Skip to main content

State Significant Development

Determination

Beresfield Battery Energy Storage System

Newcastle City

Current Status: Determination

Interact with the stages for their names

  1. SEARs
  2. Prepare EIS
  3. Exhibition
  4. Collate Submissions
  5. Response to Submissions
  6. Assessment
  7. Recommendation
  8. Determination

Development of a 170 MW / 340 MWh battery energy storage facility with associated infrastructure.

Attachments & Resources

Notice of Exhibition (1)

Request for SEARs (1)

SEARs (2)

EIS (13)

Response to Submissions (7)

Agency Advice (9)

Additional Information (1)

Determination (3)

Approved Documents

There are no post approval documents available

Note: Only documents approved by the Department after November 2019 will be published above. Any documents approved before this time can be viewed on the Applicant's website.

Complaints

Want to lodge a compliance complaint about this project?

Make a Complaint

Enforcements

There are no enforcements for this project.

Inspections

There are no inspections for this project.

Note: Only enforcements and inspections undertaken by the Department from March 2020 will be shown above.

Submissions

Filters
Showing 21 - 23 of 23 submissions
LeRoy Currie
Object
Leeton , New South Wales
Message
Whilst Australia is the sixth largest country in the world by land mass, we have some of the lowest arable food producing land per capita in the world. Example in 2020, arable land in Australia was 30,729, 200 hectares (307,292 sq kilometres) or 4% of Australia’s land mass.
Definition: Arable land includes land defined by the FAO as land under temporary crops (double-cropped areas are counted once), temporary meadows for mowing or for pasture, land under market or kitchen gardens, and land temporarily fallow. Land abandoned as a result of shifting cultivation is excluded.
For comparison, Australia world ranking for arable land in the world is number 145, Canada is 137, the USA is 56 and France is 25, with Bangladesh number one at 61.5% of its land mass and Kuwait, one of the lowest at number 185 of the 192 countries listed.
Source: https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/arable_land_percent/
Regarding percentage of energy by solar
No production system of any type is 100% effective! The spread sheet has allowed for some losses but in reality, these production losses are much greater. Of course there are other sources of energy that I haven’t calculated into the spread sheet. The object of this information is to alert those that think, care and question, is that we have a finite amount of food producing land.
The purpose of this presentation is to show how much agricultural land will be lost for food production with the implementation of solar farms on this land and have not included the fallacy of wind generation.
The facts:
Substations are installed in high electrical consumption areas
Solar farms are installed near substations for cost effectiveness for the provider who is building these farms for one reason only: it is an excellent return on investments guaranteed by taxpayers who are not engineers and do not and should not have to be engineers as they elect governments to run the nation for them and trust the governments to explore pros and cons of all transactions big or small that affect the nation. This trust is being broken by a few misguided zealots!
High electrical consumption areas in rural Australia are located in the high agriculture food production areas, hence high populations.
High agricultural production areas have high fertility soils, therefore huge areas of prime ag land is lost and possibly contaminated forever, regardless of the renewable platitudes given.
Glossary:
% or energy by solar – No production system is 100% effective. Obviously there are other sources of energy that I haven’t calculated, but to show a result of solar alternatives. Eighty percent renewable appears to be the Holy Grail by the renewable religion; therefore I have chosen that figure as a constant for all initial calculations.
Avg annual solar hrs with tracker stm – all solar energy calculations use about 6 full sun hours per day as a base for full energy yield – add a tracking system, this adds about 20% to the 6 hr, = 7.23 hours
Current per solar panel watts Currently (this wattage is increasing all the time) about 400 watts each
Annual avg. non solar hours per day – remainder of hours without energy producing sun equals about 16.77 hours
Current module battery capacity in k/W - (this is increasing all the time) is 230 k/W (just found this battery module - Invinity VS3 Battery Module 230 kW – footprint - same as a shipping container – 6m x 2.5m
Solar Farm Footprint-ha per MW the amount of land based on a per megawatt figure (research indicates between 2 & 3 ha per MW – I chose 2.5 ha as a balance point
ha – abbreviation for hectare – a measurement for land area – one ha (100m x 100m) equals 10,000 sq metres – one million square metres (1000 x 1000) equals 100 ha or one square kilometre
kW - abbreviation for kilowatt = 1000 watts
MW - abbreviation for megawatt = 1,000,000 watts (1000 x1000 kW) (million)
GW - abbreviation for gigawatt = 1,000,000,000 watts (1000 x 1,000,000) (billion)
TW - abbreviation for terawatt = 1,000,000,000,000 (1,000,000 x 1,000,000) (trillion)
The terrible fact is that regardless of the renewable religion, this is a futile exercise as the whole concept of this type of renewable is impossible to achieve. It flies in the face of physics, which mankind for all of its achievements, cannot change as physics are unalterable laws!
The renewable zealots ignore the complex “road” of creating renewable energy and the ensuing cost to humankind. Beginning with the process of locating the mines, developing the mines, the high energy requirement of the manufacturing process, the hypocritical and questionable labor types being coerced for component production, the massive lost of food producing land, the transport factor that affects every aspect of creating the renewable generators as well as the end of life of components, all having in some way, non reversible environmental impacts Notwithstanding the reality, that a massive amount of the alternative components are produced elsewhere in the world, not here is Australia, so very little national benefit.
There winners with this process are some land holders, though at the expense of the nation and eventually the investors and manufactures, but in the not so long term, by its very nature, will fail.
Facts continued:
As explained in the introductory paragraph, The Global Economy organization states that Australia has 307,292 square kilometres of arable land or just over 4% of its total land mass. Eighty percent solar for the nation, requires almost half of that land.
For your own interest, enter your own figures in the red spread sheet cells to create different scenarios which also show the change affecting each state/territory,
Attachments
Ian McDonald
Object
WALCHA , New South Wales
Message
I object to this battery storage system, because the concept is both physically and economically flawed. It will never in it's short lifespan facilitate renewable energy to become despatchable. Battery storage is a total waste of money and is willfully promoting the destruction of the natural environment in the pursuit (mining) of the rare resources required in battery manufacture. What we need is Australian Made base-load power for food and national security. Not more geopolitically sensitive batteries made in factories controlled by the CCP.
City of Newcastle
Comment
,
Message
Attachments

Pagination

Project Details

Application Number
SSD-31940756
Assessment Type
State Significant Development
Development Type
Electricity supply
Local Government Areas
Newcastle City
Decision
Approved
Determination Date
Decider
Executive Director

Contact Planner

Name
Jai Reid