Solar Photovoltaic Glint and Glare Study · The glint and glare assessment methodology has been derived from the information provided to Pager Power through consultation with stakeholders

Solar Photovoltaic Glint and Glare

Study

Richard Thomas and Co - Morfa Pingett

Solar Photovoltaic Glint and Glare Study Richard Thomas and Co - Morfa Pingett - Solar Development 2

ADMINISTRATION PAGE

Job reference: 9358A

Date: February, 2019

Author: Andrea Mariano

Telephone: 01787 319001

Email: [email protected]

Reviewer: Danny Scrivener

Second reviewer: Kai Frolic

Date: February, 2019

Telephone: 01787 319001

Email: [email protected]; [email protected]

Issue Date Detail of Changes

1 February, 2019 Initial issue

Confidential: The contents of this document may not be disclosed to others without permission.

Copyright © Pager Power Limited 2019

South Suffolk Business Centre, Alexandra Road, Sudbury, CO10 2ZX

T:+44 (0)1787 319001 E:[email protected] W: https://www.pagerpower.com/

https://www.pagerpower.com/


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Report Purpose

Pager Power has been retained to assess the possible effects of glint and glare from a proposed

solar development near Pembrey Airport in Burry Port, UK. Reflections from the solar

development towards aviation receptors at Pembrey Airport, including the approach paths and

Air Traffic Control (ATC tower) have been assessed. The potential impact on surrounding roads

has also been considered.

Pager Power

Pager Power has undertaken over 350 glint and glare assessments in the UK, Europe, India and

Australasia. The company’s own glint and glare guidance is based on industry experience and

extensive consultation with industry stakeholders including airports and aviation regulators.

Conclusion

With regard to Pembrey Airport, no significant glint and glare effects are predicted because:

• Reflections are not predicted at all towards the Air Traffic Control Tower.

• Reflections towards approaching pilots are not possible:

o Approach 04: no glint and glare predicted from the model.

o Approach 22: glint and glare are geometrically possible towards the approach path;

however the reflecting panels will be outside the pilot’s view. The effects are

therefore not significant.

With regard to nearby roads, no significant glint and glare effects are predicted:

• A low impact has been predicted for some of the receptors considered, for the others no

impact was predicted. This because one of the roads is a local road and for the other there

will be enough vegetation to screen the view of drivers.

• No mitigation requirement has been identified since drivers will not look directly in the

reflection, but effects could be reduced further via the provision of screening near the road

junction at the site boundary (receptor 5).

More exhaustive information can be found from page 37 to 46.


Recommendations

The results of this assessment should be made available to Pembrey Airport.

No mitigation requirement has been identified for road users because the predicted impacts

are, at worst, low. However, further screening at the road junction immediately west of the

development (receptor 5) could reduce effects even further.


LIST OF CONTENTS

Administration Page ................................................................................................................................. 2

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 3

Report Purpose .............................................................................................................................................. 3

Pager Power .................................................................................................................................................... 3

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................................ 3

Recommendations ........................................................................................................................................ 4

List of Contents ........................................................................................................................................... 5

List of Figures .............................................................................................................................................. 8

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................ 9

About Pager Power ................................................................................................................................. 10

1 Introduction................................................................................................................................. 11

1.1 Overview ........................................................................................................................................... 11

1.2 Pager Power’s Experience .......................................................................................................... 11

1.3 Glint and Glare Definition .......................................................................................................... 11

2 Proposed Development Location and Details................................................................ 12

2.1 Proposed Development Location – Aerial Image............................................................. 12

2.2 Proposed Development Layout ............................................................................................... 13

3 Glint and Glare Assessment Methodology ...................................................................... 14

3.1 Guidance and Studies.................................................................................................................. 14

3.2 Background ..................................................................................................................................... 14

3.3 Methodology .................................................................................................................................. 14

3.4 Inputs ................................................................................................................................................. 15

4 Identification of Receptors .................................................................................................... 16

4.1 Overview ........................................................................................................................................... 16

4.2 Air Traffic Control Tower ............................................................................................................ 16


4.3 Approaching Aircraft ................................................................................................................... 18

4.4 Roads: A484 & road southern border................................................................................... 20

5 Modelling the Solar Development ..................................................................................... 21

5.1 Resolution ........................................................................................................................................ 21

6 Glint and Glare Assessment Results ................................................................................... 22

6.1 Overview ........................................................................................................................................... 22

6.2 Results – ATC Tower..................................................................................................................... 23

6.3 Results – Approach for Runway 04 ........................................................................................ 24

6.4 Results – Approach for Runway 22 ........................................................................................ 25

6.5 Results – Road A484 .................................................................................................................... 26

6.6 Results – Local road southern border ................................................................................... 33

7 Results Discussion ..................................................................................................................... 42

7.1 ATC Tower results ......................................................................................................................... 42

7.2 Runway 04 Approach results .................................................................................................... 42

7.3 Runway 22 Approach results .................................................................................................... 42

7.4 Road results ..................................................................................................................................... 42

7.5 Overall Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 51

8 Overall Conclusions .................................................................................................................. 52

8.1 Analysis Results .............................................................................................................................. 52

8.2 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................................... 52

Appendix A – Overview of Glint and Glare Guidance ................................................................ 53

Overview ........................................................................................................................................................ 53

UK Planning Policy ..................................................................................................................................... 53

Assessment Process .................................................................................................................................. 54

Ground Based Assessment Guidelines .............................................................................................. 54

Aviation Assessment Guidance ............................................................................................................. 54

Appendix B – Overview of Glint and Glare Studies ..................................................................... 60

Overview ........................................................................................................................................................ 60


Reflection Type from Solar Panels ....................................................................................................... 60

Solar Reflection Studies ........................................................................................................................... 61

Appendix C – Overview of Sun Movements and Relative Reflections ................................. 64

Terrain Sun Curve - From lon: -4.298671 lat: 51.721264 ............................................................ 65

Appendix D – Glint and Glare Impact Significance ..................................................................... 66

Overview ........................................................................................................................................................ 66

Impact Significance Definition .............................................................................................................. 66

Assessment Process for Road Receptors .......................................................................................... 67

Assessment Process – ATC Tower........................................................................................................ 68

Assessment Process – Approaching Aircraft ................................................................................... 69

Appendix E – Pager Power’s Reflection Calculations Methodology ..................................... 70

Appendix F – Assessment Limitations and Assumptions .......................................................... 72

Pager Power’s Model ................................................................................................................................ 72

Sandia National Laboratories’ (SGHAT) Model .............................................................................. 73

Appendix G – Coordinate Data ........................................................................................................... 74

Roads receptors .......................................................................................................................................... 74

Aviation receptors ...................................................................................................................................... 75

Modelled Reflector Area ......................................................................................................................... 76

