Birriwa Solar - Modification 1

In sufficient consultation with neighbouring properties including Moreton Bay South

My objection to the Birriwa Solar Farm project is its potential impact on the visual amenity and agricultural productivity of the area. 1/Visual Impact and Aesthetics:
The solar farm and associated infrastructure, including transmission lines and substations, will significantly alter the landscape, impacting the visual amenity of the area and potentially deterring tourists and visitors, according to the NSW Government.
2/Impact on Tourism:
The visual impact is particularly concerning for areas popular with tourists, like the route to the Warrumbungles National Park.
3/Agricultural Impact:
Loss of Farmland: The project will convert productive agricultural land into a solar farm, impacting farmers' livelihoods and potentially reducing local food production.
4/Devaluation of Properties: Concerns exist that the solar farm will decrease the value of surrounding properties, impacting both landowners directly involved and those nearby.
5/Impact on Farming Practices: The project may disrupt existing farming practices and create difficulties for those who wish to continue farming in the area.
6/Social Impact, Community Disruption:The influx of workers and the industrial nature of the project could disrupt the tight-knit community, leading to increased social tension and potentially driving residents away.
Strain on Local Services:
The increased population during construction and operation could strain local infrastructure, including roads, emergency services, and medical facilities.
Other Concerns include Traffic Congestion and Environmental Impact.
The increase in traffic associated with the project, both during construction and operation, could lead to congestion and safety concerns on local roads.
Environmental Impact: Concerns exist about the long-term environmental impact of solar panels, including their disposal at the end of their lifespan.
Cumulative Impact: The Birriwa Solar Farm is one of many large-scale renewable energy projects proposed for the region, and the cumulative impact of these projects is a major concern for some residents.

I object to any increase in capacity of the Birrawa solar farm based on the attached submission:

Solar panels destroy great agricultural land and cannot be properly recycled. They last less than 25 years and will generate an environmental disaster. What is wrong is that Solar panels only work if the Sun shines and it doesn't from 5.15pm to 6.45 am. Wind fluctuations are from supplying 5% to 30% of electricity. There will never be enough affordable storage to cover the fluctuations in Wind and Solar energy supply. When you add the cost of Transmission grids it will ensure electricity prices are unaffordable. We already have too much Solar in the system at the wrong times of the day. We need to stop ridiculous Renewables and stop wasting Billions of dollars of taxpayer's money. Please understand that Renewables are not Renewable and are intermittent energy that will never work and ensure electricity prices are unaffordable.

i object to this Modification as i do not approve of this project taking prime ag land out of production. This way of generating power will not keep the lights on and if you think so try doing it in the city . With more and more house holds and farms generating there own power i see this a waist
When i was young my parents had batteries and a generater , 70 years later here we are again generating our own power for the whole property so are a lot following suit

This project (SSD-29508870) was originally pushed through by stealth and by mislabeling it as "state critical" without consultation with local stakeholders, many of whom have been severely affected. After-all, the entire project is just one of temporary infrastructure to try and make good on a hasty political promise that was made without any consideration of the wider ramifications.

Now, just 11 months in they ask to extend the project. No professional has such little foresight. Clearly, this scheming was hatched while developing the original proposal. It should have been included in the original and this extension by stealth is an abuse of planning laws. If I am wrong in this assessment then it reveals the complete incompetence of the proponents. Such a small extension can be incorporated into the current approved footprint without destroying further native vegetation and prime agricultural land for a temporary development.

Stakeholder engagement.
As the proponent is aware, this is deceitful language. Stakeholder "engagement" with neighbouring landowners is, in fact, bullying and passive aggression - not the positive engagement as implied here.

