camelot-forum.co.uk

https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2022- ... r%20panels.



Australia needs shade & the sheep appreciate it, not unlike the wind turbine shadow following sheep news a while back.
Less heat stress for them must be good.

Seems a good option for attempts to reclaim by moisture arid land to graze & improve the root system of the local environment., not forgetting the occasional cleaning by water & silicone brushing.

It ties in with this report from 2020, (its part of a 4 year study) ..however that's not to say there have not been problems, as usual no proper consultation as to workable height to keep panels & animals safe " Mr Keith said one issue that had cropped up was sheep getting caught in the solar panels.

"We've lost two sheep who became tangled in the panels, and I'm surprised there's not more thought into having the panels higher up off the ground."

"I took them away from the panels for two months because their wool was getting caught in the universal joints that run the panels as they tilt towards the sun."

"But this trial will add to the national projects being run to give producers more information on bloodlines into the future."
https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2020- ... s/12581756

1.2 meters minumum.

Sheep love to itch themselves on the support poles.

Here are ours amongst the Trackers, 2014.

Now have several ARRAYS with the Panels themselves at 1.25 meters.

A bit more on grazing amongst solar panels (this time from Maryland)

https://www.marylandmatters.org/2022/05 ... stureland/

https://www.marylandmatters.org/2021/09 ... ar-energy/

& of course there is an agrivoltaics section to reddit
https://www.reddit.com/r/agrivoltaics/

ClockmanFRA wrote: ↑Mon May 30, 2022 9:11 pm 1.2 meters minumum.

Sheep love to itch themselves on the support poles.

Here are ours amongst the Trackers, 2014.

Now have several ARRAYS with the Panels themselves at 1.25 meters.

Your solar array isn’t particularly dense but even so, how has it affected the number of sheep the field can support without supplemental feed? Have you reduced sheep or increased supplemental feed?

Hi Stinsy,

I cannot give figures on density of sheep to weight gain and feed supplements required.

At present we don’t have any sheep as we are re-stocking with a gentler breed. Our sheep dog is bored and spends most of the day in the Bar hehe.

Those 'French Rouge West' breed, in my photos, were ruffians, and even a Famous Lincolnshire Sheep Farmer remarked when he was here helping with a round up/capture, " never worked with this breed before, but hell they are ruffians."

So i can only give info on sheep hights and grazing around PV arrays.

We only have 8.5 acres, half of which is hay meadows. So the sheep here are not seen as a financial farming possibility. However, most sheep farmers i have spoken to would be happy to put sheep into PV solar farms to graze the grass if the PV panels are at a suitable hight.

Of course the PV solar farm developers don’t care a hoot, if they make the ground underneath sterile or constantly spray weed killer etc, they want it installed as cheap as possible.

So sorry, I cant answer your exact question as i have no data.

Stinsy wrote: ↑Mon Jun 06, 2022 9:02 am
Your solar array isn’t particularly dense but even so, how has it affected the number of sheep the field can support without supplemental feed? Have you reduced sheep or increased supplemental feed?

That is fairly immaterial in the context of renewable energy generation.

The solar farms are clearly more financially attractive than sheep farming, so they can easily stand-alone (as an income stream) without any assistance from other agricultural activities.

Even a few sheep could be an asset, so many (within a solar farm boundary) would be an extra income stream - if practical. My brother works (on occasions) at a farm with a large solar array - which is about to be doubled in size. The area is very securely fenced off and monitored for any intrusion. Animals within the boundary might well complicate the security arrangements as they would require quite a lot of management.

It is maybe a shame that this reflects on the honesty of the lowest scum, who would pilfer the kit at the drop of a hat. All these things need to be taken into consideration by the investors, who install and operate these installations.

I’m not aware of the security of the, local-to-me, Mallard Pass 350MW solar farm development. Security will, no doubt be a very important issue for the developers of such a sprawling development. It is currently at the Stage Two Statutory Consultation - but already access for infrastructure is very apparent. I am sure future developments will be better understood, and adjusted accordingly, and that current developments have learned on past schemes. I am happy with the progress.

Oliver90owner wrote: ↑Mon Jun 06, 2022 10:38 am

Stinsy wrote: ↑Mon Jun 06, 2022 9:02 am
Your solar array isn’t particularly dense but even so, how has it affected the number of sheep the field can support without supplemental feed? Have you reduced sheep or increased supplemental feed?