Appendix H – Geometric Calculation Results – Pager Power Results .................................. 77

Approach 22 ................................................................................................................................................. 77

Road A484 receptors ................................................................................................................................ 78

Road south of development .................................................................................................................. 81


LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 – Aerial image of proposed development .................................................................... 12

Figure 2 – Development details: panels height, tilt and orientation .................................... 13

Figure 3 – ATC tower image ................................................................................................................ 17

Figure 4 – ATC tower location relative to the solar development......................................... 17

Figure 5 – Approaching aircraft locations ...................................................................................... 19

Figure 6 – Aerial view of A484 (red line green points) and road southern border (blue

line red points) .......................................................................................................................................... 20

Figure 7 – Part of the path will concurrently experience low impact and low screening

from vegetation ........................................................................................................................................ 43

Figure 8 – Observer 3 A484 ................................................................................................................. 44

Figure 9 – Observer 4 A484 ................................................................................................................. 45

Figure 10 – Observer 5 A484 ............................................................................................................... 45



Figure 13 – Observer 9 southern border road .............................................................................. 47

Figure 14 – Observer 10 southern border road ........................................................................... 48








LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 – Glare intensity designation ............................................................................................... 22

Table 2 – ATC tower results ................................................................................................................. 23

Table 3 – Runway 04 approach results ............................................................................................ 24

Table 4 – Runway 22 approach results ............................................................................................ 25

Table 5 – Road A484 results ................................................................................................................ 32

Table 6 – Local road southern border results ............................................................................... 41


ABOUT PAGER POWER

Pager Power is a dedicated consultancy company based in Suffolk, UK. The company has

undertaken projects in 44 countries within Africa, Europe, America, Asia and Australasia.

The company comprises a team of experts to provide technical expertise and guidance on a

range of planning issues for large and small developments.

Pager Power was established in 1997. Initially the company focus was on modelling the impact

of wind turbines on radar systems. Over the years, the company has expanded into numerous

fields including:

• Renewable energy projects.

• Building developments.

• Aviation and telecommunication systems.

Pager Power prides itself on providing comprehensive, understandable and accurate

assessments of complex issues in line with national and international standards. This is

underpinned by its custom software, longstanding relationships with stakeholders and active

role in conferences and research efforts around the world.

Pager Power’s assessments withstand legal scrutiny and the company can provide support for

a project at any stage.


1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Overview

Pager Power has been retained to assess the possible effects of glint and glare from a proposed

solar photovoltaic development located near Pembrey Airport in Burry Port, UK.

The assessment has considered potential impacts on aviation activity with specific reference to

Pembrey Airport and the potential impact upon surrounding roads. The report contains the

following:

• Proposed development details.

• Explanation of glint and glare.

• Overview of relevant guidance.

• Overview of relevant studies.

• Overview of Sun movement.

• Assessment methodology.

• Identification of aviation receptors including relevant approach paths.

• Identification of road receptors.

• Glint and glare assessment for identified receptors.

• Results discussion.

1.2 Pager Power’s Experience

Pager Power has undertaken over 350 Glint and Glare assessments within the UK and

internationally. The studies have included assessment civil and military aerodromes, railway

infrastructure and other ground-based receptors including roads and dwellings.

1.3 Glint and Glare Definition

The definition of glint and glare can vary however, the definition used by Pager Power is as

follows:

• Glint – a momentary flash of bright light typically received by moving receptors or from

moving reflectors.

• Glare – a continuous source of bright light typically received by static receptors or from

large reflective surfaces.

These definitions are aligned with those of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in the

United States of America. The term ‘solar reflection’ is used in this report to refer to both

reflection types i.e. glint and glare.


2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT LOCATION AND DETAILS

2.1 Proposed Development Location – Aerial Image

The location of the proposed development is shown in the aerial image1 of Figure 1 below (panel

array shown by red line).

Figure 1 – Aerial image of proposed development

1 Source: Copyright © 2019 Google.


2.2 Proposed Development Layout

The following panel details (Figure 22) have been assessed:

• A vertical tilt of 20 degrees above the horizontal.

• A height above ground of 0.75 metres, a mid-height of 1.08 meters and a top height of

2.16 meters. The panel midpoint has been considered for the analysis.

• An azimuth angle of 198.6 degrees for all panels.

Figure 2 – Development details: panels height, tilt and orientation

2 Source: IKAROS SOLAR 07/08/2018.


3 GLINT AND GLARE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

3.1 Guidance and Studies

Guidelines exist in the UK (produced by the Civil Aviation Authority) and in the USA (produced

by the Federal Aviation Administration) with respect to solar developments and aviation activity.

Independent studies regarding the relative reflectivity of solar panels and other materials have

been undertaken (see Appendices A and B).

Pager Power’s assessment methodology is based on compiled guidance from these sources,

industry experience and consultation with the relevant bodies.

Key points from the literature are:

• Specular reflections of the Sun from solar panels are possible.

• The measured intensity of a reflection from solar panels can vary from 2% to 30%

depending on the angle of incidence.

• The intensity of reflections from solar panels are equal to or less than those from water.

Reflections from solar panels are significantly less intense than many other reflective

surfaces which are common in an outdoor environment.

3.2 Background

Details of the Sun’s movements and solar reflections are presented in Appendix C.

3.3 Methodology

The glint and glare assessment methodology has been derived from the information provided

to Pager Power through consultation with stakeholders and by reviewing the available guidance.

The methodology for the glint and glare assessment is shown below.

• Identify receptors in the area surrounding the proposed solar development.

• Consider direct solar reflections from the proposed solar development towards the

identified receptors by undertaking geometric calculations.

• Consider the visibility of the panels from the receptor’s location. If the panels are not

visible from the receptor then no reflection can occur.

• Based on the results of the geometric calculations, determine whether a reflection can

occur, and if so, at what time it will occur.

• Consider both the solar reflection from the proposed solar development and the

location of the direct sunlight with respect to the receptor’s position.

• Consider the solar reflection with respect to the published studies and guidance –

including intensity calculations for aviation receptors.


• Determine whether a significant detrimental impact is expected in accordance with the

methodology presented in Appendix D.

3.4 Inputs

Within the Pager Power model, the solar development area is defined, as well as the relevant

receptor locations. The result is a chart that shows whether a reflection can occur, the duration

and the panels that can produce the solar reflection towards the receptor. See Appendix E for

technical information regarding the methodology. Solar reflection intensities are cross-checked

using external software that is aligned with the Sandia Laboratories methodology. Limitations

and assumptions are presented in Appendix F.


4 IDENTIFICATION OF RECEPTORS

4.1 Overview

This assessment has been carried out with specific reference to potential impacts at Pembrey

Airport (ATC tower and runaways), in accordance with the recommended guidance, and ground

level road receptors including the A484 road and the local road situated to the development’s

southern border, in accordance with Pager Power guidance.

