Central-West Orana REZ Transmission

To Whom it may concern,
I would like to make an objection to the proposed Central-West Orana REZ Transmission. Submission Sub-64548219.
The points of concern in summary are:
Failure by the proponents to comprehensively assure local landholders of the size, structure and capacity of the proposed transmission line in development and future developments/expansions.
The cumulative affect this will have on the loss of agriculture land and the negative impacts it will have on income and cash flow for the area affected by this proposal. This will flow on to future generations of farmers which will hinder their ability to operate agricultural businesses in the region.
The loss of land value to landholders affected and adjacent to the proposed transmission lines.
The negative health impacts that are known and documented with regard to high voltage powerlines.
The negative visual impacts the proposed project will have for tourism in the area.
The proposed transmission line will give critical infrastructure to wind and solar projects which I also object to.
The negative impacts the proposed line will have on agricultural practices in the near vicinity and surrounding areas.
The lack of fair compensation that is offered by the proponents to the affected landholders and adjacent landholders.
Due to the hasty nature of this development, I feel it is necessary for both the state and federal governments to come together to consider an overhaul of the laws surrounding fair compensation and the compulsory acquisition laws. This project is part of not just a state significant proposal but one that is going to affect the country as a whole, thus the importance for collaboration from both state and federal governments concerning fair compensation and the compulsory acquisition laws.
The increased risks to our local citizens on the roads due to the massive increase in both light and heavy vehicle movements.
The real risk for life threating complications caused by the increase in population putting extra stress/burden on the already fragile and limited health services we have in the region.
For the same reasons as above the extra strain this proposal will put on all emergency personnel.

I would also like to hold the right to add to this objection in the future.
Regards
Henry Armstrong.

Please see the attached for the reasons I object

i object to this becasue its not viable and damages region

As a lady who travels around the NSW, it is very disappointing to see that Energy Co are looking to destroy the landscape that myself and many other travellers enjoy so much.


The reason we get out of Sydney is to admire the countryside and support local communities. Should Energy Co’s transmission lines go ahead, followed by construction of wind turbines and solar farms, I feel that this will have a severe negative impact on local communities as simply, people like myself will look to travel elsewhere as we don’t want to travel around industrial sites.


Other concerns I have over Energy Co’s transmission structure and future renewable infrastructure are as follows:
· Destruction of productive agricultural land that will forever have tainted soil.
· Feral pest numbers increasing due to inabilities to effectively manage due to structures
· Increased fire hazards
· Highly electrified sites packed with millions of solar panels, huge lithium batteries and turbines over 200m tall.
· There will be significant deaths of bird wildlife due to the turbines, thus leading to extension.
· The toxic components pertaining to solar panels, and how these will pollute surrounding land and waterways, thus poisoning livestock and wildlife.
· Devaluation of properties impacted by infrastructure (both directly and indirectly with neighbouring properties and properties with views etc).
· These are simply unreliable forms of electricity, and it is illogical that the Australian government sees fit to run our country based on weather.
· All these energy companies seem to be owned by international corporations. Why is Australia allowing this? As a matter of national security, this should simply not be allowed. These international companies are receiving substantial subsidies; money that is from the Australian taxpayer. This simply should not be allowed.

I don't want thes power lines etc ruining our beautiful country. We have horrible solar panel and wind turbines on the way to wellington and it is disgustingly uglt and a waste of prime farming land. We do not want thes ugly power lines and should have a say in the matter

I have great concern regarding the effect of the proposed development on our rural environment. Please act to preserve our fauna and flora and refrain from this project decimating the local landscape with other potential negative effects on the health of the local inhabitants and native animals, not forgetting our local natural heritage, which is fast disappearing. This is of vital significance to mental, physical, social and spiritual well being of a large proportion of the population.

