MP claims Red Arrows could crash thanks to solar farms
A Conservative MP has raised concerns about the potential impact of new solar farms on flight safety, suggesting they could even cause the Red Arrows to crash.
Dr Caroline Johnson, who represents Sleaford and North Hykeham, argues that light reflecting off the solar panels could dazzle RAF pilots.
Speaking out against plans for large-scale solar farms in her rural Lincolnshire constituency, Dr Johnson argued they were inappropriate as they could hinder farmland productivity in the area.
She claimed solar panels could be potentially dangerous to pilots operating from nearby air bases, including one with historical significance from the Second World War and another serving as a crucial training facility. MPs in Parliament however, clarified that solar power farms absorb light and do not reflect light.
Dr Johnson told the House of Commons: 'I also ask the minister to give due consideration to the three RAF bases local to my constituency, RAF Waddington, RAF Cranwell and RAF Digby. Glint and glare from reflective panels will cause problems for pilots flying over these areas.
'Our newest pilots undergo basic training at Cranwell, and RAF Waddington is home to the Red Arrows. It is a huge joy for me and many of my constituents to watch the nation's iconic display team practice the loop-the-loop and roll into turns at high speeds.
'But the miles and miles of aligned panels creating glint and glare could lead to disaster.'
Labour MP Sarah Russell (Congleton) intervened and asked Dr Johnson to clarify.
She said: 'Does (she) agree with me that pilots seem to fly throughout our nation and many others already, despite there being widespread solar panels in, for instance, Spain, where there is more sunshine than here. So it seems unlikely that they'll be unlikely to manage in her constituency.'
Dr Johnson replied: 'I wonder if the average jumbo jet flying to Heathrow does a loop-the-loop on the way in?'
She continued to raise concerns, this time about the impact on the home of UK signals unit, the Joint Cyber and Electromagnetic Activities Group, which provides support to the Army, RAF and Royal Navy.
She said: 'RAF Digby is the headquarters of the Joint Cyber and Electromagnetic Activities Group. Any interference with these defence estates could cause significant harm.'
Speaking from the frontbench, Liberal Democrat MP Edward Morello (West Dorset) said he could 'write a whole other speech debunking some of the things that were said today', adding: 'Any solar farm development requires a glint and glare report before it gets approved if it's anywhere near an air force base or an airport.'
Energy minister Michael Shanks said: 'These solar panels are designed to absorb light, not reflect it, and… glint and glare is considered within the planning process already. So it is one of the factors that is taken into account.'
Five large solar farms have already been approved for Lincolnshire, with more already in the pipeline.
But there has been criticism that it will vastly reduce the amount of high quality agricultural land.
Dr Johnson said: 'Lincolnshire is the nation's bread basket and produces 30 per cent of the nation's vegetables.
'The land in the county is also more productive than the UK average, with the wheat harvest over a difficult last five years 25 per cent above the UK average and much, much more productive than global averages. So this is land we can least afford to lose.'
RAF Waddington, RAF Cranwell and the Ministry of Defence have been contacted for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Spending Review: Massive cheques from the chancellor for some - but what do totals hide?
The next few days are vital – "one of the last moments to weave it all together – to look politically credible to the people Labour has lost", one senior figure reckons. There have been huge fights inside government about the looming Spending Review. As I write, the home secretary and deputy prime minister are both still in dispute with the mighty Treasury over the amount of cash they'll have to spend. But the Treasury's already trying to convince the public the review is about significant investment. On Wednesday Rachel Reeves boasted of funnelling billions more taxpayers' cash to big transport projects outside the wealthier south east of England, having tweaked the Treasury rules to do it. Now, with five days still to go, I've been passed some of the information that'll be in the pages of Wednesday's review. It's one crucial chart that will be in the huge bundle of documents heading to the printing presses on Tuesday night that shows what's called TDEL – the Total Departmental Expenditure Limit. In other words, the total that government spends, including the day-to-day costs of running public services and long-term spending on big projects. But it doesn't include costs that government can't set in advance – like pensions and benefits, or debt interest. The chart spans 2010 to 2030, so takes in the coalition years, where you can see the total sliding down, then the Conservative years when spending starts rising after the Brexit referendum, then leaps up during Covid. And then, when Labour took charge, the red line going up steeply at first, then more slowly towards the end of this parliamentary term. The total real terms spending by 2029-30? More than £650bn – roughly £100bn more than when Labour took office. The pale blue line is what would have happened to spending if the Conservatives had managed to hang on to power last year. The government now is allergic to accusations that any cuts they make will be a return to austerity. And this chart shows that overall spending is going up considerably, compared to those lean years. The political argument around spending will rage but the chancellor did - to use the ghastly technical term – set out the "spending envelope" in her autumn Budget, indicating rises were coming. You can bet they'll want to use every chance they have to say they are spending significantly more than the Tories planned to under Rishi Sunak. The government's political opponents on the other hand, may look at that red line as it climbs steeply upwards and say: "See, public spending is ballooning out of control". This chart does illustrate very significant rises in public spending. But be careful. What this chart doesn't give us is any idea of how those massive totals break down. Massive chunks will go to favoured departments, suggestions of an extra £30bn for the NHS today. And a very significant