Liz Truss’s solar scheme announcement highlights some key concerns, but we mustn’t overstate its importance.
Shining a light on solar subsidies
Solar panels on factory roof in Beccles
Photo: © Lightsource
Last Sunday the new environment secretary Liz Truss 
announced that ground-based solar installations would not qualify for Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) subsidies from January 2015. Giving her reasons for the decision, Ms Truss referred to the visual impact of land-based solar farms, as well as the potential impact they can have on food production. We should, she said, be concentrating on rooftop solar installations.
On the face of it, this is an announcement we welcome. CPRE is concerned about applications for solar farms on good quality farmland, or projects that could harm the landscape’s natural beauty. Consistent with our promotion of green energy in the right places, we support sensitively sited solar development.
We also support the government’s aspiration to increase the building of solar panels on the roofs of commercial and public buildings. Significant support for larger rooftop installations would augment green energy production, help us work towards a more balanced energy supply, and protect our treasured landscapes.
Much of the solar industry is working hard to protect high quality agricultural land and enhance biodiversity. While there are certainly still some applications to build solar farms on valuable farmland, the extent to which solar panels are harming productive agricultural land, or removing land which could be used for food production, should not be overstated.
The effect of the announcement on solar scheme viability should also not be overstated, as the Government’s renewable subsidies are much higher than those available through CAP. We want to see solar properly supported by the Government, but also more rigorously planned and optimally sited projects being approved.
While we agree with Defra that roofs should be prioritised for solar panels, the Government must do far more to ensure that this potential is realised. Subsidies for such schemes are available, but non-financial obstacles often get in the way. Minimising the possible constraints of permitted development rights, on which the Government has recently consulted, and increasing incentives for landlords to support rooftop solar are two possible solutions.
Ultimately, we want to work with solar firms and the Government to ensure that much-needed solar schemes can get off the ground.
Find out more
Read our recommendations on better planning for renewable energy to protect the countryside
Download our report: The countryside generation game (4.4MB PDF)
More blogs
-
Why we protect the Green Belt2018-06-08Small places of large consequence2018-06-08Beating our plastic problem2018-05-25Fracking: when 'no' is not enough2018-05-23Growth - but not at any cost2018-05-08Restoring democratic planning2018-04-12Saving beauty for the people2018-04-10Why people need the Green Belt2018-04-09Planning for People2018-03-23How to build houses and save the countryside2018-03-16Villages are unviable without affordable homes – closing the viability loophole in the NPPF2018-03-03What our planning system needs to do2018-03-02The scandal of land-banking2018-03-01We told you there was brownfield...2018-02-20Protecting what we love2018-02-14For the love of the countryside2018-02-14Getting to the heart of the matter2018-02-02Are we losing the plot?2018-01-29How land promoters erode local democracy2018-01-17How can we save small farms?2018-01-11A vision for change?2018-01-11Making the most of brownfield2017-12-12An outrageous national betrayal2017-11-17Clean Growth and the countryside2017-10-31Bushcraft in Dagenham2017-10-12The future of the countryside2017-10-04Farmhouse cheese – going back to the future2017-10-04Affordable housing for all?2017-10-03Local food for a living countryside2017-10-02Why we must focus on housing need2017-09-20Where has our affordable housing gone?2017-09-19Getting started2017-09-04The seeds of a new system2017-08-29Smaller farms – going, going, gone?2017-08-10Towards a rural urbanism2017-07-31Keep your landscape special2017-07-10Missing the target?2017-07-07The big build2017-06-26Once more with feeling2017-06-12We cannot afford to go on like this2017-06-06Still a question of judgement2017-05-25A considered response2017-05-03Road-building: time for a new direction2017-04-19Improving the brownfield picture2017-04-13Land: a ‘shared asset’2017-04-07Land is not a disposable asset2017-03-07Going for green2017-03-03Housing White Paper: worth the wait?2017-02-08Beat the bottle2017-02-06Manchester - back to the 1980s?2017-01-24Green Belt: One legacy we can be proud of2016-12-12Designing a faster future?2016-12-06£60 million for development driven by locals2016-11-14Waste not, want not2016-11-02Inner peace in the great outdoors2016-10-10Is farming always in your genes?2016-09-30Putting the art into artisan food2016-09-16The true value of 5p2016-08-04Ruskin, the countryside and fruitfulness2016-07-20Affordable rural housing: why it matters2016-07-08What do dark skies mean to you?2016-06-21Getting builders to build2016-05-13Up for a challenge2016-05-12LPEG: missing the point2016-05-05Passing the buck on Green Belt2016-04-29Stand and deliver!2016-04-08A Victorian process for 21st century rail2016-02-26Planning changes: making our views known2016-02-17Getting houses built2016-01-04
