Birriwa Solar Farm

I am concerned that the first knowledge I had of detail of this proposal was your letter of October 12 addressed to The Occupier, with responses required by November 10th. We have been absent from the property during part of this period and have only just now had an opportunity to review the proposal and submit a response. Given the visual impacts on our property, as identified by the EIS maps, we are extremely concerned that there has been no consultation with us to mitigate any impacts.

There is considerable community push back to renewable projects. In the US over100 solar projects, of which 75 are in the year to October 2022, and 471 wind have been rejected. Source robertbryce.com.
I object to paying subsidies. If it is so good, let it stand on its own merits.
I ask the proponent to itemise
1. Detail the description and $ amount of each subsidy, and other benefit, both direct and indirect, to be received from the public purse, in a time line.
2. The amount of materials needed to manufacture and construct all parts of this project.
3.The amount of CO2 released in all aspects of creating this project, and compare it with the anticipated CO2 to be saved.
, with timeline.
4. Detail the change to global carbon dioxide levels and temperature to be achieved by this project both in gross terms and net after 3. above.
5. An estimate of energy in to energy out.
6. Detail how the panels will be recycled and material to be disposed of.

I request the DPE
1. To require a bond or irrevocable third party AAA guarantee for damage, removal and rehabilitation.
2. To ensure that NO SLAVERY or CHILD LABOUR be used in the manufacture of any of its components.
3. Require the proponent to pay the full cost of connection to the existing grid.
4. To require all solar panels be made in Australia.
5. To deny the proponent accreditation to receive any government assistance, preferences or advantages.

REJECT THE PROPOSAL.

I object to this project in the strongest terms. Please refer my attachment. I seek an interview with the appropriate NSW Gov Major Projects officer responsible for the Birriwa Solar Project. Please refer the last paragraph of the attached?

Much is made of food security, viable land use, contaminated water supplies and pay lip service only to human rights -
Yet the same entities will condone 1 million Solar panels that contaminate soils with heavy metals rendering the and unfit for food supply , negatively impacting local economies - installing them near creeks and other water supplies and if near a groundwater recharge area, potentially poisoning the aquifers - arable ag land creates about six downstream employment opportunities - solar farms rip employment out of communities and contribute little to nothing to the LOCAL economy.
Birriwa Solar site area is 1330 ha (13.3 km2.)
Birriwa Solar site has White Creek & Browns Creek traversing the site. - possible water contamination
Birriwa Solar will be consuming dry land cropping + sheep/cattle grazing land.- massive local impact on schools, population and the small businesses, the machinery dealer ships, the local vet, all in all the local economy is negatively affected
Where is the benefit to the local economy?
Has or is the shire creating a slush fund paid for by the developer for the end of life junk disposal costs? If the project is sold, does the end of life pass to the new purchaser?
Incidentally I am not totally against STAND ALONE solar and roof top solar but wind and solar do not have a practical hope of total energy supply -
Where is the seen to be seen support for human rights concern
So much misinformation to con folk into thinking that wind and solar will save the planet - no one actually asks the engineering and true scientific questions that should be asked

The developer's key object of this project is take advantage of Government subsidies and investment from public companies and superannuation funds falling over themselves to appear "green".

The solar panels cannot be recycled and will contribute to land fill. Where is this land fill? Where will ACEN be when the solar panels need to be replaced? Where will ACEN be when the solar project is obsolete and the area requires rehabilitation? Where will ACEN be when the site and surrounds are declared unfit for food production as a result of heavy metals leaching into the soils/ground water? This is currently agricultural land - this is not a mine site and it is not a power station.

The neighbours of this solar project will be unable to operate their farm businesses as they will not be able to obtain public liablity insurance. Given ACEN's history in the CWO REZ it is quite likely that many of the neighbours of this project don't even know about the Solar project. Has ACEN explained to all the neighbours of the project that they will not be able to obtain standard insurances given their proximity to a solar farm. A 20 million dollar public liability insurance policy will not provide cover to any business should a fire start on their land and subsequently escape to the solar project. This is a bush fire zone, solar panels and BESS will ensure any fire will burns for weeks. Thermal runaway will be the new risk in CWO REZ. Can ACEN please explain what the process is for Birriwa solar plant in the case of BESS fire or thermal runaway? Will the local RFS (neighbouring farmers) be called in to deal with it? It is my understanding that there is little (if any) experience/procedures/planning to deal with such an event anywhere in NSW. YET the NSW Government is signing off on hundreds of BESS projects in bush fire zones. Making the asset protection zone larger just destroys more vegetation/CEEC and creates more habitat displacement and fragmentation. The experience of the Sir Ivan Fire indicates that solar panels and BESS will ensure a catastrophic event no matter the size of the asset protection zone.