CDDG objects to the this project. It will negatively affect our community with flow on effects for many years, from which the district may never recover.
1.Landowners are unwilling to have transmission infrastructure on their land and are being forced to become “hosts” through compulsory acquisition.
b.Landowners are being offered inadequate compensation for the damage, loss of productivity, impacts to property value and amenity.
c.Landowners, whilst provided with a budget amount for legal help and valuations are expected to pay for these upfront and seek “reimbursement” and need permission to go above their allocated “budget”, otherwise it will not be considered for reimbursement.
d.Being forced to pay for, in some cases, removal of infrastructure with no surety of being reimbursed.
e.Will be subject to land use restrictions within the easement area.
f. During construction Energy Co has told some landowners they want livestock removed and do not want to fence construction areas off.
g.As part of the easement Energy Co has a caveat over the land and may impact the ability to mortgage the land.
2.Land use – 72% of easement area is grazing land, 20% is cropping land.
a.The impacts will be larger than just the hectares of land impacted. People are likely to move when their homes become unliveable/unpleasant resulting in less agricultural production, increasing weeds and increasing feral animals.
b.During construction, the land impacted will be potentially 3x greater than stated, affecting amenity, landowner’s productivity and the district’s income.
3.Large Temporary Workforce
a- A workforce likely to be rostered fly-in fly-out and drive-in drive-out with all of the problems that a large temporary workforce of approximately 1800 persons, that are not residents of the area bring e.g. security for residents and belongings, livestock etc. in an area with a currently extremely low crime rate and with a high trust factor within the community.
b.The working hours are likely to be extended giving locals little relief from traffic, noise etc.
c.Construction compounds will be operational to working hours negatively affecting any residences nearby.
d.Accommodation camps would be operational 24/hrs. day, negatively affecting residences nearby.
e.Construction noise, camp noise, traffic noise are stated to exceed noise limits at some residences for a period of up to 3.5 years which will likely be detrimental to the community as a whole (see 2a above).
4. Workers Accommodation Camps
a. With 1 x 600 workers camp at Neeley’s Lane, Cassilis and 1 x 1200 workers camp at Merotherie, these are likely to be “satellite towns” with facilities including, for at least larger one, a supermarket, alcohol outlet, police presence etc.
b. Merotherie Workers Camp at 1200 people will be bigger than Dunedoo in terms of population.
c. There are other projects suggesting workers camps as well, e.g. Liverpool Range Wind, Birriwa Solar.
5. Biosecurity is a major concern in an agricultural community.
a. There is a need for a stringent biosecurity plan with multiple vehicles travelling through multiple properties, putting multiple farms at risk.
6. The district has limited water capability and relies on ground and bore water.
a. Having stated a need of around 700,000,000 million litres of water a year during construction for approximately 3.5 years is a large amount of water, particularly when other projects are suggesting they will be taking water from similar sources. Impact on the water table?
7. Visual Amenity
a. Our district is appreciated by tourists for its peaceful rural scenery which will be changed by a spiderweb of high voltage transmission infrastructure covering the REZ, negatively impacting the visual amenity and downgrading our landscape character.
8. Cumulative Impact
a. The State Government has described a REZ as power station. The EIS admits that multiple projects in the REZ (wind/solar and transmission) in our district will have a negative impact on our visual amenity. “This infrastructure would change the landscape character to one where the presence of energy and electricity infrastructure is more frequently encountered and prominent, resulting in a cumulative landscape character impact”. Our community’s enjoyment of rural vistas will change to one that is industrial.
b. There is estimated to thousands of additional traffic movements on local roads during construction that will negatively impact our local community for over 3 years.
9. Economic – with a FIFO workforce living in accommodation camps there will be minimal flow on benefits.
a. E.g. local purchases may be limited for various stated reasons.
b. Estimated lost agricultural income $1.35 million per year during construction.
c. Post construction, there will still be a loss of $317K per year (equivalent) for the duration of the transmission lines.
d. Prices are likely to increase in the region for construction materials.