part of that steep rise will be allocated to long-term projects, not running public services, some of which are struggling. The overall total may be enormous, but a couple of parts of government greedily suck in billions - others will still feel the pain. A case in point – as I write on Saturday morning, the Home Office is still arguing over its settlement, believing there isn't enough cash to provide the number of police the government has promised, while the front pages are full of stories about the NHS receiving another bumper deal. So observe this big health warning. The chart gives us a sense of the political argument the chancellor will make. But it doesn't tell the full story or give the crucial totals, department by department, decision by decision. It's worth saying it's incredibly unusual to see any of this before the day itself, hinting perhaps at jitters in No 11 about how the review will be received. Until we hear the chancellor's speech, and then see all of the documents in full on Wednesday, the story of the Spending Review won't be clear. There will be reams of statistics, produced by government, and the official number crunchers, the OBR, and then days of analysis by think tanks and experts in the aftermath. But bear in mind these three core facts. Rachel Reeves will put a huge amount of cash, tens and tens of billions, towards long term projects. Short-term spending money will be tight, with no spare cash for sweeteners. And the government is not popular, so there's huge pressure to tell a convincing story to try to change that, not least because of what went wrong the last time. "We can't ever do it like this again." After Labour's first Budget, government insiders concluded next time, it had to be different. A source recalls: "It was a very brutal exercise - it was literally just making the sums add up, there was no collective approach to what the priorities were." Alongside a lot of extra cash for the NHS, there was a big tax rise for business that came out of the blue. No one wants a repeat of that experience. The "next time" is now – and a Labour source warns the review might be as "painful as hell" . So the task for a government struggling in the polls is to make this moment more than just a gruesome arithmetic problem, instead, to use the power of the state's cheque book to make, and go on to win an argument. Stick a fiver on Rachel Reeves referring back to that first Budget as "fixing the foundations" of the economy and public services, this week then being the moment to start, "rebuilding Britain". Sources suggest she has three aspects in mind: security for the country (which will explain all those billions for defence), the health of the nation - that does what it says on the tin, and "investing", all that cash for long-term projects. Next week's decisions will be followed soon after by the government's industrial strategy which will promise support for business, possibly including cash to help with sky-high energy costs. And it comes after several big staging posts – the immigration white paper, trade deals, the defence review. In government circles there's hope of denting some of the criticisms that they have been slow to get moving in office, that, frankly, Sir Keir Starmer arrived in government without having worked out what he really wanted to do. One Whitehall insider tells me, "Now the buses are all arriving at once – maybe the idea of this lacklustre government that didn't have a plan will be blown away by July?" Another Labour source suggests the threat from Nigel Farage has actually forced the government to get moving, visibly, and decisively: "Reform gives us the impetus to actually shake this stuff down." That's the rosy view of how the chancellor might be able to play a difficult hand. It might not be reality. It is profoundly uncomfortable for a Labour government to make cuts. There is already a whiff of rebellion in the air over ministers' welfare plans. Expanding free school meals for kids in England seems designed to placate some of those critics in advance, but there could be more to make them mutinous. Don't forget Reeves has several different audiences – not just the public and her party, but the financial bigwigs too. This time last year all Labour's schmoozing was paying off, and she enjoyed good reviews in the City. One year on, that mood has shifted, in part because of the autumn budget. According to one city source, it "damaged her. People saw it as an about turn on her promises. Raising National Insurance, however they want to present it, went against the spirit of the manifesto… confidence in her in the City is diminished and diminishing", not least because there is chatter about more tax hikes in the autumn budget. Sign up for the Off Air with Laura K newsletter to get Laura Kuenssberg's expert insight and insider stories every week, emailed directly to you. You probably don't need me to remind you that the level of taxes collected by government are historically sky high. So too, at the other end, is the amount of government debt. A former Treasury minister told me this morning, "debt is the central issue of our time, nationally and globally". "There is a real risk our debt becomes unsustainable this Parliament, unless we make tough choices about what the state does. We can't keep on muddling through." Add in the twists, tariffs and tantrums of the man in the White House, that make the global economic situation uncertain and the picture's not pretty. But politics hinges on finding advantage in adversity. Polling suggests much of the country reckons Labour inherited a bad hand and has played it badly. This week, the chancellor has a chance to change the game. No 11 is determined to prove that she has made decisions only a Labour chancellor would make. And Reeves is gambling that her decisions to shovel massive amounts of money into long term spending helps the economy turn, and translates into political support well before the next general election. A senior Labour source said, Wednesday will be "the moment, this government clicks into gear, or it won't". There's no guarantee. 'It's going to be ugly': Westminster braces for Spending Review The Conservative Party faces problems - is its leader one of them? The country where the left (not the far right) made hardline immigration laws BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. And we showcase thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. You can send us your feedback on the InDepth section by clicking on the button below.