ACEN (100% foreign owned) has a reputation in CWO REZ for poorly presented EIS. Given past performances there are likely numerous omissions and errors in this EIS document. Is this a tactic or is this a result of a poor attention to detail? This project will have a massive negative impact on individuals, businesses, agriculture and the environment - there is no room for errors or omissions.

Please explain exactly where the 20 ongoing employees for the project will be located and the nature of their work.

Please expand cumulative impact to those projects within 200 km, not just 25 km. Projects include the transmission corridor to link the projects in cumulative impact.

When assessing cumulative impact please assume that all proposed projects within 200 km of this project overlap in construction periods.

When determining environmental cost please account for the increased lithium, copper, zinc and silver mining required for the production of solar panels and batteries. This is cumulative impact.

When assessing environmental cost please include the new transmission corridor costs to connect to substations?

When assessing environmental cost please include the cost of the new substations? (mis labelled as hubs)

Cost of electricity will be reduced when supply exceeds demand. When the sun doesn't shine and the battery supply has been drained (how long will the battery last, for how many hours, at peak periods) how will this project contribute to supply? The cost of this project - environmental, social and financial - far outweighs any benefits.

1. The community has been through several significant events over the past few years (fire, floods, drought, mouse plague, COVID-19) which have united the community. This project is having the opposite effect. This is small close-knit community with families that have been friends for generations and often your neighbour is also a relation. The landholders hosting the solar panels will receive generous financial benefits, meanwhile their neighbours and the landholders hosting the transmission lines will be poorly compensated. It is creating a big social and wealth division. The host landholders are absentee, they do not live in the area and do not have to live with the consequences of this project.
2. There is already a struggle to find housing/rental properties in the area. It is also increasingly difficult to find and attract employees into the agricultural industry. This project will add pressure to the housing market and make it harder to find people to work in agriculture as we can't compete with the salaries offered by private investment companies. Our district does not have the resources to accommodate the influx of hundreds of workers required to build this project and the many other projects for this area.
3. It is in the wrong location. Build the projects where the energy is required. Don’t use good agricultural land.

I wish to make an objection to the proposal for the Birriwa Solar Farm.
I am a concerned community member whose family has a long history with the Dunedoo, Birriwa and surrounding communities.
It is my opinion that the amount of renewable energy projects operating and/or proposed within the CWO REZ has just become overwhelming, and particularly within the Birriwa locality I feel this project is too much for the local landholders neighbouring the project to have to endure (all of whom, I am aware, are in objection to this project).
I have worked at one of the local agribusiness companies within Dunedoo for 2 years, and I am concerned about the impact this project will have on such businesses. By removing 1330 hectares of productive agricultural land from our community, the flow on effect with have negative financial impacts on not only local agribusinesses, but also the local stock and station agents.
I have also worked as a farmhand on one of the neighbouring properties, and have seen first hand the love and dedication these landholders have within their farm management systems, as well as for their lifestyle within the community. This solar project will completely change the lifestyle of the community, through the noise and visual pollution, increased traffic within the area, increased number of workmen within the area, and this will have a negative impact on the locals that I feel is unfair and unnecessary. I ask that you reconsider the location of this solar project, as it is currently proposed to be neighbouring some of the best agricultural land within the district and it isn't right. I do not feel that ACEN has any understanding of the market value of these lands and properties, nor of the detrimental effect it will have on this market value.
These renewable companies have also already been responsible for huge social dilemmas within communities, tearing apart relationships between generations of families and neighbours due to the strain those for or against these projects creates. The flow on effect is definitely understated by the renewable companies and I feel their research into such aspect as social and lifestyle impacts is negligent.
Sincerely,
A concerned community member.

The impact of this development does not just directly impact the locality of Birriwa, this
development will have lasting negative direct and indirect impacts on the Dunedoo and surrounding community. This documentations fails to detail these impacts.
The burning of harvest stubble is part of our annual farming practices. A solar development on
the adjoining land will place a greater financial insurance burden on all farmers in the vicinity or will most likely result in
the inability to obtain insurance due to the risk of fire affecting the area of the solar project
Of concern to me is the loss of good arable land used for farming. There is no denying that we need energy sources but surely land that is not suitable for farming could be sourced.

There has been no cumulative assessment on the planned and foreseeable future projects in the CWO REZ that employs an explicit methodology to model plausible future scenarios, understand the pathways of interaction of cumulative impacts and determines and describes thresholds and limits for the environment and communities of the districts affected.
The guiding metric to date appears to be maximum number of solar panels and wind turbines. Given that these projects are being driven by private developers, the overriding factor is maximizing profit.