e. Any flow on benefits will be temporary in nature.
10. Noise will be excessive at some properties that could make these properties unliveable over time.
a. E.g. Switching Camps noise levels up to 25dB higher than noise limits will be experienced by some residences
b. E.g. Corona Noise (from transmission lines) will be experienced by one residence up to 24% of the time.
c. Their stated noise mitigation measures are inadequate with one mitigation suggestion merely “advising” residents of expected noise.
11. Property Values – there have been estimates of up to 30% loss in property value if “hosting” transmission infrastructure and even losses of up to 10% just for having the easement on a property. This could have a negative flow-on effect to neighbouring properties and the district.
12. We already have multiple impacts on our biodiversity from other projects in our area. Energy Co. admits that multiple current wildlife corridors will be removed and/ or affected by the construction, impacting over 1000 ha of native vegetation. We are concerned of the cumulative effects of multiple projects in our district on the wildlife, native vegetation and habitat from all of the clearing that is proposed.
13. Multiple Negative Social Impacts will be detrimental to our ability to function as a community and within the wider district.
a. Energy Co identified the following, all of which are of great concern:
-detrimental effects to community cohesion,
-impacts to sense of safety,
-diminished sense of place,
-road delays and sense of safety,
-capacity of health, food and social services,
-the way people enjoy the environment,
-stress from bushfire risk,
-diminished sense of belonging,
-loss of aesthetic values,
-loss of biodiversity,
-impact to agricultural land and food production,
-worry about future generations ability to farm.
14. Having experienced multiple bushfires, the district is well aware of the risk and believe this will increase bushfire ignition with overhead transmission lines and/or transmission infrastructure.
a. Insufficient mapping of some areas .
b. History of the bushfires in the area have only been considered back to 2006 excluding some severe fires.
c. Stated water supplies and firefighting are underestimated.
15. Many project details still not confirmed or fully planned etc., so all the risks are currently unknown. We are concerned with this fact given the project is applying for approval without the full risks being disclosed for public comment and government oversight.
16. Issue of waste disposal has not fully been addressed. Quantities are massive, and some Councils, including ours, have said they cannot accept waste from this project. We would like to know more information on where and how this waste will be disposed, as it may negatively affect our district.
17. The heritage study appears to be inadequate and does not actively preserve monuments/items sufficient. We are surprised that local history groups did not appear to be consulted.
18. We have recently had a resurgent interest in our Aboriginal history and are concerned to hear that Energy Co. expect 5-16% of identified sites, within the construction area will be severely affected.
19. The Social Impact Assessment appears totally inadequate with very limited numbers of interviews, and surveys, with less than 1% of the local area’s population included. So far, Energy Co. has not actively tried to address any concerns by residents and the EIS has not addressed the issues raised by the few surveyed/interviewed in the SIA. We do not believe the project has social licence within the community.
20. Concerned about a lack of decommissioning and rehabilitation information for infrastructure sites.
21. The information on EMR/magnetic fields is inadequate and does not fully address the safety of landowners, animals and even staff. Energy Co does not want to underground the powerlines (we assume due to increased cost – refer Amplitude Consultants 2023 estimate 1.5x higher cost undergrounding, far less than Transgrid advised the undergrounding enquiry), however we have to raise the question of “what cost is safety?”
22. EnergyCo estimate an approximate additional 100 vehicles per hour during peak construction on local roads.
a.This level of increase will negatively affect our roads, our travel times to get to work/home and will increase frustration by residents which could lead to stress and accidents.
b.As a rural area our roads are occasionally used for livestock movements will be dangerous with the increased traffic.
c. Threat of biosecurity breaches with increased vehicles.
23. The instance of flooding has not been accounted for sufficiently. Parts of the district are prone to flooding in wet years and associated damage from floodwaters. Increasing paved areas, installing culverts and changing water courses as part of their construction plans for infrastructure could have wide ranging flow-on effects both upstream and downstream.

