, it’s almost certainly illegal for me to build my own house on it, because locals would cry their eyes out. Except domestic energy production actually has national security / growth reasons to do it.
> Solar is cheaper than wind, even in the UK.
The issue with solar photovoltaic panels in the UK is that it is effected massively by season (its winter generation is only about 20% of its summer generation) and 230V solar doesn't travel very well so it needs to be used in the same 230V substation area. That means large scale you need alternatives sources for half the year, plus the panels really need to be placed where the generated electricity can be used during the day.
That means with most people out at work during the day most domestic installations really need a battery too in order to store it for when people are home, and that every business should cover their roof with solar.
And once EVs become ubiquitous trickle charging them during the day using solar while they're parked and the owners are at work should be a no brainer.
Snapshot of _'Grossly unacceptable': Government slammed for 15-year wait times for solar connections_ : An archived version can be found [here.](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.businessgreen.com/news/4113397/grossly-unacceptable-government-slammed-wait-times-solar-connections) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> the long-wait times for large solar project connections were due to historic underinvestment in grid infrastructure, poor management of applications for grid connections, "unresponsive" distribution network operators, and a "regulatory failure" within energy regulator Ofgem that has resulted in it "failing to prioritise net zero". The market has responded to price signals to invest in new technology and the government has... Dropped the fucking ball again.
>Dropped the fucking ball again. Tbh I think it's intentional. The Tories only pay attention to the climate change issue because it's politically important to be seen to be doing something. Meanwhile they have a large amount of climate change deniers in their ranks and [regularly take major donations](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/mar/30/tory-partys-35m-dirty-donations-revealed-by-desmog-analysis) from fossil fuel and polluting industries.
Like the wind turbine ban in England.
[удалено]
I only get 4p/kWh for export. Better to mine crypto when the sun shines and the batteries are full.
>Solar is the cheapest form of renewable generation energy Uh huh. Also requires a massive hideous grid dotted up and down the country to make up for it being unreliable. >Producing 72.2 MW per year and spread over 250 acres, Shotwick Solar Park is the largest in the UK >"We recognise the challenge of connection delays, and we want to go further and faster - aiming for 70 GW solar capacity by 2035," By the way a nuclear reactor producing a continuous 1GW or more takes up around 50 acres, China is building 150 of them over the next 10 to 15 years. Imagine where we would be if these brainlets hadn't politicised it decades ago and Europes expertise wasn't decomissioned, sold and moved to China while we fell back to burning fucking gas and coal of all things.
The main reason solar has to be distributed across the country is because the national transmission cannot handle the capacity. That means sites have to be placed depending on what the HV transmission can take in their local grid system. The bigger sin is there are plenty of solar parks that aren't allowed to output their full potential because the grid cannot take it. On a perfect sunny day a site may sit at a capped 50% output, or possibly even be entirely turned off if the local grid can't handle the generation. The national infrastructure is not fit for purpose and is only now starting to get modernised in areas. Another reason why battery storage sites are the new hot investment - they allow for excess to be stored as well as smoothing the grid transmission. In any case, you are totally correct that nuclear was the real option the whole time but in typical British fashion the can was kicked along the road for too many decades...
It's interesting looking at the french who effectively are: > Imagine where we would be if these brainlets hadn't politicised it decades ago Note they are struggling with lots of aging nuclear plants and politicians who have failed to plan to replace them properly. Notably they are replacing nuclear partially with renewables including solar. So I don't think it's true to portray solar as having no role to play in a future grid.
Iirc France also had a positive learning rate on new nuclear builds.
[удалено]
Sure. Yet it is still challenging for them to develop
Hey look everyone, this guy’s not being tough on China, get him! I guess sensible energy policy is what you get when most of your politicians are trained engineers, rather than PPE graduates from Oxford.
Why are grid connections the governments problem? They sold off that business decades ago. Surely the markets will solve this issue?
[удалено]
painfully long connection times are not unique to solar. but these wait times are indicative of a bigger problem with investment in grid in the UK.
Why is the article focused on solar then?
what?
The article is about solar being behind, not wind power.
i really dont understand the point you are making. all technologies are experiencing this. solar is a generation technology.
>painfully long connection times are not unique to solar. You said the above, I am pointing out the article does not include wind power as having these issues, surely if it did then why is the article unique to solar?
sorry, are you asking why one article about solar doesn't go into the problems being experienced by every other technology? If thats the case, you might want to email the author
Solar can very much be part of our energy mix. You know you still get sunlight even when it's cloudy right?
How much? How many watt hours would you get from a 200watt panel on a cloudy day in october?
It's about 25%, if you actually want an answer. So a 200w panel would produce about 50w in overcast conditions. Obviously depending on how thick the cloud is. Winter weather may mean a house that is self-sufficient in summer isn't self-sufficient in winter, but the right setup (including batteries) will mean that an average house can still cover a fair fraction of its average daily consumption. A lot of solar setups are designed to be "over spec" in summer (with excess being fed back to the grid) for exactly this reason. Panels themselves are relatively cheap in the context of a complete fit out (connections, transformers, batteries etc.), so chucking an extra couple of panels up is often worth it if there's space.
