How greenwashed was my valley? Part 1: The view from Rhydyfelin

Neil Anderson

Despite being an early advocate of the solar economy and of sustainable and low-impact technologies (1970s in Aotearoa New Zealand), it has become apparent to me, and no doubt to many others, that typical development projects have some obvious upsides and, all too frequently, significant downsides.

Below is the first of two articles about the Glyn Taff Solar Farm proposal which explores some of the issues around this project. The second article will discuss some of the political and economic drivers for such projects, and their implications for Cymru, concluding that the benefit to Cymru from this proposal is near-zero if not negative.

The Project

My neighbours in Rhydyfelin, Glyntaff and Treforest are broadly aware of the Glyn Taff Solar Farm proposal to cover 71ha of the uplands of Eglwysilan Mountain, though perhaps not of the details. Just next door to a set of Bute Energy’s proposed 200m turbines at Twyn Hywel Wind Farm, in fact. Modern energy tech has arrived! Huzzah!

One might consider that the attractive landscape on either side of the Taff Valley and beyond would merit a measure of protection from inappropriate development. One wouldn’t know it with these projects though. Nor from the pylons and wind turbines sprouting from the tops…

The solar farm is being promoted by Nadara/Renantis, a multinational company based in Italy with subsidiary offices in Scotland and, recently, in Cardiff. Their prospectus (https://glyntaffsolar.co.uk) says that it would produce 39.9MW peak. Let’s look at their proposals more closely…

Concerns of Local Residents – Flooding and Water Supply

People in Rhydyfelin and Glyntaff are concerned about the impacts of the proposed project on both the immediate and the wider area, particularly in relation to flooding, water supply and access.

Some, close to the proposed Farm, draw their water from boreholes and springs on the mountain. The Farm would also extract water. Adding cleaning agents, the water would be used to keep the solar panels clean, to maximise their solar capture.

It is not known how much water would be utilised in this manner, nor what contaminated contribution that would make to drains and watercourses. Nor the chemistry and environmental impact of the cleaning agent residues. Given the flooding that occurs here during storm events, any additional flows both locally and downstream would be very unwelcome. The access and other local roads could easily channel damaging flows into adjacent properties, as has happened in the recent past.

Yet Nadara advises that any runoff rates should be better or equivalent to pre-development greenfield rates (italics indicate quotes from the Nadara website). Much of the ground where the solar arrays would be installed would be compacted during construction thus increasing the rate and volume of runoff. More water would flow from the cleaning processes. Nadara seems capable of negating the laws of mathematics, fluid mechanics and gravity! Good luck with that one.

Furthermore, Nadara claims that the design of the solar farm ensures that sunlight can still reach the ground between and beneath the panels, allowing vegetation to thrive and supporting local ecosystems. But how could this possibly come about, compared with open ground? And, in inclement weather, any stock (yes, two-tier agriculture!) would tend to gather under the panels and heavily graze the available vegetation. It is therefore wholly implausible for Nadara to suggest that the retention of the existing vegetation underneath the panels [would] help mitigate run-off and improve attenuation.

No details have been given of the cleaning fluids to be used. Contamination of residents’ boreholes, streams and downstream watercourses could easily occur, but again Nadara reassures us that regular monitoring …[would] ensure full compliance. The mechanism for this miracle has not been explained either but appears to lie in their fantasy science.

Nadara has yet to issue an environmental impact assessment (EIA) and a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA). Although Nadara lists some very local mitigations, the potential impact of the wind and solar energy projects on the special landscape area is likely to be of major concern to a much wider group of residents across the valley and beyond, perhaps as far as Bannau Brycheiniog from where the site could be visible. Caerphilly? Possibly not.

Of course, the Twyn Hywel wind turbines will be much more visually prominent from a large area in and around Pontypridd.

Opportunity Costs

The opportunity costs are those incurred by not utilising a better alternative to the selected proposal. Often these benefits/disbenefits are difficult to calculate, so most developers don’t bother and governments purport not to understand them anyway! In this case, as for most uplands in Cymru, I suggest that, especially given the climate crisis, the optimal use of the land like that proposed for the Farm could include afforestation, rewilding, water harvesting, micro-hydro, small-scale solar capture, outdoor recreation, small-scale grazing, polytunnel horticulture and/or aquaculture, offering long-term well-paid employment for hundreds of people. The return to Cymru would dwarf that to Nadara from exporting electricity.