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
"I Voted For Trump, But I'm On Elon's Side Here" — MAGA Is Choosing Sides In Trump/Musk's Breakup, And The Reactions Are Priceless
As the whole world knows by now, former besties Donald Trump and Elon Musk have beef. This week, their bromance turned into an online feud after a string of chaotic posts slamming each other went viral, all because of differing views on Trump's "Big, Beautiful, Bill." Trump's Vice President JD Vance quickly took Trump's side on X, saying he's "proud to stand beside him." Twitter: @JDVance And followed it up with another, vouching for Trump's character. Twitter: @JDVance Former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon had a much more dramatic response, immediately calling for Elon Musk's deportation. "They should initiate a formal investigation of his immigration status because I am of the strong belief that he is an illegal alien, and he should be deported from the country immediately," Bannon said in a phone interview with the New York Times. Related: "We Don't Import Food": 31 Americans Who Are Just So, So Confused About Tariffs And US Trade Well, conservative voters (many who claim to have supported Trump) are not holding back their reactions to the Trump vs. Elon feud, and many, surprisingly, are team Elon. Here's what they're saying over on the r/LeopardsAteMyFace and r/Conservative subreddits: This person told Elon to "Burn it down." This MAGA voter took Elon's side, accusing Trump of being immature. Related: AOC's Viral Response About A Potential Presidential Run Has Everyone Watching, And I'm Honestly Living For It "I'm with Elon." "We all know Trump isn't that mature, unfortunately." This user said Trump and Elon need to check their "crazy big egos." This person compared Trump and Elon to "petty immature teenagers." This user claimed the feud won't be a big deal in the long run, and called it "business as usual." This user questioned if the fued was a performance. And finally, "This is how a Democrat gets elected in 2028." What are your thoughts on the Trump vs. Elon feud? Let us know in the comments below. Also in In the News: People Can't Believe This "Disgusting" Donald Trump Jr. Post About Joe Biden's Cancer Diagnosis Is Real Also in In the News: Republicans Are Calling Tim Walz "Tampon Tim," And The Backlash From Women Is Too Good Not To Share Also in In the News: JD Vance Shared The Most Bizarre Tweet Of Him Serving "Food" As Donald Trump's Housewife
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
The British military base preparing for war in space
In a fake village in Buckinghamshire, several members of Space Command are huddled around a computer screen watching a foreign missile approach a Ministry of Defence communications satellite. It is just an exercise, but it is a scenario that is increasingly worrying military chiefs, who fear space is now the most important theatre of war. With satellites controlling everything from EasyJet flight plans, to Amazon deliveries, to army advances, targeting them would cripple society. Russia took down Ukraine's satellite communications hours before it began its full-scale land invasion in 2022. China and Russia have both tested anti-satellite missiles, while Moscow is allegedly developing a programme to arm some of its satellites with nuclear warheads, meaning it could destroy enemy networks while in orbit. In recognition of this new orbital battlefield, Space Command was established at RAF High Wycombe in 2021, to 'protect and defend' UK interests in space. It is now home to the UK Space Operations Centre, opened officially by government ministers this week. The RAF base is the former headquarters of Bomber Command, a military unit responsible for strategic bombing during the Second World War. With its winding streets, faux church towers and manor house office blocks, it was designed to look like a quintessential Home Counties village, should the Luftwaffe be passing over. The Bomber Command motto 'Strike Hard, Strike Sure' has been replaced with Space Command's 'Ad Stellas Usque' – Latin for 'up to the stars'. While Bomber Harris's team had its eyes fixed firmly on the ground, Space Command's are turned skywards. Maria Eagle, minister for defence procurement, who helped open the operations centre this week, said: 'From a national security point of view, space is a contested and congested and competitive domain, and we need to make sure, as our adversaries advance their capabilities, that we're able to deal with what that throws up.' She added: 'It's an extension of the more earthbound worries that we've got. The usual kind of things that you worry about on Earth, it's just extended upwards, because that's now a domain that is as important as land, sea or air to the potential of war-fighting or defending national security. 