An integrated and responsible strategy should involve a detailed analysis of all adverse effects, and the compounding nature of these that may interact and accumulate into a morass of detrimental consequences for the communities involved.
Research into the cumulative impacts of all projects in the CWO REZ should include wildlife habitat displacement, bird and bat mortality, broader impacts on local environments, social upheaval, breakdown of community cohesion, land devaluation, restriction of aerial fire fighting, loss of natural and rural landscapes to industrialization, mental health effects.

In addition, the communities affected have not invited these developments and have had these regional wrecking projects thrust upon them. The CWO REZ was declared by the NSW State Government unilaterally and without consultation. The reason most people live in these regional areas and sacrifice the facilities and services of cities is because of the scenic beauty and natural landscapes. To lose these will have a substantially negative emotional effect on these communities.

Given the Birrawa Solar project is a key part of the CWO REZ and as such has not been considered in terms of its contribution to the cumulative impacts on the communities involved, I object to this project.

I object to the Birriwa Solar project . Please see attached submission.

Birriwa Solar Farm (SUB-50456269) Objection:

The Birriwa hills are a natural beauty that can be observed from the Castlereagh highway and the Golden Highway. Many tourists travel into Mudgee from far and wide to then continue their journey onwards to see the Warrenbungles national park. I think the visual impact of the Solar farm will affect the natural beauty of the surrounding areas and will challenge the willingness of tourists to continue to explore our beautiful country side. This is just one example that doesn't include the thousands of locals and other traveller’s that use these roads every day. Furthermore, I personally work right next to the proposed solar farm and think it will have a significant impact on the surrounding agricultural land. The farmers have worked their whole life to increase the profitability of their farms, just for a monstrosity like this to come and destroy the market value of their properties. Between the ugly effects of the solar panels, massive powerlines that will soon clog up the valley, and incoming proposed wind farms on the other-side of the valley, I think that it will be detrimental to the surrounding countryside and in no way viable for the local area.

This proposal appears to be hastily put together with no consultation for the surrounding property owners. The visual impact assessment, for this project, including photomontage, fail to provide a true representation of the visual impact of the development. The images look dull and were taking on a cloudy day and fail to capture the reflectivity of the panels. Further, from observing the Beryl Solar farm at morning and evening, the panels are most reflective, this has not been adequately considered.

If a landowner wishes to gain a supplementary income from hosting a solar development, it should not be to the detriment of neighbouring properties or the community at large. While landowners who sign up to the project do so of their own free will for financial benefit, neighbouring properties do not get this luxury. They just have this eyesore thrust upon them. It seems to me that country people are again being shafted by government and urban residents who are all in favour projects like this as long as it is not next to them. No consideration is given to the value of farmland and the devaluing of surrounding properties if this solar farm comes to fruition. This proposal will be to the detriment of our locality and the Dunedoo community.

I am objecting to the Birriwa solar farm because;
water contamination risk from this large area of 1 million Solar panels + BESS :-
Birriwa Solar site area is 1330 ha (13.3 km2.)
Birriwa Solar site has White Creek & Browns Creek across the site.
Birriwa Solar will be taking dry land cropping + sheep/cattle grazing land and related community jobs. Solar farms are not to be constructed on high value agricultural land. As such this development should be rejected as it is proposed to go on land classified good agricultural land by MWRC in their LEP.
Biodiversity impact - The entire site will be fully closed off by a 2.4 metre high meshed fence. This will remove habitat and access for larger native animals, such as kangaroos and wombats, so driving them onto nearby properties and onto nearby roads in greater numbers, increasing road accidents.
The EIS does not state how much CO2 and other emissions their project has created before starting operation. However, studies show and panel manufacturers state, that it takes many years of electricity generation by a solar works to offset the emissions created from the mining, processing, transport, manufacturing and construction of a solar works. In addition, decommissioning, land rehabilitation and materials recycling and disposal should be added.

High , unacceptable and unreasonable interference with the comfort or response of adjoining land users. There is no definite confirmation on the effects of the sound and noise impacts to the surrounding residence. The Applicant does not offer any mitigating factors or compensation to affected residents. Exposing residents to the amount of noise to be emitted by the inverters and the forever humming or buzzing sounds for more than 20 years is not acceptable. Please consider that there are existing homestead that are within the immediate vicinity of this proposed operation. There is no confirmation on how the continuous sound impact will be redressed.

Please refer to the attachment for my submission to object to this project.

I object to removal from production of 1330 hectares of prime agricultural land for the installation of 1,000,000 solar panels, batteries and transmission lines. There would be a huge economic and social cost to the community, combined with a significant reduction in production resulting in a decrease in food security and export income. The area has poor internet and mobile service, the access to the area is largely via dirt roads. Given the distance from building supplies, poor communications, lack of workforce, housing and infrastructure, this proposal seems inefficient and costly. I question whether the project will deliver affordable power. How many years will it take to offset the green house gas emitted as a consequence of all aspects of the construction of the project, including the manufacture of the batteries (including mining the raw materials) and solar panels and their disposal? 77% of batteries are manufactured in China where coal is the primary energy source. China also produces 50% of solar panels and produces double the emissions per panel compared to Western countries.
As Australia transitions to renewables it has to be done in an environmentally appropriate manner, not just to tick a box.