There is no formal guidance with regard to the maximum distance at which glint and glare

should be assessed. From a technical perspective, there is no maximum distance for potential

reflections.

However, the significance of a solar reflection decreases with distance. This is because the

proportion of an observer’s field of vision that is taken up by the reflecting area diminishes as

the separation distance increases.

Terrain and shielding by vegetation are also more likely to obstruct an observer’s view at longer

distances for ground-based receptors.

4.2 Air Traffic Control Tower

The ATC tower is located to the east of the runway at Pembrey Airport, approximately 1.15 km

southwest of the proposed development.

The tower co-ordinates have been extrapolated from aerial imagery (Figure3 3 and 4 on the

following page) and are shown in Appendix G. The tower height has been estimated to be 5

meters above ground level.



Figure 3 – ATC tower image

Figure 4 – ATC tower location relative to the solar development


4.3 Approaching Aircraft

It is Pager Power’s methodology to assess whether a solar reflection can be experienced on the

approach paths for the associated runways. Pembrey Airport has approach paths for one

runaway.

A geometric glint and glare assessment has been undertaken for both aircraft approach paths

for the runway. This is considered the most critical stage of the flight. The Pager Power approach

for determining receptor (aircraft) locations on the approach path is to select locations along

the extended runway centre line from 50ft above the runway threshold out to a distance of 2

miles. The height of the aircraft is determined by using a 3-degree descent path relative to the

runway threshold height. The Sandia Laboratories methodology, recommended by the USA’s

Federal Aviation Administration, uses the same criteria. Figure 54 in the following page shows

the assessed aviation receptors overlaid on aerial imagery of the airport.



Figure 5 – Approaching aircraft locations


4.4 Roads: A484 & road southern border

The analysis has considered through-roads that:

• Are within, or close to one kilometre of the proposed development; and

• Have a potential view of the panels.

The assessed roads receptor points are shown as green and red icons in Figure 65 below. The

A484 is located 55 meters (at its closest point) west of the solar development (green icons) while

the road at the southern border is located at 20 meters from the site boundary (red line). The

direction of the A484 North-South while for the local road the direction is East-West. A height

above ground level of 1.5 metres has been taken as typical eye level for a road user for both

roads. The co-ordinates of the receptor points are presented in Appendix G.

Figure 6 – Aerial view of A484 (red line green points) and road southern border (blue line red points)



5 MODELLING THE SOLAR DEVELOPMENT

5.1 Resolution

A number of representative panel locations are selected within the proposed solar development

site boundary. The number of locations is determined by the size of the proposed solar

development and the assessment resolution. The bounding co-ordinates for the proposed solar

development have been extrapolated from the available site maps. The assessment is considered

conservative and robust. All ground heights have been taken from Pager Power’s database.

Boundary coordinate data is shown in Appendix G.

A resolution of 1m has been chosen for this assessment (Pager Power model). This means that

a geometric calculation is undertaken for each identified receptor every 1m from within the

defined solar development area. This resolution is sufficiently high to maximise the accuracy of

the results – increasing the resolution further would not significantly change the modelling

output. If a reflection is experienced from an assessed panel location, then it is likely that a

reflection will be viewable from similarly located panels within the development.


6 GLINT AND GLARE ASSESSMENT RESULTS

6.1 Overview

The Pager Power model has been used to identify whether reflections are possible, and when

they would occur. Where solar reflections have been predicted, intensity calculations in

accordance with Sandia National Laboratories’ methodology have been undertaken.

Where glare is predicted, the intensity model calculates the expected intensity of a reflection

with respect to the potential for an after-image (or worse) occurring. The designation used by

the model is presented in Table 1 below along with the associated colour coding.

Coding Used Intensity Key

Glare beyond 50°

Low potential

Potential

Potential for

permanent eye

damage

Table 1 – Glare intensity designation

This coding has been used in the table where a reflection has been calculated and is in

accordance with Sandia National Laboratories’ methodology.

In addition, the intensity model allows for assessment of a variety of solar panel surface

materials. In the first instance, a surface material of ‘smooth glass without an anti-reflective

coating’ is assessed. This is the most reflective surface and allows for a ‘worst case’ assessment.

Other surfaces that could be modelled include:

• Smooth glass with an anti-reflective coating;

• Light textured glass without an anti-reflective coating;

• Light textured glass with an anti-reflective coating; or

• Deeply textured glass.

If significant glare is predicted, modelling of less reflective surfaces could be undertaken.

The tables in the following subsections summarise the results of the assessment.


6.2 Results – ATC Tower

Receptor

Pager Power Results

Glare Type Comment Theoretical reflection times towards ATC tower, GMT (approx.)

am pm

ATC None. None. N/A – No glare predicted.

No reflections are

predicted towards the

ATC tower.

Table 2 – ATC tower results


6.3 Results – Approach for Runway 04

Receptor

Pager Power Results

Glare Type Comment Theoretical reflection times towards Runway 04, GMT (approx.)

am pm

Threshold

up to 2

miles

None. None. N/A – No glare predicted.

No reflections are

predicted towards pilots

approaching within 2

miles of the threshold.

Table 3 – Runway 04 approach results


6.4 Results – Approach for Runway 22

Receptor

Pager Power Results

Glare Type Comment Theoretical reflection times towards Runway 22, GMT (approx.)

am pm

Threshold None.

None.

Not applicable because

the viewer will be at an

angle of more than 50°

compared to the solar

panels’ location.

No visible reflections are

predicted towards pilots

approaching within 2

miles of the threshold.

0.25 miles Between 6.50 and 7.20 from May to

early August

0.50 miles

Between 8.00 and 8.50 from mid-

January to mid-February and

between 7.30 to 8.10 mid-October

to mid-November

0.75 – 2

miles None.

Table 4 – Runway 22 approach results


6.5 Results – Road A484

Receptor

Pager Power Results

Comment Theoretical reflection times towards Road A484, GMT (approx.)

am pm

1-2 None. None. None.


Receptor

Pager Power Results


am pm

3

Reflection are possible between 7:00 and 7:40

from late February to early April. It is also

expected between 6:50 and 7:10 from

September until mid-October.

None.

Reflections would occur from

the northern portion of

development. The analysis

shows that there is line of sight

between drivers travelling

south and the panels, however

the panels will be outside the

drivers’ view and existing

vegetation will screen

completely the site (Figure 8).

Also, the solar reflection and

direct sunlight will originate

from the same location during

that time of the year.

Effects are possible.


Receptor

Pager Power Results


am pm

4 Reflection are possible between 6:40 and 7:30

from late February to late October. None.


almost all development area.

