'Shame on you. Build one behind where your children live': Outcry over battery farm 40 minutes from Derby

“Shame on you. Go and build one behind where your children live. Thank you VERY much. A disgrace, an utter disgrace. Paying our council tax for this? What a waste of time.”

This was the reaction from furious residents opposing plans for a battery energy farm in Park Road, Overseal, following a decision from South Derbyshire District Council to approve the scheme at a meeting last night (July 22).

Councillors had been deadlocked six votes for and six votes against, with one councillor, Labour’s Cllr Ian Hudson, abstaining, leading to fellow Labour councillor, chairman Gareth Jones, to use his casting vote to break the impasse and approve the scheme.

Cllr Jones felt that approval at appeal was effectively inevitable, following an early appeal loss over a battery storage farm near Walton.

The scheme, from Care Power (Overseal) Limited, would involve chopping down two and a half acres of National Forest woodland tree planting next to a recently developed holiday lodge site.

More than 50 battery shipping containers measuring more than two and a half metres in height would take their place and replacement trees would be planted elsewhere in the National Forest, along with more planting including hedges on the same site.

The facility would be able to store 50 megawatts of electricity and be able to provide power for 17,236 homes each year, with the scheme to be connected by 7.5km of cabling to the former Drakelow Power Station.

An ecology report says 30 per cent of the trees on the site are dead or dying with more expected to die in five years, with more are at risk due to thriving, unkempt brambles.

The National Forest Company itself said “ the proposed battery storage facility should not be located in an area of existing woodland” and that “poor woodland management is not considered justification for tree felling”.

It said: “The management of 8.4ha (20.7 acres) of remaining woodland is not considered to justify or mitigate the loss of 1.1ha (2.7 acres) of woodland.”

A council report says 20.7 acres of woodland would be “thinned” by 50 per cent – seeing the removal of 4,500 young trees.

Cllr Anne Hughes, chair of Overseal Parish Council, told the meeting: “We recognise the need for battery storage facilities, but they should be sited in industrial locations, which are available in South Derbyshire, not in the heart of the National Forest.

“To lose this facility and replace it with an industrial complex would be a significant loss of amenity for residents.

“The elderly there (in a nearby retirement home) are fearful that their peaceful haven will be shattered by the noise, traffic and pollution.”

Jake Stentiford, agent for the applicant, told the meeting that the scheme carried “significant benefits”, including the avoidance of 9,600 tonnes of carbon emissions.

He said: “This is a unique opportunity for a development which will be effectively screened from day one.

“It is an excellent opportunity for the country to deliver energy and national security and protect them from external shocks, with long-term improvements for the area.”

He said the struggling forest site would be turned into “flourishing native woodland”.

Cllr Amy Wheelton said: “Officers (who recommended approval) want us to cut down over a hectare, 2.7 acres or 43 tennis courts of woodland in the heart of the National Forest to plonk a speculative, ugly industrial battery energy storage scheme, incongruous to the woodland landscape, with no connection, which is 7.5km from Drakelow. 

“It’s an embarrassment and an affront to 30 years of hard work of the National Forest.”

Speaking of the neighbouring holiday lodges, approved by the council nearly three years ago, Cllr Wheelton said: “They want us to destroy this tourism business before it starts. With 50 to 60 per cent tree thinning you will see that industrial installation as you sit in your holiday lodge for 25 years before it’s mitigated.

“The district council should not be destroying the heart of the National Forest.”

Cllr Andrew Kirke said the scheme would cause “real irreversible harm”, adding: “How much do we need this site that we need to destroy the countryside to achieve it?”

Cllr Jayne Davies said: “I know we need these but time and time again we have them in the most ridiculous locations.”

She said the trees that would be chopped down to make way for the scheme are already providing an environmental benefit by reducing carbon in the atmosphere.

Referring to the plot as a “carbuncle” she said “we cannot let the National Forest be destroyed by such eyesores”.

Cllr Steve Taylor said that what he saw on-site was not “valuable woodland”, saying: “We are starting to see the results of previous refusals which will potentially cost this council thousands and thousands of pounds which could be used for the betterment of the community.”

Steffan Saunders, head of planning, said the council’s chances of losing an appeal would be “very high” with no battery energy farm outside of the Green Belt yet rejected by inspectors anywhere in England and Wales.

Cllr Kirke said: “The risk of appeal is genuine but the fear of costs is not a sound reason for decision-making. Doing the right thing outweighs the fear of doing the unpopular thing.”

Cllr Jones, using his casting vote to approve the scheme, said: “Refusing this would be nothing other than a temporary reprieve. It is very clear that if we refuse this it will go to appeal and we would lose and probably have costs awarded. It would be a futile gesture.

“The right thing to do is not to have costs awarded against us time and time again.”