This submission is on behalf of Ian and Veronica Deutscher (remain anonymous). We could not find a way to make a submission on behalf of someone without access to email.

As a proud 3rd - 5th generation farmer, planting wheat, oats, barley and lucerne on black to red soils, solar panels will devalue our land reverse all the years of hard work we have done to preserve our land. It will be difficult to move stock via road which we are required to do regularly due to the increased traffic. Bio security is of great concern with workers coming from who knows where.
We have just gone through 3 years of drought followed by a decimating mouse plague and now floods.
Alarmingly we have not once been contacted by anyone regarding this project and as direct neighbours this is unacceptable.
The EIS is limited and does not properly address the environmental impact that this project will have on the land, therefore we cannot provide our support/object to this project until a thorough EIS has been completed.

I would like to submit my objection to the Birriwa Solar Farm.
I live on a neighbouring property to the project and am concerned about the cumulative effects of this project.
This is a small, tight-knit and unique community which I feel lucky to be a part of. My partner's family have lived here for 70 years and have a deep connection to the community and the land.
Of main concern to me is the size of this project, when considered amongst the total 33 projects within the CWO REZ. From our home, we will be able to see 50-100 wind turbines from the Valley of the Winds project, not to mention this Birriwa Solar Farm on our doorstep. I feel that the visual, noise, social, cultural and lifestyle impacts will have a detrimental effect on our quality of life and farm management plans within the area. The proposed 1330ha solar farm, as well as the Merotherie substation, BESS and the transmission grids required to run the operation, is simply way too large an operation for this area to have. The project is already having a negative effect on relationships with the community, as well as the mental health of many of the neighbouring farmers.

I have many concerns over the proposed Birriwa solar farm project.
We are 5th generation farmers neighboured by many different types of farms. As a neighbour to this project, we have been offered an offensive amount of compensation to take away the peace and tranquility of our district and community by this project going on land owned by unaffected, absentee owners.
Some of the more important effects we believe that this project will have on our land includes erosion from water run off, bio security from workers during and after construction, a inevitable devaluing of our land, huge visual impact, noise and dust in construction affecting animal health and many unknown human health risks. The fire risk mitigation isn't sufficient and our proximity to this project means we are at direct risk.
We have read the EIS and do not believe it has properly addressed these matters, many of the supposed mitigation plans haven't even been drafted yet! The EIS has been rushed and contains far too many unknowns and yet to be finalised details which all attribute to the environmental impact. We don't feel that we are in a position to support or object to this project based on the EIS.

My wife and I own agricultural property in the Hunter Valley, Liverpool Plains and Southern New England Tableland. we have a keen interest in farming and resource projects.
The Birrawa Solar Farm will impact significant amounts of agricultural land which will flow onto negative impacts on the community. at Birrawa and Dunedoo. It will remove grazing/farming country and the economic benefits that the crops and stock will produce.
The solar farm will negatively impact land valuations because of the unsightly solar panel and the the intrusion of transmission lines through farming and grazing land.
Costs of the rehabilitation of the land post-solar farm life have not been adequately spelt out in the EIS and there is no indication that any land restoration will take place. if the project is to proceed, it requires provision of a bond by the developer to ensure funds are available to rehabilitate the site post solar farm life.

We are concerned that this EIS is being conducted before a great deal of important information has been finalised such as sizes of PV's and PCU's, number of overhead power lines and battery storage units etc. These are all incredibly important to the environmental impact on the land and we do not understand why this EIS is being rushed through, popular opinion is that it is because this project will be sold to another organisation. The EMF from the battery storage facility is a large concern considering our proximity to the possible locations. Is there information about how much these emissions emanate exactly from each neighbour?
The land which this project surrounds already has a large amount of erosion and we have seen this increase over the past decade. I am doubtful that any mitigation mentioned will prevent the increased run off. The Soil and Water Management Plan hasn't even been implemented yet so how can anyone say a thorough EIS has been completed?
The importance of productive land is incredibly important and will be even more so in 30 - 50 years when this project potentially ends. The amount of land to grow food is dwindling and the mouths to feed are rapidly increasing. We are perplexed as to where this food is supposed to grow when productive land is being taken away to provide "cheap" energy to those living in the city.
Our quiet valley which we treasure is going to be ruined by traffic and our picturesque views will become panels, poles and fences. We choose to live here for so many reasons and to say we are devastated by the numerous renewable projects we are affected by is an understatement.
Before we can object to or support this project we believe there is a lot important detail about the full environmental impact that needs to be finalised.