That is fairly immaterial in the context of renewable energy generation.

The solar farms are clearly more financially attractive than sheep farming, so they can easily stand-alone (as an income stream) without any assistance from other agricultural activities.

Even a few sheep could be an asset, so many (within a solar farm boundary) would be an extra income stream - if practical. My brother works (on occasions) at a farm with a large solar array - which is about to be doubled in size. The area is very securely fenced off and monitored for any intrusion. Animals within the boundary might well complicate the security arrangements as they would require quite a lot of management.

It is maybe a shame that this reflects on the honesty of the lowest scum, who would pilfer the kit at the drop of a hat. All these things need to be taken into consideration by the investors, who install and operate these installations.

I’m not aware of the security of the, local-to-me, Mallard Pass 350MW solar farm development. Security will, no doubt be a very important issue for the developers of such a sprawling development. It is currently at the Stage Two Statutory Consultation - but already access for infrastructure is very apparent. I am sure future developments will be better understood, and adjusted accordingly, and that current developments have learned on past schemes. I am happy with the progress.

My concern is the use of land previously used for food production for energy production instead.

I heartily agree stinsy, good arable should not be taken out of circulation.

Bad land may be helped back by being used for solar & pasture over a 25-30 year solar farm contractual lifespan.

Land with solar should not be smothered in weedkiller (& everything else that goes with it)

Design needs proper planning to the scale solar farms are put out, is we need a common sense list to follow to pass the planning stage & remain in place, after all sheep are cheaper than men spraying pesticides, & the green marketing is valuable for the investment firms in terms of community & approval.

I too have seen solar farms with metal fencing all around, does that go at end of contract? ..or left for the farms future security?

Hope there is change because it all seems a bit hit & miss to date.

We also need farmers takes on groundscrews versus concrete foundations for land transition at end of contract. (Presumably they can be "leftie-loosey 'ed by a small hydraulic tracked vehicle arm) !?

The early US/ Aus news of improvements to diversify & here weight gain should be stress tested for really marginal scrub reclamation recovery that could help grazing for climate stressed areas that may mean people stick around rather than migration that passes the stresses along elsewhere.

Solar desalination plant that irrigates the land around it & maybe salt production ponds for the brine? to close the loop ..is that possible? ..I hope so.

My concern is the use of land previously used for food production for energy production instead.

Food over climate change? We all know, or should know (even if only ‘deep down’) that climate change issues are far more important than rearing animals for human food.

Landowners have the reasonable right to earn a decent financial return from their holdings.

I am certainly not a vegetarian - let alone a vegan - but am of the opinion that we should reduce meat eating to a sensible level. I will admit to buying (and enjoying) mainly the better quality meat joints - rather than the rougher end of the market (that often turns up in junk food).

My conclusion from these opposing ‘wants’ is that the renewable generation is a far more appetising choice for many farmers who have the choice and should not be discouraged by meat eaters. The Mallard Pass development (MPD) is rather more contentious, in this respect, because it is primarily an arable area.

I somehow feel that sheep/PV trials in OZ bear little resemblance to conditions in the UK. The comparisons are starkly different and likely not even reasonably understood by non-agriculturists. To raise any tilting joints a few centimetres is not a big deal, I would suggest. But how many UK solar farms utilise trackers? (I honestly do not know and don’t personally know of any, but I understand the MPD is considering utilising at least some form of tracking).

There is an awfully large spectrum of what is termed high quality agricultural land, too. Most, but not necessarily that trial area, of Australia is of rather lower quality? Mainly, perhaps, regulated by the regional rainfall and temperature levels.

The UK is much more ‘intensive’, I would suggest. Likely a large percentage of UK arable land is regarded as ‘high quality’ for different reasons - but only produces large crops due to large chemical applications (fertilisers and icides), and is, IMO, in much lower health than when I was brought up on a farm, six decades ago. Much of the soil living organisms/organic matter has long been extinguished/seriously reduced.

The sort of outdoor raised, grass fed, animal husbandry practiced in the UK is carbon negative (he carbon is sequested in the soil). The story about meat being automatically bad for the climate is PETA nonsense.