The analysis shows that there is

line of sight between drivers

travelling south and the panels,

however the panels will be

outside the drivers’ view and

existing vegetation will

completely screen the site

(Figure 9). Also, the solar

reflection and direct sunlight

will originate from the same

location during that time of the

year.



Receptor

Pager Power Results


am pm


from late February to late October. None.


the south eastern portion of






drivers’ view and existing

vegetation will completely

screen the site (Figure 10). Also,

the solar reflection and direct

sunlight will originate from the

same location during that time

of the year.



Receptor

Pager Power Results


am pm


from early April September. None.

Reflections would be from the

south-eastern portion of






drivers’ view. In this case

existing vegetation will not






year.



Receptor

Pager Power Results


am pm


from June to early July. None.


south-eastern portion of






drivers’ view. In this case







year.



Receptor

Pager Power Results


am pm

8 None. None. None.

Table 5 – Road A484 results


6.6 Results – Local road southern border

Receptor

Pager Power Results

Comment Theoretical reflection times towards Local road southern border, GMT (approx.)

am pm

9 Reflection are possible between 6:40 due 7:10

from mid-March to end of September. None.


south eastern position of



between drivers travelling east

and the panels. However,







year.



Receptor

Pager Power Results


am pm


from early April to early September. None.


south eastern position of



between drivers travelling east

and the panels. In this case







year.



Receptor

Pager Power Results


am pm

11 Reflection is expected between 6:40 until 7:10

from early May to early August.

Reflection is expected between 19:20 until

19:40 from early May to late July.


south eastern and western

position of development. The

analysis shows that there is line

of sight between drivers

travelling both direction and

the panels. In this case existing

vegetation will not completely

screen the site (Figure 15). Also,

the solar reflection and direct

sunlight will originate from the

same location during that time

of the year.



Receptor

Pager Power Results


am pm

12 None. Reflection is expected between 19:10 until

19:30 from early May to mid-August.


south western position of



between drivers travelling west








year.



Receptor

Pager Power Results


am pm















year.



Receptor

Pager Power Results


am pm















year.



Receptor

Pager Power Results


am pm















year.



Receptor

Pager Power Results


am pm















year.



Receptor

Pager Power Results


am pm

17 – 23 None. None.

No impact predicted. Existing

vegetation will screen the site

from all of these receptors.

Table 6 – Local road southern border results


7 RESULTS DISCUSSION

7.1 ATC Tower results

None of the models predicted solar reflections at the ATC tower.

No impacts are predicted.

7.2 Runway 04 Approach results

None of the models predicted solar reflection at the Approach Runway 04.

No impacts are predicted.

7.3 Runway 22 Approach results

The Pager Power model predicts reflections at receptor 0.25 and 0.50 miles. However, during

landing operation a pilot would not be looking towards the panel area since the PV arrays are

located North of the receptor point while the plane’s landing direction will be South-West.

No effects are predicted.

7.4 Road results

Based on the review of the analysis and available imagery, at 13 of the 23 points assessed a solar

reflection is geometrically possible. This is equivalent to 0.6km of road. However, when existing

screening is considered the solar reflection zone is reduced to approximately 170m. This is

presented in Figure 76 (orange lines) on the following page.



Figure 7 – Part of the path will concurrently experience low impact and low screening from vegetation

7.4.1 A484 Road

Up to 0.3km of this road will experience a solar reflection. The speed limit on this road is 50mph

and it is likely that drivers will travel at such speed. The solar reflection will last 20 minutes per

day. Its duration would depend on the speed of the car travelling through the solar reflection

zone. Note that not all the solar panels will be producing a reflection at the same time. The Pager

Power model predicts a solar reflection at receptors 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 for a considerable amount

of time throughout the majority of the year.

Glint and glare will not be an issue for people travelling in North-South direction, however solar

reflection might be visible for people travelling in the opposite direction since the solar panels

may be visible. Available imagery shows that significant screening in the form of vegetation

would shield the view of the reflecting solar panels especially for receptors 6 and 7 (Figures7 11

and 12 on the following pages).



However, the vegetation is not consistent throughout all the road bordering, from receptors 3,

4 and 5 (Figures8 8 to 108 on the following pages). The view of the proposed solar development

from the vehicle will be at a lower height (1.5 metres) compared to the imagery provided from

the Google camera (2.5 metres) resulting in lower chances of establishing a line of sight with the

site.

Figure 8 – Observer 3 A484









7.4.2 Local road southern border

Only 0.75km of this road will experience solar reflection. At this point the speed limit will be

60mph and it is extremely unlikely that drivers will travel at such speed due to the size of the

carriage. The solar reflection will last 20 minutes per day. Its duration would depend on the

speed of the car travelling through the solar reflection zone. Note that not all the solar panels

will be producing a reflection at the same time. The Pager Power model predicts a solar reflection

at receptors location 9 to 16 for a considerable amount of time throughout the majority of the

year.

Glint and glare will can be an issue for people travelling in both direction since the solar panels

will be visible. However, available imagery shows that significant screening in the form of

vegetation which would shield the view of the reflective solar panels especially for receptors

location 9,12,13,14,15 and 16 (Figures9 13, 14, 17, 18, 19 and 20 on the following pages).

However, the vegetation is not consistent throughout all the road section, from receptors 10

and 11 (Figures10 14 to 15 on the following pages). The view of the proposed solar development

from the vehicle will be at a lower height (1.5 metre) compared to the imagery provided from

the Google camera (2.5 metre) resulting in lower chances of establishing a line of sight with the

site.

Figure 13 – Observer 9 southern border road














7.5 Overall Conclusion

7.5.1 Aviation receptors

No significant impact has been highlighted based on the results of the analysis carried out with

Pager Power software.

7.5.2 Road receptors

In accordance with Pager Power methodology set out in Section 3 and Appendix D, the impact

upon road users with respect to safety is therefore classified as low where the reflecting solar

panels are visible and there is no requirement for mitigation based on Pager Power’s assessment

guidance. This is because for both roads the reflection will not originate in front of the road user

and/or it is significantly screened considering existing screening. However, despite low impact

predicted, for receptor 5 (Figure 10) glint and glare effects can be reduced further via the

provision of screening near the junction.


8 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS

8.1 Analysis Results

The analysis has shown that:

• No significant reflections predicted:

o Runaway 04: no reflection predicted

o Runway 22: reflection predicted but outside pilot sight range

• No reflections towards the Air Traffic Control tower at Pembrey Airport is expected.

• The impact of reflection on the receptors analysed for both roads is considered low.

8.2 Conclusions

• No significant impact upon aviation operations at Pembrey Airport are anticipated

• Low impact predicted for both the A484 and the local road which runs alongside the

southern border. No mitigation requirement has been identified, but effects could be

reduced further via the provision of screening near the road junction at the site

boundary.