Traffic.
The project has been given approval access is via Barneys Reef Road off the Castlereagh Highway. The proponent now suddenly ”sees an opportunity” to use Merotherie Road to access their project - as if they hadn't eyed it from the start. On one hand they try and present this as a minimal 18% extension of the project but then claim they need this extra access to make it work. It's a ridiculous argument and they do not justify a real need. Merotherie Road is a quiet public road used by the local rural community. Leave them alone. They don't deserve a heavy vehicle every 3 minutes and an inestimable number of light vehicle trips from the accommodation facility township. People here live in a rural environment. The visual impact presented here only considers the extension as minimal – it does not consider the disastrous effect on the visual environment and loss of amenity that has already been done.

Accommodation facility.
It appears that the proponents want to move into the real estate business. Upscaling the accommodation facility from 500 (def: village) up to 1000 (def: town) so that their business can cater for "other projects" is an absurd breach of regulations. A condition of the approval must be that only employees on this project can live in this accommodation. This is not a gazetted SA1.

I object to the above project!

It is clear the race to so called "clean energy" has been poorly researched and does not take in consideration the huge negitive impact it will have on the local area. Not only community current and moving forward but environmental.
The project implementation has not provided locals with transparency to its effects and most importantly the goal of clean energy by wind and sun has completely masked the environmental impacts it will truly have.
Shame on the people who have concocted and ignorantly supported the plans.
Let's take a look at why it is really being pushed ahead...Would falsely supported renewable rebates and an appearance to be working towards clean energy be to blame here??
I hope common sense and not greed prevails here.
My family has been raised in these areas and as the next generation comes about i fear for their futures.

I object to this proposal. In regional areas “scale” works differently. A neighbour, someone who lives on the same street, could be 30 km away from me. Going to get food or see a doctor could be a 50km plus trip. So when community members object to planning proposals, this scale needs to be considered as “community” has a very large radius, more than 5 or 20 or 50km.
There needs to be a cumulative impact assessment done in the CWO REZ and a freeze on all approvals until there are adequate measures put in place to deal with these issues and proper consultation, negotiation and compensation have been achieved.
There also needs to be better studies done on leaching, please see attached. - I have only attached the first post

Please accept this submission as my formal objection to the Birriwa Solar - Modification 1

The transition to renewable energy requires unprecedented development across NSW. The planning and delivery of many generation projects in Renewable Energy Zones and the required interconnecting transmission projects in the grid across NSW are collectively ALL currently required to meet targets and to successfully deliver both the NSW Electricity Infrastructure Roadmap and to successfully contribute towards delivering the Nations Integrated System Plan as designed by AEMO.

The fact that the entire Scope and Scale of (a) each REZ and (b) for the full NSW REZ and Transmission plan has not been presented to the NSW Public, in my mind, is neither fair or just. Assessing each project individually, is taking advantage of the current dated and flawed NSW planning system and fails to present the transition transparently and with adequate due-diligence and accountability for impacts, particularly cumulative impacts to the State and to the people, lands and water of NSW.

As a resident of rural NSW, I am concerned that the planning process for this type and scale of transition is not protecting NSW Agriculture, rural communities and the future of rural and regional NSW and Australia.

I liken this type of assessment for Australia’s first Renewable Energy Zones and associated transmission infrastructure to building a Nation-first Hospital but presenting only one room or ward at a time for assessment.

Across the vast rural areas of NSW collectively, there is and will be, a mostly unknown permanent change to landscapes and rural community character, a significant interruption to and reduction of farmland and food and fibre production, a permanent change to rural tourism products, the destruction of community cohesion and the introduction of a multitude and magnitude of new electricity generation and associated transmission infrastructure - these are all critical and fundamental reasons that this transition needs to be presented to the people of NSW holistically, not in part and 1 project at a time.

Residents within a REZ have never been presented with what a REZ fully entails. The EPA Act requires public exhibition of certain development proposals, allowing rural communities to provide input on projects that may alter their landscapes or way of life. This ensures community voices are considered in decisions affecting rural areas. Presenting each project within a REZ and projects required for bringing this generation to the grid one by one, pushes on the boundaries of project fragmentation or project splitting, which the EPA Act explicitly tries to prevent. It is the responsibility of the NSW Government to recognise this.

