Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   HarriettMB (harriettmb@beige.party)'s status on Monday, 11-Aug-2025 18:48:08 JST HarriettMB

   NIMBYs would would prefer to die from gas and oil pollution, or global warming, than have a solar farm nearby. Would be far better to ask for the solar panels to be on stilts so crops can grow underneath. This creates a mini-climate with all kinds of benefits for animals and for plants.
   Fools.
   Solar farm plan for our tiny hamlet is crazy' - BBC News https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cglnx31d6pdo

   • Embed this notice
     Sam :moomin_hattifatteners: (ravenbait@mastodon.scot)'s status on Monday, 11-Aug-2025 19:02:45 JST Sam :moomin_hattifatteners:

     in reply to

     • Infoseepage

     @Infoseepage @HarriettMB Short-term construction costs are being used to assess best option, rather than whole-life and other costs, such as health and wellbeing or biodiversity. E.g. up here, developers are using 1950s farm equipment standards to assess clearance height for their OHTL, so farmers won't be able to farm. People affected are accused of being NIMBYs while those who will benefit are largely unaffected. None of this is a good recipe for a collaborative effort to achieve Net Zero.

   • Embed this notice
     Sam :moomin_hattifatteners: (ravenbait@mastodon.scot)'s status on Monday, 11-Aug-2025 19:02:46 JST Sam :moomin_hattifatteners:

     • Infoseepage

     @Infoseepage @HarriettMB The issue largely is that the private developers who are building the infrastructure we need for Net Zero -- and we do desperately need to get there as quickly as possible -- are doing so as cheaply as possible in order to maximise profits. Also, the developers are subverting the planning process by applying for one thing then making changes later, which disguises the ultimate effect. There is a better way to do all of this, but it will cost more.