APPENDIX A – OVERVIEW OF GLINT AND GLARE GUIDANCE

Overview

This section presents details regarding the relevant guidance and studies with respect to the

considerations and effects of solar reflections from solar panels, known as ‘Glint and Glare’ .

This is not a comprehensive review of the data sources, rather it is intended to give an overview

of the important parameters and considerations that have informed this assessment.

UK Planning Policy

UK National Planning Practice Guidance dictates that in some instances a glint and glare

assessment is required however, there is no specific guidance with respect to the methodology

for assessing the impact of glint and glare.

The planning policy from the Department for Communities and Local Government (paragraph

2711) states:

‘Particular factors a local planning authority will need to consider include… the effect on landscape

of glint and glare and on neighbouring uses and aircraft safety.’

The National Planning Policy Framework for Renewable and Low Carbon Energy12 (specifically

regarding the consideration of solar farms) states:

‘What are the particular planning considerations that relate to large scale ground-mounted solar

photovoltaic Farms?

The deployment of large-scale solar farms can have a negative impact on the rural environment,

particularly in undulating landscapes. However, the visual impact of a well-planned and well-

screened solar farm can be properly addressed within the landscape if planned sensitively.

Particular factors a local planning authority will need to consider include:

• the proposal’s visual impact, the effect on landscape of glint and glare (see guidance on

landscape assessment) and on neighbouring uses and aircraft safety;

• the extent to which there may be additional impacts if solar arrays follow the daily

movement of the sun;

11 http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/blog/guidance/renewable-and-low-carbon-energy/ 12Reference ID: 5-013-20140306, paragraph 13-13,http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/blog/guidance/

renewable-and-low-carbon-energy/particular-planning-considerations-for-hydropower-active-solar-technology-solar-

farms-and-wind-turbines/


The approach to assessing cumulative landscape and visual impact of large scale solar farms is

likely to be the same as assessing the impact of wind turbines. However, in the case of ground-

mounted solar panels it should be noted that with effective screening and appropriate land

topography the area of a zone of visual influence could be zero.’

Assessment Process

No process for determining and contextualising the effects of glint and glare are, however,

provided. Therefore, the Pager Power approach is to determine whether a reflection from the

proposed solar development is geometrically possible and then to compare the results against

the relevant guidance/studies to determine whether the reflection is significant.

Ground Based Assessment Guidelines

There are no specific guidelines for assessing the impact of solar reflections upon surrounding

roads and dwellings. Therefore, the Pager Power approach has been informed by the policy

presented above, current studies (presented in Appendix B) and stakeholder consultation.

Aviation Assessment Guidance

The UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) issued interim guidance relating to Solar Photovoltaic

Systems (SPV) on 17 December 2010 and was subject to a CAA information alert 2010/53. The

formal policy was cancelled on September 7th, 201213 however the advice is still applicable14 until

a formal policy is developed. The relevant aviation guidance from the CAA is presented in the

section below.

CAA Interim Guidance

This interim guidance makes the following recommendations (p.2-3):

‘8. It is recommended that, as part of a planning application, the SPV developer provide safety

assurance documentation (including risk assessment) regarding the full potential impact of the

SPV installation on aviation interests.

9. Guidance on safeguarding procedures at CAA licensed aerodromes is published within CAP 738

Safeguarding of Aerodromes and advice for unlicensed aerodromes is contained within CAP 793

Safe Operating Practices at Unlicensed Aerodromes.

10. Where proposed developments in the vicinity of aerodromes require an application for planning

permission the relevant LPA normally consults aerodrome operators or NATS when aeronautical

interests might be affected. This consultation procedure is a statutory obligation in the case of

certain major airports, and may include military establishments and certain air traffic surveillance

13 http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/697/srg_asd_solarphotovoltaicsystguidance.pdf

14 Reference email from the CAA dated 19.05.2014.


technical sites. These arrangements are explained in Department for Transport Circular 1/2003

and for Scotland, Scottish Government Circular 2/2003.

11. In the event of SPV developments proposed under the Electricity Act, the relevant government

department should routinely consult with the CAA. There is therefore no requirement for the CAA

to be separately consulted for such proposed SPV installations or developments.

12. If an installation of SPV systems is planned on-aerodrome (i.e. within its licensed boundary)

then it is recommended that data on the reflectivity of the solar panel material should be included

in any assessment before installation approval can be granted. Although approval for installation

is the responsibility of the ALH15, as part of a condition of a CAA Aerodrome Licence, the ALH is

required to obtain prior consent from CAA Aerodrome Standards Department before any work is

begun or approval to the developer or LPA is granted, in accordance with the procedures set out

in CAP 791 Procedures for Changes to Aerodrome Infrastructure.

13. During the installation and associated construction of SPV systems there may also be a need

to liaise with nearby aerodromes if cranes are to be used; CAA notification and permission is not

required.

14. The CAA aims to replace this informal guidance with formal policy in due course and reserves

the right to cancel, amend or alter the guidance provided in this document at its discretion upon

receipt of new information.

15. Further guidance may be obtained from CAA’s Aerodrome Standards Department via

[email protected].’

FAA Guidance

The most comprehensive guidelines available for the assessment of solar developments near

aerodromes were produced initially in November 2010 by the United States Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA) and updated in 2013.

The 2010 document is entitled ‘Technical Guidance for Evaluating Selected Solar Technologies on

Airports’16 and the 2013 update is entitled ‘Interim Policy, FAA Review of Solar Energy System

Projects on Federally Obligated Airports’17.

Key points from the 2010 FAA guidance are presented below.

15 Aerodrome Licence Holder.

16 http://www.faa.gov/airports/environmental/policy_guidance/media/airport_solar_guide_print.pdf

17 http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-10-23/pdf/2013-24729.pdf


• The potential impacts of reflectivity are glint and glare (referred to henceforth just as glare)

which can cause a brief loss of vision (also known as flash blindness).

• Reflectivity from solar panels could cause flash blindness18 episodes on pilots or air traffic

controllers when 7-11 W/m2 reaches the eye.

• Today’s solar panels reflect as little as 2% of the incoming sunlight meaning roughly 20 W/m2

are reflected off a typical PV panel.

• PV solar panels reflect less light than other substances such as snow, vegetation and water.

• Reflections from PV panels are specular because of their smooth surfaces – meaning that

reflected light from a specific source is reflected in a single direction.

• Glare analysis can include one or more of:

o A qualitative analysis of potential impact in consultation with the Control Tower,

pilots and airport officials;

o A demonstration field test with solar panels at the proposed site in coordination with

FAA Tower personnel;

o A geometric analysis to determine days and times when an impact is predicted.