The Central West Orana REZ is an extremely large project that will have a significant impact on the townships of Coolah, Dunedoo, Wellington and the surrounding agricultural areas. The rush to convert to renewable energy by state and federal governments using the REZ strategy simply has the impact of destroying the environment in order to save the environment. This strategy makes no sense and has the impact of creating industrial zones in prime agricultural areas and disrupting and dividing communities. Renewable energy development should be decentralised so as to minimise the impact on any one town or region. Renewable energy developments should be restricted to non agricultural government land and/or disused mining sites and the like. Powerlines should be put under ground to minimise the visual blight, to reduce the fire risk and so as to remove the operating restraints within powerlines easements. The cost of undergrounding powerlines is rapidly decreasing and should be a critical requirement for any future developments.
In order to be consistent with the objective of ‘saving the planet’ through the adoption of renewable energy it is important that renewable energy projects are themselves environmentally friendly. Unfortunately it appears that with 10,000 kilometres of powerlines to be constructed Australia wide (quote energy minister Bowan) and the environmental and visual damage and disruption this will cause it is hard to see how the REZ strategy makes any sense at all

I strongly object to the project in its current form and would like to provide the following comments.
The Rez has the potential and will most likely have a huge detrimental impact on Central West Orana Region, a region that is known for its prime agricultural land.
Agricultural Land - There is the potential for the area to become an industrial zone unless the REZ development is managed very carefully and sympathetically with agriculture kept as the major use of land. There must be a cap put on how much can be built and a limit that when reached there is to be no more built. Biosecurity is of massive concern to our agricultural Industry, how do you propose to manage this? The risk of loosing this agricultural land is criminal.I don't think you have any idea how this impacts the way we choose to live. It is not an easy industry at the best of times so to add another enormous stress to our farmers is so wrong, unreasonable and it appears almost impossible for you all sitting in your offices to understand. You have to live here to understand what you are doing is and will have a real impact, a negative one at that, on the people, the communities and the land, our land that we have worked hard to maintain some of us for 4 generations.

Powerlines - Power lines must be put underground for the sake of everyone. This protects us all from the visual impact and also the practical and safety issues involving aircraft etc that are needed to control weeds and fertilise the agricultural land. The power lines also are a known fire hazard.

Water- There needs to be serious thought and consideration of water usage for the duration of the development of the REZ and ongoing viability of the area. We as landowners making a living and earning our income from agriculture rely on the water and it is a finite resource and the use of it whilst building and maintaining the REZ must be taken into serious consideration. I cannot stress this enough. We do not always have water when we turn the tap on so please be respectful of this situation.

Visual Amenity - this impacts everyone, host landowners and towns folk as well as the important tourist trade for our region. who wants to see an industrial zone where there should be open free viesw of beautiful regional NSW.

Workers - where are they all going to come from and where shall they all stay/live. Our towns of Coolah, Dunedoo, Wellington are stretched already when it comes to essential services. How on earth do you imagine resources will cope with the thousands of extra workers living amongst us, driving on our roads to get to where they have to go. Roads are in the worst state ever since the floods of 2020, 2021 and 2022 with an increase in accidents with fatalities in the last 12-18months. Please be mindful of these concerns.

The REZ zone appears to be a quick fix for power needs of the eastern seaboard of NSW and to reach unreasonable targets set by politicians that really are, just guessing. It is crossly unfair for the Central West region of NSW to have to bear the cost of this both visually and economically. More thought needs to be put into these projects for the long term viability of our state. We do not want to become a modern day power station and nor should we be forced into it.

Please take all the submissions very seriously, once agricultural land is gone its gone and we cant get it back. We only have one shot at saving this prime agricultural land and keeping it for the generations to come. Lets get it right, PLEASE.

The Central West Cycle Trail is a 400 km cycle loop going encompassing Mudgee, Mendooran, Dubbo, Wellington and Gulgong shown in the EIS Traffic Report figure 4-16 and 4-17. Some thousands of cyclists use this road each year. The great attraction of the trail is the opportunity to enjoy very low traffic volume unsealed roads. The trail has attracted very high use by cyclists from the more heavily populated coastal areas. The vast majority of 7,500 CWC Facebook members are from coastal/urban areas.

