Britain's net-zero scheme is being derailed by opposition to solar and wind projects

Britain’s plans to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 won’t be derailed by high costs, even though Brits are now paying some of the world’s highest residential electricity prices.

Nor will the effort be derailed by lack of support from the Labour Party, which has issued a manifesto claiming that Britain will be a “clean energy superpower.”

Instead, the country’s net-zero scheme will fail because of the fierce opposition from rural landowners throughout the British Isles. They are telling the owners of proposed solar and wind projects to take their oceans of photovoltaic panels and forests of giant turbines and put them somewhere the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow.

The proof is in the numbers. Since Jan. 1, there have been nearly four dozen rejections of solar or wind projects in England, Ireland, and Scotland. Among the latest was a rejection last month in Kent, where a planning inspector spiked plans for a massive solar project owned by the French company EDF.

The 257-acre project was rejected due to what the planning inspector determined would be a “significant adverse effect on the receiving landscape.” Also in July, a scheme that aimed to cover 114 acres of prime agricultural land in Scotland with solar panels was rejected by local officials. The project near the town of Coupar Angus had received 44 letters of objection and just one letter in support.

I have been tracking the rural backlash against alt-energy projects in the U.S. for 15 years. As the Renewable Rejection Database shows, there have been at least 878 rejections or restrictions of wind and solar projects in the U.S. since 2013, including 82 this year. I am also tracking the international opposition to alt-energy in the Global Renewable Rejection Database.

The numbers in the global database show the extent of the local opposition to solar and wind energy in the British Isles. Thus far in 2025, there have been 64 rejections or restrictions of solar or wind projects in countries outside of the U.S. Of that number, 45 have been in England, Ireland, or Scotland. And of that sum, six rejections occurred in July alone.

The opposition to these projects is ferocious, and it has been ongoing since at least 2016, when local campaigners defeated a proposal to build a 12-turbine wind project near Scotland’s Loch Ness.

One of the latest high-profile battles is over the proposed Calderdale Energy project in West Yorkshire. If built, the 300-megawatt plant, promoted by a Saudi outfit called Al Gihaz Holding, would be one of the biggest onshore wind projects in England. The plan calls for 41 massive turbines, standing 200 meters high, to be built amid Walshaw Moor, a region believed to have inspired Emily Brontë’s masterpiece, "Wuthering Heights." The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds has called the project “entirely inappropriate.” Opponents have already collected over 15,000 signatures calling for the rejection of the giant bird-chopping project.

The surging resistance to solar and wind projects in Britain rhymes with what I have seen all over the world. Although climate NGOs, the pro-solar claque, and pro-wind lobbyists try to dismiss rural residents’ objections as NIMBYism ("not in my backyard"), the reality is that everyone, everywhere, cares about what happens in their neighborhoods.

Over the last 15 years, I have interviewed dozens of people from numerous countries who have fought solar and wind projects. Their concerns are the same. They are rightly concerned about the deleterious health impacts caused by noise pollution from wind turbines. They are concerned the projects will hurt their property values. Numerous studies have shown that wherever solar and wind projects are built, the value of nearby properties tends to fall. They are concerned about their landscapes and viewsheds. They are also worried about wildlife. And increasingly, objections are being made about the destruction of agricultural land.

To cite just one example, last year, the provincial government in Alberta announced an “agriculture first” policy designed to protect Canadian farmland from solar and wind development. The province also created a 70,000 square kilometer buffer zone around the Rocky Mountains to preserve viewsheds from alt-energy development.

Despite the never-ending hype about renewable energy, land-use conflicts are a binding constraint on the expansion of solar and wind energy. That’s true in England, Ireland, Scotland, and in rural communities worldwide. After watching these fights for years, it is clear to me that the farmers, ranchers, and residents of rural communities are not just going to roll over and take it. They will continue to fight to protect their communities, and the numbers in the Global Renewable Rejection Database will continue to rise.

Robert Bryce is a Texas-based author, film producer, and public speaker.