• The extent of reflectivity analysis required to assess potential impacts will depend on the

specific project site and system design.

• Reflection in the form of glare is present in current aviation operations. The existing sources

of glare come from glass windows, auto surface parking, rooftops, and water bodies. Figure 16

(not shown) shows the percent of incoming sunlight that is reflected off of a variety of surfaces.

At airports, existing reflecting surfaces may include hangar roofs, surface parking, and glassy

office buildings. To minimize unexpected glare, windows of air traffic control towers and

airplane cockpits are coated with anti-reflective glazing and operators will wear polarized eye

wear. Potential glare from solar panels should be viewed in this context. Any airport

considering a PV installation should first review existing sources of glare at the airport and the

effectiveness of measures used to mitigate that glare.

• Geometric studies are the most technical approach for reflectivity issues that are difficult to

assess. Studies of glare can employ geometry and the known path of the sun to predict when

sunlight will reflect off of a fixed surface (like a solar panel) and contact a fixed receptor (e.g.,

control tower). At any given site, the sun not only moves across the sky every day, but its path

18 Flash Blindness, as described in the FAA guidelines, can be described as a temporary visual interference effect that

persists after the source of illumination has ceased. This occurs from many reflective materials in the ambient

environment.


in the sky changes during various times of year. This in turn alters the destination of the

resultant reflections since the angle of reflection for the solar panels will be the same as the

angle at which the sun hits the panels. The larger the reflective surface, the greater the

likelihood of glare impacts.

• Solar installations are presently operating at a number of airports including megawatt-sized

solar facilities covering multiple acres. Project managers from six airports where solar has been

operational for one to three years were asked about glare complaints. Air traffic controllers

were contacted from three of those airports and asked to comment on the effect of glare on

their daily operations. To date, there have been no serious complaints from pilots or air traffic

control due to glare impacts from existing airport solar PV installations.

Any potential problems in this area have apparently been resolved prior to construction

through one or a combination of the strategies described above. The anecdotal evidence

suggests that either considerable glare is not occurring during times of operation or if glare is

occurring, it is not a negative effect and is a minor part of the landscape to which pilots and

tower personnel are exposed.

From October 2013, the FAA is reviewing multiple sections of the guidance based on new

information and field experience. An overview of the 2013 FAA interim guidance is presented

below.

• Solar energy systems located on an airport that is not federally-obligated or located outside

the property of a federally-obligated airport are not subject to this policy.

• Proponents of solar energy systems located off-airport property or on non-federally-obligated

airports are strongly encouraged to consider the requirements of this policy when siting such

system.

• FAA adopts the Solar Glare Hazard Analysis Plot shown…below as the standard for measuring

the ocular impact of any proposed solar energy system on a federally-obligated airport. This

is shown in the figure below.


Solar Glare Hazard Analysis Plot (FAA)

• No potential for glint or glare in the existing or planned Airport Traffic Control Tower

(ATC) cab, and

• No potential for glare or ‘‘low potential for after-image’’ … along the final approach

path for any existing landing threshold or future landing thresholds (including any

planned interim phases of the landing thresholds) as shown on the current FAA-

approved Airport Layout Plan (ALP). The final approach path is defined as two (2)

miles from fifty (50) feet above the landing threshold using a standard three (3) degree

glidepath.

• Ocular impact must be analysed over the entire calendar year in one (1) minute intervals from

when the sun rises above the horizon until the sun sets below the horizon.

The two bullets highlighted above state there should be ‘no potential for glare’ at that ATC

Tower and ‘no’ or ‘low potential for glare’ on the approach paths.


Air Navigation Order (ANO) 2009

In some instances, an aviation stakeholder can refer to the ANO 2009 with regard to

safeguarding. Key points from the document are presented below.

Endangering safety of an aircraft

137. A person must not recklessly or negligently act in a manner likely to endanger an aircraft, or

any person in an aircraft.

Lights liable to endanger

221.

(1) A person must not exhibit in the United Kingdom any light which—

(a) by reason of its glare is liable to endanger aircraft taking off from or landing at an

aerodrome; or

(b) by reason of its liability to be mistaken for an aeronautical ground light is liable to endanger

aircraft.

(2) If any light which appears to the CAA to be a light described in paragraph (1) is exhibited, the

CAA may direct the person who is the occupier of the place where the light is exhibited or who

has charge of the light, to take such steps within a reasonable time as are specified in the

direction—

(a) to extinguish or screen the light; and

(b) to prevent in the future the exhibition of any other light which may similarly endanger

aircraft.

(3) The direction may be served either personally or by post, or by affixing it in some conspicuous

place near to the light to which it relates.

(4) In the case of a light which is or may be visible from any waters within the area of a general

lighthouse authority, the power of the CAA under this article must not be exercised except with

the consent of that authority.

Lights which dazzle or distract

222. A person must not in the United Kingdom direct or shine any light at any aircraft in flight so

as to dazzle or distract the pilot of the aircraft.’

The document states that no ‘light’, ‘dazzle’ or ‘glare’ should be produced which will create a

detrimental impact upon aircraft safety.


APPENDIX B – OVERVIEW OF GLINT AND GLARE STUDIES

Overview

Studies have been undertaken assessing the type and intensity of solar reflections from various

surfaces including solar panels and glass. An overview of these studies is presented below.

The guidelines presented are related to aviation safety. The results are applicable for the purpose

of this analysis.

Reflection Type from Solar Panels

Based on the surface conditions reflections from light can be specular and diffuse. A specular

reflection has a reflection characteristic similar to that of a mirror; a diffuse will reflect the

incoming light and scatter it in many directions. The figure below, taken from the FAA

guidance19, illustrates the difference between the two types of reflections. Because solar panels

are flat and have a smooth surface most of the light reflected is specular, which means that

incident light from a specific direction is reradiated in a specific direction.

Specular and diffuse reflections

19Source: Technical Guidance for Evaluating Selected Solar Technologies on Airports, Federal Aviation Administration,

November 2010.


Solar Reflection Studies

An overview of content from identified solar panel reflectivity studies is presented in the

subsections below.

Evan Riley and Scott Olson, “A Study of the Hazardous Glare Potential to Aviators from

Utility-Scale Flat-Plate Photovoltaic Systems”

Evan Riley and Scott Olson published in 2011 their study titled: A Study of the Hazardous Glare

Potential to Aviators from Utility-Scale Flat-Plate Photovoltaic Systems20”. They researched the

potential glare that a pilot could experience from a 25 degree fixed tilt PV system located outside

of Las Vegas, Nevada. The theoretical glare was estimated using published ocular safety metrics

which quantify the potential for a postflash glare after-image. This was then compared to the

postflash glare after-image caused by smooth water. The study demonstrated that the

reflectance of the solar cell varied with angle of incidence, with maximum values occurring at

angles close to 90 degrees. The reflectance values varied from approximately 5% to 30%. This is

shown on the figure below.