The CWC is particularly concerned to see that Birriwa Bus Route South and Merotherie Rd will receive high vehicle loads, this will impact cyclist safety and could very likely adversely impact one of the ‘iconic’ features of the trail the farm call in at ‘Mayfield’ located midway along Birriwa Bus Route South.

The CWC believes that measures should be taken at a very early stage to set out the plans for how cycling will be catered for. This will should sensibly involve considering:
a. integrating with the Birriwa Solar Farm who have already proposed measures of mitigation as a result their project which lies to the north of Birrawa Bus Route South.
b. Alternative routes, such as Upper Barney Reef Rd between Merotherie Rd and Birriwa Bus Route South (known as the Slap Dash Adventure Route). This route requires some upgrades mainly 3 or more concrete culverts and gravel along 500m of the northern end to make it a reasonable route for a cross section of touring cyclists. Or
c. Access to the rail corridor.

Any of the above will take time to negotiate and the EIS response should have detailed specifics of having looked at the alternatives. Particularly challenging is going to be maintaining cyclist access to “Mayfield”.

As a general point any volume of light or heavy vehicles on narrow rural local roads are a danger to cyclists. The rural road network has a speed limit of 100 km per hour. This speed is generally far too high for safe bicycle – motor vehicle interaction when there is any volume of traffic. Vehicles at this speed can throw up stones. If there is on-coming traffic it is extremely difficult to give the legislatively required 1.5 m gap between vehicle and cyclist. There are significant issues of inhaled dust for the cyclist. If the option of alternative side trails is not considered viable, then there must be a move to lowering of speed limits. There is an exponential risk of fatality as speed rises about 30 km per hour. Experience from the Aaron's Pass Windfarm was that locals who lived along the road tried to travel home or away from home out of hours to avoid the fast and high volume traffic. For cyclists the perils of mixing with this type of traffic are even higher, and having systems that protect that safety will be challenging.
Yours sincerely

David Allworth
Secretary
Central West Cycle Trail

I object to the Energy Co Central-West Orana REZ on the broad ground that a very small sector of the population is to bear the brunt of the physical, economic environmental and mental health impacts of the transition to renewable energy for all of NSW, in particular city dwellers.
My submission contains more specific objections and questions.

I object for the attached reasons

I live in very close vicinity (within 5km) to the proposed “Merotherie Hub” and 1200+ workers camp. My property is going to be surrounded by infrastructure – the transmission lines, wind turbines and solar panels.

My concerns are:
• There is a huge increased risk of bushfire ignition if this proposed project goes ahead. The country surrounding the proposed solar and wind farms between Tallawang and Merotherie have not been mapped. They should be classed as vegetation category 1 & 2. The EIS only covered bushfire history from 2006-2017. There was a catastrophic bushfire in 1979 that burnt from Birriwa to Ulan – completely through the proposed area for the Birriwa solar farm, the Merotherie Hub and the proposed workers camp. The water compounds proposed are not even close to near enough to supply water to aid with a bushfire. The extra vegetation (fuel) that will be apparent due to no stock or farming in the areas or solar farms will lead to the possibility of a catastrophic bushfire that will wipe out my home and livelihood. These Solar farms are all to the west of my farm and all fires generally burn west to east in this area.
• Energy Co identified that this project will have detrimental effects on the community and I have already noticed a divide. Private meetings and people being told not to discuss the meetings with neighbours and friends. Why Not?? What is there to hide? The fact that one property gets offered one thing and next door get nothing? These renewable energy groups are coming to where we have lived for generations and built relationships with people on neighbouring properties over decades of time and then expect us not to speak to each other. I believe they have no concept of community and what it feels like to be a part of such a close knit one such as this. People, including myself are questioning the safety in our own homes, we are afraid we will loose our sense of belonging, our whole way of life is going to be completely changed. People who haven’t lived in this area have no understanding of that. What is this pristine valley going to be like for future generations – they will never have the opportunity to experience the tranquillity and comfort of living on agricultural land that is not surrounded by infrastructure.
• I am concerned about the affect the REZ will have on property values in the area. The EIS estimates up to 30% loss in property value if the property is “hosting” transmission infrastructure – What about properties that are surrounded by wind turbines, solar panels and the transmission line, but are ‘hosting’ none of it? Those property values will surely decrease also?
• The noise pollution from both the wind turbines and the transmission line is described as 25dB higher than noise limits allowed from the switching camps and 1residence will experience Corona Noise (from the transmission line) up to 24% of the time. Advising of noise in advance is not acceptable. Until this REZ is built there is no way to tell what the noise pollution is going to be for the residents already living peacefully in the area.