'The National Space Operations Centre does vital work in monitoring and protecting our interests. It's a recognition of the fact that our adversaries are active there, and we need to know what's going on.' Although the United States performed the first anti-satellite tests in 1959, space warfare has largely been consigned to Hollywood and science fiction until recently. Fears began to ramp up in January 2007, when China shot down one of its own ageing weather satellites with a ballistic missile creating a cloud of space junk, which is still causing problems. In November 2021, Russia conducted its own direct-ascent anti-satellite test, destroying the Soviet intelligence satellite Kosmos-1408, and generating a debris field that forced astronauts on the International Space Station to take shelter. However it is not just anti-satellite missiles that are causing concern. According to the latest Space Threat Assessment, from the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, nations are developing evermore elaborate space weapons. These weapons include electro-magnetic pulses, microwaves and lasers to fry electronics, dazzlers to blind optical sensors, and grapplers to latch on to satellites and pull them out of orbit. China, Russia, Iran and North Korea all have the capability of jamming and hijacking satellite signals and launching cyber attacks. A 10-second delay in Google Chrome loading may seem like a domestic internet glitch, but bad actors could also be behind it, Space Command has warned. Space Command is particularly worried about China, which in the past year has launched increasingly advanced and highly-manoeuvrable satellites for purposes that remain unclear. CSIS believes Beijing may be creating a 'formidable on-orbit counter-space arsenal' and that manoeuvrability testing is allowing Chinese operators to develop 'tactics and procedures that can be used for space war-fighting'. US Space force commanders have also warned that Chinese satellites have been spotted 'dogfighting' in space, moving within less than a mile of each other. 'China continues to develop and field a broad set of counter-space capabilities,' a member of Space Command told The Telegraph. 'It's certainly one of the more capable adversaries. Space is no longer a sanctuary, it's a space of contest. It's the modern battlefield.' Russia's Luch satellites have also been spotted stalking European communications and broadcast satellites, moving close to their orbits for reasons not fully understood. Space Command fears they are probing the systems to find out how best to disrupt signals. Although Russia continues to deny it is developing an orbital nuclear anti-satellite weapon – which would breach the 1967 Outer Space Treaty – US intelligence suggests otherwise. Chris Bryant, minister of state for data protection and telecoms, said: 'There's a lot of stuff up there now … and the risks from deliberate bad actors, in particular from Russia and China, and the havoc that could be created either deliberately or accidentally, is quite significant. 'So we need to monitor as closely as we possibly can, 24/7, everything that is going on up there so that we can avert accidental damage, and we can also potentially deter other more deliberate, harmful activity.' Space Command currently employs more than 600 staff, roughly 70 per cent of whom are from the Royal Air Force with the remaining 30 per cent from the Army and Navy, plus a handful of civilians. Not only is it monitoring the sky for threats from foreign powers but it is also keeping an eye out for falling space debris, asteroids, and coronal mass ejections from the Sun which could wipe out power grids and satellites. When a threat is spotted, the team can contact satellite providers to warn them to reposition their spacecraft, or advise them to power down until a powerful jet of plasma has passed through. It also informs the government and the security services on the orbital movements of foreign powers. Space Command also launched its first military satellite last year, named Tyche, which can capture daytime images and videos of the Earth's surface for surveillance, intelligence gathering and military operations. It is part of the Government's £968 million Istari programme which will see more satellites launched by 2031 to create a surveillance constellation. Mr Bryant added: 'Lots of people think 'space' and joke about Star Trek and the final frontier, but actually the truth is you couldn't spend a single day of your life these days in the UK without some kind of engagement with space. 'The havoc that could be created, which might be military havoc, or it might be entirely civil havoc, could be very significant.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