The above more advantageous utilisation of the land would reduce runoff, enhance water quality and protect local people, housing and infrastructure while contributing towards the amelioration of the climate and future timber supplies. Reservoirs may need to be covered (by solar panels) to reduce evaporation. But we can anticipate that the substantial opportunity costs of the Solar Farm would be ignored in any typically shallow assessment of benefits and disbenefits.

This proposed land use cannot otherwise contribute to Cymru’s Net Zero for the foreseeable future, a negative and unhelpful legacy.  It builds in Non-Zero!

Concerns of Local Residents – Access

Access to the site is planned from the A4054/Cardiff Road via Dyffryn Road, Masefield Way, Bryntail Lane and Bryntail Road. There are believed to be at least eight alternative routes to the site – for traffic as well as power cables – but this is the chosen one.

Nadara estimates there would be about 20 heavy goods deliveries a day during the construction period. They state that the site has good transport links to minimise disruption to the local road networks during construction and decommissioning, but exactly what this means is wholly unclear.

Perhaps they could explain what these good transport links are, and which local road networks they are referring to. Local pedestrians, people in wheelchairs, cyclists, buses and commercial deliveries are likely to be affected as well as motorists. Air quality issues for residents in the vicinity would arise from diesel trucks travelling up the steep incline of Dyffryn Road/Masefield Way.

Rhydyfelin residents living on or near these roads would all experience some disruption. The A4054 passes a major school in Hawthorn. There are four bus routes along it. Parking on both sides is generally not possible, and there are also even tighter spots either side of De Barri Street. Dyffryn Road, again narrow in parts, serves around 400 homes as their only access to the rest of the village and the A4054.

The opinions of residents, typically ignored in pursuit of ‘the greater good’, might tend towards acquiescence at present. But they may not have heard about the large 1m by 1m trench to be excavated along Dyffyrn Road and the remainder of the route to the Upper Boat substation. Or some of the other downsides that will be half-hidden in the arcane procedures of Developments of National Significance and beyond public accountability. Those opinions may change – too late!

Meanwhile the nine families, including children, that live on Bryntail Lane and lower Bryntail Road anticipate major disruption as well as noise and air pollution. Apart from the upper reaches of the Road, which the Council (Rhondda Cynon Taf Borough Council) has had repaired, the road is prone to subsidence, narrow with few passing places and tortuous. It has inadequate drainage and is in very poor condition. A popular walking and horse-riding track passes along the Lane.

Bryntail Lane and Bryntail Road are very close to some homes, and the residents there are very worried about the vibration, subsidence and accidents as well as restrictions on access during construction and beyond. A truck has already hit one house.

Nadara’s Offer

Nadara’s prospectus for the project is clearly an amateurish and slipshod piece of work. This careless approach has been further compounded by the reported attitudes and behaviour of their staff or sub-contractors on-site. A survey of watercourses was carried out by a junior member of staff was described as superficial in the extreme. According to those residents closest to the site, “Very limited engagement with local residents has occurred – to the level of the minimum required – with objections treated with dismissive scorn and smug grins…”, as one witness reports.

The opportunity to object to the scheme expired on 21 April 2025. Under the terms of the Developments of National Significance (Wales) (DNS Wales) this was the time for major changes to be proposed. A later opportunity, when the local authority (RCT BC) prepares their Local Impact Report (LIR), does not provide for anything other than minor changes, tweaks.  A reason for the smugness then as the project is virtually guaranteed green lights and rubber stamps henceforth.

But perhaps we should be more grateful – Nadara has offered a community benefit package of up to £581 000 per year, which over the 35-year life of the project amounts to about £20m. Small beer compared with the revenue this Italian company would earn from our sunshine!

However, our true appreciation should go the Conservative Government which in 2016 created a ‘Welsh Statutory Instrument’ (DNS Wales) which was ‘laid before’ the then National Assembly a few days later, and to the Labour Governments in Cardiff and London. Labour has retained the DNS powers and processes, which are designed to facilitate development regardless of merit and to reduce public involvement (read ‘obstruction’). Please remember that in May 2026!

Clearly, Nadara, Bute Energy and similar firms have a licence to exploit, extract and export Cymru’s natural capital with minor cost to them and minuscule benefit to us. How grand is that?

And let’s not forget Reform – Nigel Farage has indicated his intention to re-industrialise South Wales. Wonder where the benefits of that would go…? I can see that a future article, unless we stop Reform as well in the elections for the Senedd next year, could be entitled ‘How Grey is my Valley’.