These are only a few points of why I am objecting to this development. I am very concerned for my families’ livelihood and what my young children are going to have to grow up enduring whilst living in this proposed REZ.

My husband and I own a piece of land which the power lines wish to transverse through . We have been kept in the dark for quite sometime during the early stages of this project. The management of energy co kept changing hands however the project was continuing, all whilst we were still being kept in the dark. We then tried to change the route with energy co ( two proposed routes) only to be informed every one else had to agree to the changes (neighbours ,REZ wind farm etc ) .Only to be informed it cannot be changed. Where is our right to be able to say where things go on our own land and if the neighbours can have things that affect us. As for the project it is going to impact at least 40 plus trees on our place used for shade for stock and to protect the soil from eroding . The farm was fixed up by soil conservation when purchased in 1980 by my In-laws. The waterways have an effective job to do ,put water into dams for stock. If towers are not placed in the right position erosion is going to happen. We have only just acquired the place through succession planning .All our plans and wishes have been put on hold due to the long process of deciding if the three power lines can be realigned away from our infrastructure( silos, cattle yards and small shed). The positioning of the infrastructure is vital due to it being close to all weather road for access to run our business effectively.If they do not realign these lines the time and energy to reposition we do not have. Consideration by Energy Co need to be doing this . When lines are going through the fences will no longer be intact . How do we run a business and who pays for the fences to be repaired to be able to run our property.The lines really cuts the property in half, reading the dos and don’ts from Energy Co we will be greatly affected in running an agricultural business. We are not allowed to move high machinery under these lines(There is height restrictions ).So headers and other agricultural machinery is not allowed. How do we grow crop and then harvest them , to put in silos for stock feed in the drier times. As for the valley upon we visually see each day is beautiful ,once the renewable energy projects come through we wont be enjoying this view, and neither will anyone else . So selling will be greatly affected. We plan on succession planning with our children when the time comes ,having to put up with these for the rest of our lives and theirs is ridiculous, and unfair. Also fire fighting will be inhibited no firefighter wants to deal with these fires under the lines. Cannot use aircraft due to the amount of lines and the terrain . We have put out many a fire around the Barney’s Reef area, as this is a highly timbered area, with remote access , are we to watch the district burn? Please put some common sense into the thought process on these lines ,and redirect to a different path. We have been very patient and reasonable . If these lines continue to be on this path we will be greatly affected on all accounts.
Regards Donna Hackney 312 gingers lane