The NSW Government is committed to delivering the NSW Electricity Roadmap and is significantly funding EnergyCO as the Infrastructure planner for each REZ, a REZ cannot deliver what is required by the State without the culmination of generation, storage, firming and transmission projects. Assessing each project one by one is pulling the wool over the eyes of every NSW resident and taking advantage of legislation written before a REZ concept was even thought of.

It appears to me, that the NSW Land and Environment Court has played a critical role in preventing project splitting. Courts have ruled that assessing components of a larger project in isolation may breach the EPA Act’s requirement for comprehensive environmental assessment. Eg. In Mach Energy Australia Pty Ltd v Minister for Planning (2019) NSWLEC 55, the court emphasised the need to consider the full scope of a project’s impacts, including related infrastructure.

I firmly object to the approval of this project until such time as the entire NSW REZ rollout, associated/required generation, storage, firming and transmission projects are transparently presented to the public of NSW for their full consideration and participation.

- there is too much density in this area now already
- the roads are failing
- merotherie road already has too much traffic on it
- there definitely should not be more traffic directed to merotherie. Merotherie Road is becoming very dangerous to drive on.
- they should be shrinking their footprint not expanding it
- there has not been appropriate consultation
- around merotherie area never was a good location for these projects, energy co rushed it through without liasing with locals
- this modification should definitely be stopped
- they shouldn't allowed to have a camp in a rural area, let it alone increase it from 500 to 650 people
- no doubt acen will rent the camp to other developers once they have their solar installations completed and will likely share with valley of the winds
- do not allow this modification
- the planning minister needs to actually visit this site (take a trip over the sandstone curtain for a change) and see how inappropriate these ticks of approval are
- start listening to rural australia for a change

I object to these modifications and project in its entirety.

I object to this project

I am against this project modification.

I am against every aspect of this project

This project will leave a disgusting footprint on the landscape and community. Any modifications will only add to its vileness.

The community hate this Birriwa Solar plan - overwhelmingly objected to it originally and are dead against this horrible expansion.

Neither the people nor the environment can endure any more RenewaBULLs as they are THE ASBESTOS OF THE FUTURE!

Treasured Threatened Ecological Communities and the Koalas cannot absorb this extensive, highly destructive, contaminating impact.
The modification directly affects PCT 80 and PCT 281, both legally recognised as endangered or critically endangered ecological communities.

Local families are being mistreated by work camp intrusion and inundation - scaring our children and wrecking our pretty rural areas.

Expanding works within these zones constitutes a clear case for federal intervention and should not proceed at all let alone without Controlled Action determination.

This Modification is completely unacceptable as nobody but the pariah Hosts want this toxic disaster which is already an extensive purveyor of poisonous PFAS plan.

The jump from 120 to 156 daily heavy vehicle trips is not a minor change—it's a major intensification of industrial activity through rural roads and sensitive landscapes.
This increased pressure on local infrastructure and habitat corridors necessitates a new environmental assessment at the Commonwealth level.

This Modification is out of control as we’ll all be poisoned by this toxic, hazardous rubbish and the itinerant influx is very dangerous for local families.

The Biosecurity risks are alarming - increasing the workforce from 500 to 650 workers—with no detailed plan for waste, pest, or disease control—is a recipe for biosecurity disaster.

Movement of people and materials through intact rural ecosystems requires federal environmental safeguards.

This plan is an energy depriving, contaminating Trojan Horse for foreign energy control by our most hostile enemy - designed to harm and supplant Australia.

Behind the green facade is ACEN’s deep foreign ownership, which raises questions of critical infrastructure security, foreign investment accountability, and long-term sovereignty.

The Commonwealth must assess these implications—especially given the sabotaging energy and cyber security dimensions