Total reflectance % when compared to angle of incidence

The conclusions of the research study were:

• The potential for hazardous glare from flat-plate PV systems is similar to that of smooth

water;

20 Evan Riley and Scott Olson, “A Study of the Hazardous Glare Potential to Aviators from Utility-Scale Flat-Plate

Photovoltaic Systems,” ISRN Renewable Energy, vol. 2011, Article ID 651857, 6 pages, 2011. doi:10.5402/2011/651857


• Portland white cement concrete (which is a common concrete for runways), snow, and

structural glass all have a reflectivity greater than water and flat plate PV modules.

FAA Guidance- “Technical Guidance for Evaluating Selected Solar Technologies on

Airports”21

The 2010 FAA Guidance included a diagram which illustrates the relative reflectance of solar

panels compared to other surfaces. The figure shows the relative reflectance of solar panels

compared to other surfaces. Surfaces in this figure produce reflections which are specular and

diffuse. A specular reflection (those made by most solar panels) has a reflection characteristic

similar to that of a mirror. A diffuse reflection will reflect the incoming light and scatter it in many

directions. A table of reflectivity values, sourced from the figure within the FAA guidance, is

presented below.

Surface Approximate Percentage of Light Reflected22

Snow 80

White Concrete 77

Bare Aluminium 74

Vegetation 50

Bare Soil 30

Wood Shingle 17

Water 5

Solar Panels 5

Black Asphalt 2

Relative reflectivity of various surfaces

Note that the data above does not appear to consider the reflection type (specular or diffuse).

An important comparison in this table is the reflectivity compared to water which will produce

a reflection of very similar intensity when compared to that from a solar panel. The study by

21 Source: Technical Guidance for Evaluating Selected Solar Technologies on Airports, Federal Aviation Administration,

November 2010. 22 Extrapolated data, baseline of 1,000 W/m2 for incoming sunlight.


Riley and Olsen study (2011) also concludes that still water has a very similar reflectivity to solar

panels.

SunPower Technical Notification (2009)

SunPower published a technical notification23 to ‘increase awareness concerning the possible

glare and reflectance impact of PV Systems on their surrounding environment’.

The figure presented below shows the relative reflectivity of solar panels compared to other

natural and manmade materials including smooth water, standard glass and steel.

Common reflective surfaces

The results, similarly to those from Riley and Olsen study (2011) and the FAA (2010), show that

solar panels produce a reflection that is less intense than those of ‘standard glass and other

common reflective surfaces’.

With respect to aviation and solar reflections observed from the air, SunPower has developed

several large installations near airports or on Air Force bases. It is stated that these developments

have all passed FAA or Air Force standards with all developments considered “No Hazard to Air

Navigation”. The note suggests that developers discuss any possible concerns with stakeholders

near proposed solar farms.

23 Source: Technical Support, 2009. SunPower Technical Notification – Solar Module Glare and Reflectance.


APPENDIX C – OVERVIEW OF SUN MOVEMENTS AND RELATIVE

REFLECTIONS

The Sun’s position in the sky can be accurately described by its azimuth and elevation. Azimuth

is a direction relative to true north (horizontal angle i.e. from left to right) and elevation describes

the Sun’s angle relative to the horizon (vertical angle i.e. up and down).

The Sun’s position can be accurately calculated for a specific location. The following data being

used for the calculation:

• Time;

• Date;

• Latitude;

• Longitude.

The combination of the Sun’s azimuth angle and vertical elevation will affect the direction and

angle of the reflection from a reflector.

The following is true at the location of the solar development:

• The Sun is at its highest around midday and is to the south at this time;

• The Sun rises highest on 21 June reaching a maximum elevation of approximately 60-

65 degrees (longest day);

• On 21 December, the maximum elevation reached by the Sun is approximately 10-

15 degrees (shortest day).

The combination of the Sun’s azimuth angle and vertical elevation will affect the direction and

angle of the reflection from a reflector. The figure on the following page shows terrain at the

horizon as well as the sunrise and sunset curves throughout the year.


Terrain Sun Curve - From lon: -4.298671 lat: 51.721264


APPENDIX D – GLINT AND GLARE IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE

Overview

The significance of glint and glare will vary for different receptors. The following section presents

a general overview of the significance criteria with respect to experiencing a solar reflection.

Impact Significance Definition

The table below presents the recommended definition of ‘impact significance’ in glint and glare

terms and the requirement for mitigation under each.

Impact

Significance Definition Mitigation Requirement

No Impact

A solar reflection is not geometrically

possible or will not be visible from the

assessed receptor.

No mitigation required.

Low

A solar reflection is geometrically

possible however any impact is

considered to be small such that

mitigation is not required e.g.

intervening screening will limit the

view of the reflecting solar panels.

No mitigation required.

Moderate


possible and visible however it occurs

under conditions that do not represent

a worst-case.

Whilst the impact may be

acceptable, consultation

and/or further analysis should

be undertaken to determine

the requirement for mitigation.

Major


possible and visible under conditions

that will produce a significant impact.

Mitigation and consultation is

recommended.

Mitigation will be required if

the proposed development is

to proceed.

Impact significance definition


The flow charts presented in the following sub-sections have been followed when determining

the mitigation requirement for roads and aviation receptors.

Assessment Process for Road Receptors

The flow chart presented below has been followed when determining the mitigation

requirement for road receptors.

Road receptor mitigation requirement flow chart


Assessment Process – ATC Tower

The charts relate to the determining the potential impact upon the ATC Tower.

ATC Tower mitigation requirement flow chart


Assessment Process – Approaching Aircraft

The charts relate to the determining the potential impact upon approaching aircraft.

Approaching aircraft receptor mitigation requirement flow chart


APPENDIX E – PAGER POWER’S REFLECTION CALCULATIONS

METHODOLOGY

The calculations are three dimensional and complex, accounting for:

• The Earth’s orbit around the Sun;

• The Earth’s rotation;

• The Earth’s orientation;

• The reflector’s location;

• The reflector’s 3D Orientation.

Reflections from a flat reflector are calculated by considering the normal which is an imaginary

line that is perpendicular to the reflective surface and originates from it. The diagram below may

be used to aid understanding of the reflection calculation process.

Illustration of calculation process


The following process is used to determine the 3D Azimuth and Elevation of a reflection:

• Use the Latitude and Longitude of reflector as the reference for calculation purposes;

• Calculate the Azimuth and Elevation of the normal to the reflector;

• Calculate the 3D angle between the source and the normal;

• If this angle is less than 90 degrees a reflection will occur. If it is greater than 90 degrees

no reflection will occur because the source is behind the reflector;

• Calculate the Azimuth and Elevation of the reflection in accordance with the following:

o The angle between source and normal is equal to angle between normal and

reflection;

o Source, Normal and Reflection are in the same plane.