I am objecting to energy co’s transmission lines on 312 Gingers lane for reasons being
Energy co is a lying, deceptive, bulling company. Consultation has been very much non existent only tell you what you want to hear not their hidden agenda. I cant believe they let a snotty nose 3 year old kid draw a line on a map and call it a transmission easement
I cant believe they are calling this a green renewables project when I am going to lose 40 plus established shade trees along the easement removing valuable shade for livestock as well as a soil conservation regeneration area set up to stop erosion.
Our country has all been contoured in the early 1980s for erosion control and water management construction of a transmission easement will severely impact this management system allowing erosion to start again.
The current easement is crossing straight through the middle of the property effectively cutting it in half it travels straight over our cattle yards which have been established in their current location since the 1960s because it is a hard stoney ridge with all weather access our silos sit near the cattle yards for the same reason. Moving all our infrastructure will hamper our ability to access during periods of wet weather and will require the fences to be replaced for stock movements to the yards. We have asked for changes so as to miss our infrastructure but have been turned down as to this day During construction the property will be unmanageable with 6 of 11 paddocks being affected,this will mean total destock for construction period . Management of feral animals will be a problem if there is workers on the property means no shooting or 1080 poison to control vermin. Once the spiders web is constructed the ability for drones and aircraft to do agricultural practices and fire fighting will be serveally impacted . Transmission lines are known to cause fires which will be a problem during construction and once commissioned. A big fire in late 1979 tore all through this country we don’t need a repeat of this thanks to the power lines better off UNDERGROUND for obvious reasons This whole project is and has caused a lot of sleepless nights and stress, countless hours unpaid fighting for our rights while energy co’s staff go about there secret squirrel service agenda getting paid and sleeping soundly we are the ones wearing the brunt of the governments rewire the nation policy If they were to go NUCLEAR they could use the existing grid and piss off all the renewable bullshit and trans lines. LET FARMERS BE FARMERS Stuart Hackney

I object this project, its impact on our community will have dire effects on all residents and animals. We do not want high voltage power lines and wind turbines in our district and destroying our beautiful quiet, rural setting. This area has been a natural environment for everyone. We have sacrificed many things such as good phone and internet service, electricity blackouts and road infrastructure to live a healthier and quieter lifestyle. Please do not bring this energy project to our beautiful quiet setting, it will completely destroy our already debilitated town and surrounding rural properties.

I whole-heartedly object to the Transmission Line Project and the Central West Orana REZ. Please find attached written submission containing my objections and reasoning (where time-permitted) and additional supporting documents. It appears to me that our system is fundamentally flawed when many people in impacted communities don't and can't have a say BEFORE a project (or REZ) is planned, especially when it directly impacts them, their environment, their livelihoods and their future. I am confident that the number of objections received to this project, will ultimately only represent a small proportion of those within the community who eventually will fully and vehemently object. It is evident to me that a significant portion of REZ community members still do not fully grasp the REZ model, the Transmission Project and what the cumulative impacts potentially look like for the future. I reserve the right to add to my submission at a later date if necessary.

I travel through the Central West every year on my way to & from Hereford bull sales in the North of the state. Every time I go I am amazed at the topography of this rugged land. I do not want this beautiful country to be spoilt by solar farms like the mess that is Wellington or the ugliness of windfarms like those near Goulburn. Solar & Wind lead to more transmission lines, these need to be placed underground to save our regional communities from further risks from bushfires. Please consider putting solar on every roof in the major cities to save our country communities.

See attached letter

I STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS PROJECT.
The overwhelming majority of people that I speak to are also strongly opposed to all of this going ahead. It seems to me that the only people who are really for it are absentee owners of land that will be immediately impacted, NSW government and the big companies that don't care about or community and are just in it for the dollars.

I don't see why as small communities out in the bush that are fertile and viable food producing areas have to bear the brunt of hosting these monstrosities for the sole purpose of powering the cities. Is it because there aren't many of us out here, and it is all about votes and where you feel the least resistance might be encountered?

The resources required to build these lines, the extra traffic on the Golden Hwy, the staff required to erect them are all enormous! Our communities cannot handle it without it completely destroying our way of life and leaving a lasting negative effect on our landscape. I would like to pose the question to anyone reading this, would you and your family like to live next to these horrible industrial eyesores.

The world is losing good agricultural land at an alarming rate annually. Food security is critical to a nation. FFS why are you taking more food producing land away from what little we have?

Not far from us are old mine sites that have been 'rehabilitated', they will never be suitable for any food production and have all the powerlines etc right there. Go and cover them in panels if you must but stop stealing farmland from people that are trying to feed the world.

I will be able to see these lines clearly from my house yet still have not been approached directly by anyone to ask my opinion or be informed of the plans. Great community consultation!

I cant state it strongly enough, this will fuck a community and tear it apart and there will be nothing positive to come of it for us, the people who have to live with it.