Join one or more Exploration Groups

Please fill in our quick form using the button below or else email us at info@peopleofglastonbury.org

You can choose whether you want to coordinate a new group or just be a member. You can also suggest forming a group not mentioned in the list above.

We’d love to know which issues are of most importance to you and whether you have additional concerns. 

Please complete our short Concerns Survey to let us know.

If you would like to get more actively involved in finding solutions for these concerns, please check out our Exploration Groups or propose creating one.

*Most of the issues are hopefully self-explanatory; however, for those with asterisks, we have given some brief clarification below:

​

Support Networks for Vulnerable & Community Cohesion

Vulnerable community members could include the young, the elderly, those with severe physical or mental health conditions, those facing other challenges including loss, other trauma, poverty, animals. This Exploration Group might start with researching community needs, existing resources, identifying gaps, coming up with solutions, signposting, befriending etc. 

​

Corporate Planning Development

The concern here is to keep an eye on Planning Applications as shown on Mendip’s website - this could relate to housing developments, commercial units, solar farms, data centres or anything  else requiring planning  permission. Also to be aware of new legislation that may affect planning. Unfavourable applications can be notified to the community so that people can raise an objection if they wish.

​

World Heritage Status*

World Heritage is a Convention of UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation), which is a branch of the UN (United Nations) designed to protect natural (landscape) and cultural (human) heritage. Glastonbury Town Council employed the services of 2 consultants for 2 years who recommended in their report that the whole of the town and some surrounding attractions be nominated as a World Heritage Site. Following considerable public opposition, GTC voted in their meeting of 10 March 2026 to pause their pursuit of WH pending additional groundwork and public engagement. More info here.

Farming & Food Security

Net Zero policies in the UK are increasingly colliding with the basic requirement of food security, despite the fact that food is officially recognised by the government as one of the country’s 13 Critical National Infrastructure (CNI) sectors, meaning its disruption could have “major detrimental impact” on society and national security. This places food alongside energy, water, transport, and health as essential to national survival, yet current policy direction appears to undermine domestic production. 

The UK already imports around 46% of its food, leaving it exposed to global shocks, while recent government reports acknowledge that geopolitical instability, cyber risks, and rising costs are placing increasing strain on food supply resilience. Parliamentary committees have also warned that food security must be prioritised to avoid risks to self-sufficiency and long-term resilience. Against this backdrop, policies that incentivise taking land out of production—through environmental schemes, rewilding, and land-use change—raise serious questions about whether the government is upholding its own duty to protect critical infrastructure.

This tension is particularly visible in places like Somerset, where local campaigns and planning documents highlight the direct loss of productive farmland to solar developments and Net Zero-driven land use changes. Campaigners in the county have warned that valuable agricultural land is being “converted into electricity generating stations” at the expense of food production, while planning proposals explicitly acknowledge the use of “best and most versatile agricultural land” for solar farms, even where this creates concern about impacts on national food production. 

Nationally, government policy itself recognises the risk—stating that the best agricultural land should be protected for food production amid rising global instability —yet in practice, large-scale infrastructure for energy, housing, and environmental targets continues to compete for that same land. With wider plans suggesting significant portions of farmland could be repurposed for Net Zero goals, and with global tensions (including instability in the Middle East) threatening supply chains, the UK risks reducing its domestic capacity at precisely the moment resilience is most critical. If food is truly critical to national infrastructure, then policies that systematically reduce the ability to produce it domestically raise fundamental questions about whether that infrastructure is being adequately defended.

Resources:

Protecting the UK’s critical national infrastructure - Veracity Trust Network

United Kingdom Food Security Report 2021: Theme 3: Food Supply Chain Resilience - GOV.UK

Farmland Under Siege from Solar - Campaign to Protect Rural England - Somerset

Solar projects must fit in with food security - GOV.UK

Solar Farms

Large-scale solar farm expansion is increasingly raising concerns about its long-term impact on land use, environmental safety, and food production. Unlike rooftop solar, ground-mounted installations require vast areas of open land—often agricultural land that could otherwise be used to grow food. Evidence from government-backed research shows that solar developments can lead to soil compaction, reduced permeability, increased runoff, and long-term structural damage, with recovery potentially taking many years or even becoming permanent. Once installed, this land is typically taken out of productive agriculture for decades, as solar farms often operate on 25–40-year lifespans. At the same time, large-scale land-use change—from arable farming to low-maintenance grassland under panels—represents a direct reduction in food-producing capacity, particularly when it involves “best and most versatile” agricultural land.

There are also legitimate environmental concerns surrounding the materials used in solar panels themselves. Research shows that photovoltaic systems can contain toxic metals such as cadmium and lead, which—if panels are damaged, degraded, or improperly disposed of—have the potential to leach into soil and groundwater. Studies have even identified elevated cadmium levels in soils around some solar installations, alongside broader concerns about waste and end-of-life disposal. While these risks are often debated and depend on management practices, they highlight the importance of long-term environmental accountability. 

