Nimbys are complaining about potential "danger from batteries" due to solar farms; but TBH this is surely far less than the danger caused by similar batteries in vehicles travelling at 110 km/h (or more) and society is willing to accept that (and the Fire Brigade is already prepared for it).
1,5 km from a school is plenty enough distance for the Emergency Services to deal with any incident even if a battery did go up...
@vfrmedia I bet if you checked the relevant zoning laws you can build a fossil or nuclear power plant closer to homes than that
There were 80 PV-related fires in the UK alone in the last 5 years. In one case when PV farm caught fire the whole neighbourhood was told to stay indoors due to toxic smoke.
A Tesla battery farm in Australia caught fire last month and burned for three days.
So granted the rather low levels of maturity of the PV technology and pressure to do things cheaply, I think the residential opposition is way more justified than in case of nuclear power plants.
its also possible for a battery fire to occur in a larger normal substation (without local generation capacity) as many have 110V/230V DC batteries used as backup supplies for energising electromagnetic protection devices (even if a feed from the grid is lost) - the real requirement is proper monitoring and enforcement of existing safety regulations that have been part of electrical engineering in Europe for decades..
I recommend the report on which I based my statements:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fire-incidents-involving-solar-panels
Having a high-voltage power-generating installation on your house is simply larger risk than having a washing machine, and that's regardless of rather miserable UK building standards.
Batteries are a completely separate topic and while the Kent opposition rhetoric of "nuclear explosion" was simply idiotic, the core of their concerns were kind of confirmed by latest Tesla fire.
Plus 22 serious fires caused by PV, 27 localised fires caused by PV and 9 thermal events.
Not sure what is the point of your cherry-picking now?
I said:
> There were 80 PV-related fires
because that's precisely what the report says.
Not sure what you're talking about but freedom of speech includes freedom to fuck off on your own rather than advising me to do the same when I do not wish so.
Also I did not use "extreme danger" anywhere, that's your own making.
If you internalised the language of hype engineered by Greenpeace for their anti-scientific battle against low-carbon nuclear power, it's quite ironic that you're now getting the taste of your own medicine when people start to use it against renewables.
I'm just here to correct technical mistakes and provide missing factual data.
@kravietz @vfrmedia "the whole neighborhood was told to stay indoors" this happens with literally any structure fire that occurs in populated areas