this post was submitted on 07 Apr 2024
9 points (90.9% liked)

UK Energy

198 readers
2 users here now

A place to post links and discussions around the UK's energy production, National Grid, energy consumption, and green energy news.

See https://grid.iamkate.com/ for the UK's current energy production and sources.

Created 23/07/23

Subscriber Count

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Proposals for a massive solar farm near Coylton are a step closer after South Ayrshire Council offered no objection to the plan.

Objectors had slammed the plans for 100,000 solar panels, which will generate 85 megawatts of electricity and fill an area the equivalent of 15 football pitches, claiming it would damage the protected ecology of the area close to Martnaham Loch.

But councillors on the Regulatory Panel were concerned that the amount of cash being proposed for community benefit was just a tenth of that agreed with wind farms in the area.

The Scottish Government’s Energy Consent Unit makes the final decision on the application, with the council a statutory consultee.

Independent councillor Alec Clark asked an agent for the applicant Locogen for the amount of community money being put up by the company for each megawatt of electricity generated.

He was told that, over the 40 year operation of the facility, £500 would be given per megawatt. This totals around £22,500 each year.

Cllr Clark was not impressed by the figures and said: “I would suggest that that is a very low level of community benefit. I am quite acquainted with the many wind farms we have around South Ayrshire, especially in the Carrick district, and the minimum community benefit there is £5000 per megawatt.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Nighed@sffa.community 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Less energy by MW? Wut?

It's price per MW that matters for that I assume

[–] Serpent 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I'm saying 85 MW of installed solar capacity would generate roughly a third the amount of energy as the equivalent installed capacity of wind. So the Councillor in the article is making a false equivalence between the two technologies.

[–] Nighed@sffa.community 1 points 7 months ago

Ah, by peak output. Makes sense.