Wales’ landmark environmental law ‘under threat from solar plant schemes’

Martin Shipton

The Welsh Government’s landmark Well-being of Future Generations Act would be rendered worthless if massive solar plants planned for the Gwent Levels were allowed to be built, according to a leading environmentalist.

Natalie Buttriss, CEO of the Gwent Wildlife Trust, says lawyers representing her charity will be arguing at a two-day hearing on July 2 and July 3 that it would be a major blow to the unique wetlands landscape if a massive solar development at Wentlooge, between Newport and Cardiff, was allowed to proceed.

She fears that if this project – a renewable energy hub comprising ground mounted solar panels and 160 battery storage units covering 318 acres south of the Newport to Cardiff railway line – is allowed to go ahead, the floodgates will open.

Asked to describe the Gwent Levels, she speaks of a really special place that is unique in terms of its fenland, with a kind of flat, eerie atmosphere that you get when you go down there at certain times of the year.

‘Historical’

She told Nation.Cymru: “I would say that it’s not just important from a biodiversity point of view, but also from a cultural and historical point of view because of all the human activity that’s gone before, right back to pre Roman times probably.

“And it’s become internationally important for a wide variety of different wildlife from the shrill carder bee, which is only in a few places in the UK, to bringing back water voles that were nearly extinct a couple of decades ago, and lots of lapwings that you see over the area, which are becoming scarcer and scarcer. So it’s a really important hub, if you like, of a range of lowland species, both plants and animal life. That makes it so special with all the reens and the waterways that you get amongst that.”

But, says Ms Buttriss, all that is at risk because of multiple applications to build solar plants: “There’s one already here, but there are proposals for up to seven solar farms across the different local authorities that cover the Levels which altogether would take up about 30% of the SSI land – sites of special scientific interest. They have scientific interest from a biodiversity point of view, and the nature that’s there and the intricacies of the habitat. “SSSI sites are supposed to be protected forever. And if you let the floodgates open and Wentlooge come in, you’ve got the potential for other solar farms. And soon you’ll have a third of the Gwent Levels covered in solar farms and these panels that are really quite aesthetically not very pleasing in relation to the unique landscape that’s there now.

“I need to add that we’re not against solar energy as such. There is a global crisis, but it doesn’t make sense to try and resolve one environmental biodiversity crisis by creating another.

“In terms of what they are, they can be absolutely massive. Some of them could be a 100 or more rugby pitches large.

“These are commercial operations. Reducing our carbon emissions is important, but the cost to the developers is one of the arguments in favour of the plants being there, to link them into the electricity grid. But what’s not being considered properly is the cost to the public, who have an interest in that area. They’ve got the Wales Coast Path that runs through it, so we’ve got visitors coming through.

“Imagine what that would look like if there were solar panels everywhere, destroying the kind of biodiversity and tranquil environment that is there now. So I would say to developers and local authorities, you really need to consider the cost. There’s only 12% of Wales that is SSSI. These are really special protected sites. So find somewhere else to put these solar panels on. There’s another 88% of land in Wales that could be considered, including many brownfield sites.

“We have to have solar energy and renewables somewhere. But what we’ve been pushing for is to get clarity from the Welsh Government in terms of where is the best place to put that, and work with the developers to make sure that we’re not cutting off our noses to spite our face. So we do need a strategy around renewables in terms of where they go, but we need to make sure that they don’t go into those valuable areas that are sacrosanct.”

Mitigation schemes

Ms Buttriss is also highly sceptical about so-called mitigation schemes that involve relocating affected wildlife elsewhere.

“We know that that does not work,” she said. “There is a post-monitoring, Welsh Government report about such a site at Llanwern, which has proven that lapwing populations have crashed and bat populations have crashed as well as other insect wildlife around that development. What they were attempting to achieve in mitigation of the work they did has not been successful. Mitigation doesn’t tend to work because you’re dealing with an incredibly sensitive and fragile ecosystem that’s been in existence for hundreds of years, if not thousands.

“The reliance of all the different insects and plants and animals that live there on each other is very complicated. So if you take a big chunk of that away, it’s not going to come back in the same way as over the hundreds of years it’s taken to evolve.

“And the impact is also an issue. If there’s nowhere else for that wildlife to disperse back to, and you’re taking more and more of the land, you’re decreasing the potential for that piece of nature to bounce back and be resilient.”

Well-being of Future Generations Act

On top of these concerns is anxiety about the integrity of the Well-being of Future Generations Act. Sophie Howe, the previous Future Generations Commissioner, said on multiple occasions that permitting the proposed M4 Relief Road to go through the Gwent Levels would have driven a coach and horses through the legislation that created her role.

Do the solar plant proposals represent an equivalent risk?

Ms Buttriss said: “I think it would make a real mockery of the Future Generations Act – completely. And, you know, Wales was such an exemplar government in the sense of putting that Act together. A lot of countries are looking to it as a really good example of decision making processes and how public, bodies need to consider these sustainable issues. So, yes, going back on that would be a disaster.”