APPENDIX F – ASSESSMENT LIMITATIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS

Pager Power’s Model

It is assumed that the panel elevation angle provided by the developer represents the elevation

angle for all of the panels within the solar development.

It is assumed that the panel azimuth angle provided by the developer represents the azimuth

angle for all of the panels within the solar development.

Only a reflection from the face of the panel has been considered. The frame or the reverse of

the solar panel has not been considered.

The model assumes that a receptor can view the face of every panel within the proposed

development area whilst in reality this, in the majority of cases, will not occur.

Therefore any predicted reflection from the face of a solar panel that is not visible to a receptor

will not occur.

A finite number of points within the proposed development are chosen based on an assessment

resolution so we can build a comprehensive understanding of the entire development. This will

determine whether a reflection could ever occur at a chosen receptor. The calculations do not

incorporate all of the possible panel locations within the development outline.

A single reflection point on the panel has been chosen for the geometric calculations. This will

suitably determine whether a reflection can be experienced at a location and the general time

of year and duration of this reflection. Increased accuracy could be achieved by increasing the

number of heights assessed however this would only marginally change the results and is not

considered significant.

Whilst line of sight to the development from receptors has been considered, only available street

view imagery and satellite mapping has been used. In some cases this imagery may not be up

to date and may not give the full perspective of the installation from the location of the assessed

receptor.

Any screening in the form of trees, buildings etc. that may obstruct the Sun from view of the

solar panels is not considered unless stated.


Sandia National Laboratories’ (SGHAT) Model

The following text is taken from the Solar Glare Hazard Analysis Tool (SGHAT) Technical

Reference Manual24 which was previously freely available. The following is presented for

reference.

24 https://share.sandia.gov/phlux/static/references/glint-glare/SGHAT_Technical_Reference-v5.pdf


APPENDIX G – COORDINATE DATA

Roads receptors

The table below presents the assessed roads’ receptor locations (A484 and local road southern

border). All the road receptors were considered at a height of 1.5 metre.

ID Longitude (°) Latitude (°) Ground

Elevation (amsl)

Overall height

(amsl)

01 -4.30126 51.72294 2.0 3.5

02 -4.30118 51.72248 2.0 3.5

03 -4.3011 51.72204 2.9 4.4

04 -4.30103 51.7216 3.0 4.5

05 -4.30096 51.72117 3.0 4.5

06 -4.30091 51.7207 3.0 4.5

07 -4.30086 51.72024 3.0 4.5

08 -4.30081 51.7198 3.0 4.5

09 -4.30025 51.72097 3.0 4.5

10 -4.29956 51.72081 2.8 4.3

11 -4.29889 51.72066 3.0 4.5

12 -4.29822 51.7205 3.0 4.5

13 -4.29753 51.72034 3.0 4.5

14 -4.29686 51.72019 2.2 3.7

15 -4.29618 51.72003 2.0 3.5

16 -4.29551 51.71987 2.0 3.5

17 -4.29482 51.71971 2.0 3.5

18 -4.29414 51.71955 2.0 3.5

19 -4.29346 51.71939 2.0 3.5

20 -4.29279 51.71923 2.0 3.5

21 -4.29211 51.71907 2.0 3.5


ID Longitude (°) Latitude (°) Ground

Elevation (amsl)

Overall height

(amsl)

23 -4.29155 51.71893 1.7 3.2

24 -4.29092 51.71879 1.3 2.8

Aviation receptors

ATC tower

Longitude (°) Latitude (°) Ground

Elevation

ATC Tower

Height25

Overall Assessed

Height 26

-4.31081 51.71329 3.0m 5.0m 8.0m

Runways 04 and 22

The table below presents the assessed 2-miles approach for 22 and 04 runaways’ receptor

locations.

ID Longitude

(°)

Latitude

(°)

Height

(amsl) ID

Longitude

(°)

Latitude

(°)

Height

(amsl)

Runway 04 Runway 22

0 -4.31536 51.71086 19.8 0 -4.30922 51.71696 19.5

¼ -4.31845 51.7078 40. 9 ¼ -4.30613 51.72002 40.6

½ -4.32154 51.70473 62.0 ½ -4.30304 51.72309 61.7

¾ -4.32463 51.70167 83.1 ¾ -4.29994 51.72615 82.8

1 -4.32772 51.6986 104.2 1 -4.29685 51.72921 103.8

1 ¼ -4.33081 51.69554 125.2 1 ¼ -4.29376 51.73228 124.9

1 ½ -4.3339 51.69247 146.3 1 ½ -4.29067 51.73534 146.0

1 ¾ -4.33699 51.68941 167.4 1 ¾ -4.28757 51.73841 167.1

2 -4.34007 51.68634 188.5 2 -4.28448 51.74147 188.2

Assessed receptor locations

25 Estimated based on altitude of the ATC tower listed within the AIP and ground level at the tower’s location.

26 Maximum height of the tower is 160m amsl however 3m has been deducted to account for the cab viewing height.


Modelled Reflector Area

ID Longitude (°) Latitude (°) ID Longitude (°) Latitude (°)

1 -4.300309 51.721105 6 -4.297876 51.720775

2 -4.299903 51.722049 7 -4.298499 51.720882

3 -4.298699 51.721854 8 -4.298461 51.721148

4 -4.297092 51.721704 9 -4.299136 51.721258

5 -4.297431 51.720929 10 -4.299303 51.720938

Modelled reflector area

Image of reflector area


APPENDIX H – GEOMETRIC CALCULATION RESULTS – PAGER

POWER RESULTS

The charts for the receptors are shown on the following pages. Each chart shows:

• The receptor (observer) location – top right image. This also shows the azimuth range

of the Sun itself at times when reflections are possible. If sunlight is experienced from

the same direction as the reflecting panels, the overall impact of the reflection is reduced

as discussed within the body of the report;

• The reflecting panels – bottom right image. The reflecting area is shown in yellow. If the

yellow panels are not visible from the observer location, no issues will occur in practice.

Additional obstructions which may obscure the panels from view are considered

separately within the analysis;

• The reflection date/time graph – left hand side of the page. The blue line indicates the

dates and times at which geometric reflections are possible. This relates to reflections

from the yellow areas.

Charts are only shown for aircraft approaching runway 22, road A484 receptors 3 – 7 and local

road southern border receptors 9 – 16 as no other reflections are predicted.

Approach 22


Road A484 receptors




Road south of development





Documents

Solar Photovoltaic Glint and Glare Study · The glint and glare assessment methodology has been derived from the information provided to Pager Power through consultation with stakeholders