I had a pacemaker inserted in 2016 for complete heart block then in 2023 I was diagnosed with heart failure with an ejection fraction of 25%, I then had my pacemaker upgraded to a pacemaker crt device in May 2023.
I have just found out that there is plans for a 700+ acre solar farm to be built directly beside my house, and I'm just wondering does anyone know if this would affect my pacemaker? I will be discussing it with my cardiologist but just curious if anyone knows anything about this as I can't find much online.
Written by
pacemakerire
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
Any interference will depend on how far you are located from any source of an electromagnetic field (EMF) and the strength of the field. My rough take on that (as a former professional engineer) would be that the panels themselves are unlikely to cause a problem, but if the site high voltage control gear, cabling and transformers are located close to your property boundary they might cause some interference. I suggest you seek a professional technical opinion by contacting the supplier of your pacemaker (perhaps through the hospital) and put the question to them, although they may need further technical information about the proposed development. If there is a strong technical case for interference you might have the basis for a planning objection which could mean the development site layout has to be changed. Finally there is an distant link between your question and the position of high voltage cables, the EMF they produce and their position in relation to housing, which may be useful as below
A domestic set of six panels on a roof are unlikely to affect you, although the inverter, smart meter or battery set up might do.
However 700 acres of solar farm panels together with all the associated plant and machinery is another matter. Where is all this associated material sited?
Solar farms have no place in our cloudy country as they work for 10% of the time, are made in a very anti social and damaging manner and 85% are made in China using coal, then shipped over. You say you have just learnt of this development. Surely there was a public inquiry?
Can you provide some details as to where the solar farm is sited?
I don't know where you get your figures from for stating that solar panels only work for 10% of the time in the UK, but it is a fact that solar panels work to some degree when there is solar radiation present, as in when the sun is up. They will certainly work less efficiently (compared to 12.00GMT on a cloudless 21 June), when there is cloud cover, and when the sun is at low elevation as in winter, but they do still provide electrical output, which can be harvested. By way of example at the present time, 0940 on a mid winter's day, solar is providing 2.8% of UK energy needs (see below). If the electrical power output was as low as you suggest there would be no economic case for using them in the UK and they would not be used on solar farms nor on public or commercial buildings nor on private dwellings. I know of at least two people who have solar panels fitted to their properties (one in the north of England) and the power output can be considerable and has proved to be a worthwhile investment for them.
Actual output depends on the location. We have a max of 1767 hours or so of sunshine in this country-whilst panels don't rely solely on sun they need the bright light that sun will bring.
Output also depends on the quality of the panel-some are very much better than others-high quality german ones will perform much better than cheap mass produced Chinese ones which constitute 85% of the market. Averages vary but a cloudy year will bring down the average.
Many calculations are made under ideal and impractical conditions converting the maximum possible light and even tracking the sun during the day and the seasons.
3% is currently being produced by solar which will be zero for large parts of the day and night.
Until viable batteries and tracking come along solar is best suited to homes whereby people can produce power and closely monitor their consumption. Solar farms are an expensive gimmick. There is no economic case-they are heavily subsidised as are wind turbines-which is why no one bid during the last round of licences.
You are absolutely right that the efficiency of a solar farm is low (15-20%) which can be compared to a gas fired power station of around 60%. Unfortunately as the world's and the UK's population expands exponentially and the thirst for energy increases, the impact of burning hydrocarbons has become increasingly questionable hence the shift to other sources of energy, amongst which are renewables including solar. So whilst the UK cannot compete with countries who have more hours of usable solar radiation, solar still makes a useful contribution just like windpower. But shift UK government and public perceptions on the desirabality of increasing nuclear energy resources, more onshore windfarms, and more commitments to tidal power like the Severn and Swansea Bay projects and the attraction of solar farms might lessen.
Yes, it is a shame modular nuclear reactors have been sidelined as solar farms take up vast amounts of space-often productive farmland-and as seen can be seen in the original question, there might be medical issues.
With tidal barrages you have enormous implications on shipping, wildlife, leisure use. Never easy but solar is not the answer to any question asked, at present.
Interesting I don't have a pacemaker yet but get arrhythmias and chest pain passing certain phone masts etc. The last few times I have been in Lidl which is near a mast I got what felt like a bolt through my heart. Not sure if any of this is electromagnetic, but it weird. I have to get a 24hr monitor this week and will be trying it out in these places
I have a crtd pacemaker fitted, and I am also working as an electrician so I am around voltages and electrical equipment all day. I have never had any problems at all, and when I get my yearly pacemaker check they tell me it has never picked up any interference at all or had to take over my beats. The old pace makers used to have a switch on them that worked when it picked up interference. And unfortunately didn’t work correctly after it. New ones are state of the art with suppression and solid state devices, no switches. If there is a possibility of interference there is usually a sign to tell you, usually it’s communications equipment that can do it and you need to be on top of them.So dont be too bothered about it.
My one is 4 years old, you should have information of the one you have, google should tell you what the manual says. I would think it’s a new type at 7 years old
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
First pacemaker check
Pacemaker
Living with a Pacemaker 
pain by pacemaker site
Pacemaker