Meanwhile, the economic reality for farmers cannot be ignored. With rising costs, subsidy changes, and uncertainty in agricultural markets, many landowners are being offered stable, guaranteed income from leasing land for solar—often significantly more predictable than farming itself. This creates a structural incentive for farmers, particularly those under financial pressure, to take land out of food production. The cumulative effect is a gradual shift away from agriculture toward energy infrastructure, raising serious questions about long-term food security, land stewardship, and whether policy is unintentionally encouraging the loss of productive farmland.

​

Resources:

The impact of solar photovoltaic (PV) sites on agricultural soils and land

Impact of photovoltaics on soil and water by metal(loid)s including technology critical elements: preliminary study - PubMed

Environmental Impact of PV Power Systems

Data Centres

Data centres are often presented as the invisible backbone of the digital economy, but their physical footprint and resource demands tell a very different story. These facilities consume vast amounts of electricity—already placing strain on national grids—and require millions of litres of water for cooling, particularly during peak operation. In a period where energy security is fragile and geopolitical tensions threaten supply stability, this additional demand risks pushing both energy prices and water costs even higher for ordinary households. Beyond consumption, there are environmental hazards: cooling systems and backup infrastructure can involve chemicals that, if leaked, pose risks to soil and water systems. Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS), increasingly deployed alongside data centres, introduce further danger due to their highly combustible nature, with fires that are difficult to extinguish and capable of releasing toxic fumes.

Equally concerning is the scale and purpose of these developments. Modern data centres can span tens to hundreds of acres—in the UK, proposals and existing sites already occupy significant tracts of land that could otherwise support agriculture. A data centre larger that 180 football pitches is planned to be built in Bridgewater near the M5. These can be opposed by local people at planning level and through their town councils.

At a time when food security is becoming a strategic priority, the conversion of productive farmland into server infrastructure raises serious long-term questions. These centres are not just storing harmless information; they are the engines of a data-driven economy in which personal and behavioural data is harvested, monetised, and traded—often without meaningful public consent. In effect, land, water, and energy are being redirected away from essential human needs toward systems that extract value from the population itself, turning data into a new form of currency while externalising the environmental and societal costs.

​

Resources:

Large data centre could be built near Bridgwater despite concerns - BBC News

Data centres to be expanded across UK as concerns mount - BBC News

'I can't drink the water' - life next to a US data centre - BBC News

5G, Street Lamps, Surveillance, Smart Cities*

The rollout of 5G infrastructure, LED street lighting, and wider smart city systems is often presented as progress, but it also raises a range of concerns—particularly around health, privacy, and long-term societal impact. 5G operates using higher frequency signals and requires a dense network of small-cell transmitters, many of which are mounted on streetlamps and placed closer to homes, schools, and workplaces. 

Regulatory bodies such as World Health Organization and Public Health England state that exposure levels remain within established safety limits, but some scientists and advocacy groups argue that these guidelines are based largely on short-term thermal effects and may not fully account for long-term, cumulative exposure. Concerns often raised include potential links to sleep disruption, headaches, oxidative stress, and neurological effects, particularly given the constant, low-level exposure created by dense urban networks. The rapid rollout of this technology, ahead of long-term independent study, has led to calls for more scrutiny.

Smart streetlamps and smart city systems add another layer of concern, in terms of health and surveillance. These systems frequently incorporate LED lighting, sensors, and wireless transmitters, which can contribute to increased exposure to blue light at night—potentially affecting circadian rhythms and sleep patterns. In addition, the integration of cameras, microphones, and real-time data collection into everyday infrastructure creates an environment of continuous monitoring. 

While often justified on grounds of efficiency, safety, and environmental management, such systems also enable detailed tracking of movement and behaviour. Initiatives linked to organisations like the World Economic Forum, and the C40 Cities organisation, promote highly data-driven urban environments, such as 15 Minute Cities and Smart Cities, where infrastructure, services, and even citizen behaviour can be monitored and optimised. Critics argue this risks normalising mass surveillance, reducing personal privacy, and concentrating control in the hands of central authorities or private technology providers. 

The broader concern is that, taken together, these technologies could reshape not just how cities function, but how people live within them—introducing both physical and societal risks that have not yet been fully explored or openly debated, potentially shifting society toward a more monitored, data-driven model of governance without sufficient democratic oversight or public consent.

​

Resources:

Environmental impacts of 5G

A review of the current state of research on artificial blue light safety as it applies to digital devices - PMC

Unleashing the Potential of 5G for Smart Cities: A Focus on Real-Time Digital Twin Integration