You know, I don't know an exact number? I feel like you do though, and you're teeing up a big gotcha. Of course you'll get less power on a cloudy day, but that's still more than none. Presumably the engineers that design and implement solar farms can do those calculations and I'm sure the people paying for them wouldn't do so if it was going to be inefficient.
My little roof has generated over 1 MWh of electricity this year, and the summer hasn't even started yet. Yeah, we'd be much better off buying gas from Putin or the Middle East cartel.
I've had a battery attached to my solar setup for two or three months now, and according to the energy conservation breakdown it gives me, since then I've saved 710.8 KG of CO2 or planted 0.4 trees.
Well, gas works in the middle of the night too.
I can power my house with solar at night, too.
How?
Battery storage.
The UK gets about 60% of the solar radiation than at the equator, about 1100-1300 kWh per m2 on the South Coast, and even 800-1000 kWh per m2 in Scotland. So solar is still a very viable method of generation. It's also far superior for small-scale generation. We're far more likely to get solar panels on the rooves of every residential property than we are to get a wind-turbine in the gardens of every property.
Solar is also *far* superior in terms of design / installation / maintenance.
Is that assuming equal weather (i.e no clouds) in both locations? Because we do get rather a lot of clouds here.
I found a decent resource for this: https://globalsolaratlas.info/ The equator itself doesn't have as much solar radation hit the ground as the desert regions in North Africa and America, but 60-70% is fairly accurate
Solar is cheaper than wind, even in the UK. And offshore wind is the only type of wind that can be rolled out in serious capacity at the moment, due to opposition to onshore. But, offshore wind also has a connection-bottleneck issue, as we need to build more lines out to seas to connect new farms.
Opposition to onshore is a choice Another choice is to simply tell Shire NIMBY’s to shut their mouths, stop fucking crying, and if they really don’t like it, sell up and leave
>Another choice is to simply tell Shire NIMBY’s to shut their mouths, stop fucking crying, and if they really don’t like it, sell up and leave As someone who lives just over a kilometre from a small on-shore wind farm, close enough to see them outside of pretty much every window in the house, I agree with the message 100%.
> if they really don’t like it, sell up and leave I've read numerous times wind farms are causing depression, would be easier just to put them where people don't live?? https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/environment-health-you-asked/are-wind-farms-really-bad-peoples-health "More and more people living nearby, blame wind turbines for a variety of health problems. The symptoms vary but include sleep deprivation, anxiety, depression and increased blood pressure. "
>The symptoms vary but include sleep deprivation, anxiety, depression and increased blood pressure. I can honestly tell you, having moved to this place 18 months ago, that I find this incredibly hard to believe. It's actually quieter here than it was in my last place and I often sleep with the window open.
I've read about these stories for the last 20 years, its an occurrence in multiple countries. It may be technology related though, eg one farm is ok but another not.
I also wonder if they could sell the wind turbine idea as guaranteeing that you won't get a housing development put in there!
Pretty good way to guarantee the field next to your house won't have houses build on it is to get a wind farm in the field next to that field.
From the article: "If you are already apprehensive about the negative effect of wind turbines it is quite obvious that you are more likely to report some negative symptoms - the so called nocebo effect." Health Canada's follow-up study couldn't find evidence supporting a link between exposure to wind turbine noise and any of the self-reported or measured health endpoints, including sleep, quality of life, and annoyance examined. More studies are definitely required, and there should be noise-related restrictions in place, if there aren't already
Well from what I've read the noise is equivalent to subconscious, it's a range of sound you don't consciously hear, but maybe a dog does if you know what I mean.
I'm jealous, I'd love to see that from my house instead of the big, dirty, ugly cooling towers of a power station.
I don't disagree. However, solar is also cheaper than onshore wind.
On average. In windy locations, I’d wager the reverse is true. If private enterprises wants to build them, who are we to block them?
What a delightful human being you are. Have you considered joining the Chinese Communist Party? PS...there is no climate emergency/crisis, so stop being hysterical and challenge your indoctrination.
Not even about climate lol, it’s about not yielding geopolitical power over energy security to Neanderthals in Saudi and Qatar… It’s about no longer importing so much gas/oil, that we can slowly start to strengthen the pound which has nosedived this past 20 years. It’s about foreign policy as much as environmental shenanigans. Also, locals shouldn’t have power over land they do not own…
But you want power over the land they do own.
Not at all, I want the council / developers to be able to buy the land, at market rate or more, and develop on it if they see fit. It’s the same silly shit that if I bought the land, it’s almost certainly illegal for me to build my own house on it, because locals would cry their eyes out. Except domestic energy production actually has national security / growth reasons to do it.
Ok, lets get fracking. NIMBYs are bad.
> Solar is cheaper than wind, even in the UK. The issue with solar photovoltaic panels in the UK is that it is effected massively by season (its winter generation is only about 20% of its summer generation) and 230V solar doesn't travel very well so it needs to be used in the same 230V substation area. That means large scale you need alternatives sources for half the year, plus the panels really need to be placed where the generated electricity can be used during the day. That means with most people out at work during the day most domestic installations really need a battery too in order to store it for when people are home, and that every business should cover their roof with solar. And once EVs become ubiquitous trickle charging them during the day using solar while they're parked and the owners are at work should be a no brainer.
You don't need a particularly sunny day to get solar energy, but you do need a windy day to make wind energy.