Comet Park Battery Energy Storage System

I object to this environmentally destructive plan with its multitude of failures regarding public health and safety, security, affordability and capability, as well as the lack of protection of precious biodiversity.

Conservation of biological diversity is a fundamental element of Ecologically Sustainable Development - which is totally ignored by this horrible, totally disingenuous and unwanted BESS scam that has NO SOCIAL LICENCE whatsoever!!

I object to the cumulative industrialisation of this area and any other rural area, as toxic contaminating, incapable, insecure, CCP reliant BESS junk is a disaster here, there and anywhere.

The dodgy DPHI’s individual assessments fail to consider the cumulative impacts of multiple swindle factories wrecking rural landscapes forever and poisoning these industrial zones.

One is terrible and the combined impacts on communities, agriculture, biodiversity and amenity are totally unjust, ill conceived and have no consent.

This dangerous and unsubstantiated BESS hazard ignores consumer outcomes like safety, affordability, national security, reliability and quality.

It’s a total waste of taxpayer subsidies with no long-term affordability benefits for electricity consumers.

Energy infrastructure decisions should be assessed against engineering facts, scientific rigour, integrity, ethics and actual consumer outcomes rather than false propaganda with no local or Australian benefits.

The environmental assessment is a complete failure as it doesn’t even examine the complete lifecycle of this experimental, highly toxic rubbish - including unethical extraction of raw materials, slave labour linked manufacturing, insecure supply chain transportation, dangerous operation and unplanned for, uneconomical and unsafe disposal.

Partial assessments like this majorly understate the true environmental footprint and the dire cyber security risks have also been totally ignored.

Thermal runaway, toxic gas emissions if a fire occurs, only volunteer ill equipped RFS on hand during fire or thermal runaway, unrecyclable waste, short life span, slave labour used in mining of materials for batteries, noisy, using taxpayer funds, permanent loss of this land, no direct financial relief for local electricity consumers let alone State/National electricity consumers, huge landfill toxic waste. This project will only benefit the developer.

I strongly object to the proposed Comet Park Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) at Yanco.
This proposal seeks to introduce an extremely hazardous, high-risk and poisonous☠️industrial facility into productive cropping and grazing land and close to a rural community that should not be expected to bear the consequences of a catastrophic battery failure.

The Applicant repeatedly asks the Department to trust engineering standards, management plans and future operational procedures.
Trust is not evidence.

When the potential consequences include thermal runaway, prolonged fires, toxic gas releases, contaminated firefighting water and long-term environmental contamination, the burden of proof must be exceptionally high.
It has not been met.

Around the world, large-scale lithium-ion battery fires continue to expose serious weaknesses in emergency response, environmental protection and long-term contamination management.

Recent events at Moss Landing demonstrate that battery failures can have consequences extending well beyond the facility itself, prompting ongoing scientific investigation into the spread of hazardous battery-related contaminants.
Fire authorities and independent researchers continue to acknowledge significant knowledge gaps surrounding utility-scale battery systems.

If experts are still identifying failure mechanisms and refining emergency response strategies, it is premature to approve another massive BESS on valuable agricultural land in the MIA.

This proposal places productive farmland, livestock, water resources, biodiversity and nearby residents at extreme risk for the life of the project and beyond.
Once contamination occurs, it cannot simply be undone by a management plan.

The Environmental Impact Statement relies heavily on optimistic assumptions about how systems are expected to perform rather than demonstrating how worst-case failures will be safely managed under real-world conditions.

The precautionary principle exists for developments exactly like this—where the potential consequences are severe and the scientific uncertainties remain significant.

The Department must not approve a project that asks the community to accept life-threatening risks that have not been independently proven to be acceptable.

Whilst National Security of our critical energy infrastructure must be our highest priority, UNREGULATED, CCP controlling BESS, Solar, Wind and Interconnector infrastructure is the antithesis of this, so must immediately be excluded and eliminated.

For these reasons, the Department must refuse consent for the proposed Comet Park Battery Energy Storage System at Yanco.

**’Forever Chemicals’ used in Lithium Ion Batteries Threaten Environment, Research Finds | Lithium-ion batteries | The Guardian 14/7/24
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/article/ 2024/jul/14/forever-chemicals-lithium-ion- batteries-environment

**Coastal Wetland Deposition of Cathode Metals from the World’s Largest Lithium-ion Battery Fire" (Moss Landing BESS FIRE)
According to independent Experts this is actually worse than a radioactivity spill.
A lot of this very toxic stuff is not easily located. Whereas, with radioactivity, one needs just a hand-held Geiger counter to locate the pollutant.
https://www.nature.com/articles/ s41598-025-25972-8#Tab1

**Safety of Grid Scale Lithium-ion Battery Energy Storage Systems
“The scale of Li-ion BESS energy storage envisioned at “mega scale” energy farms is unprecedented and requires urgent review. The explosion potential and the lack of engineering standards to prevent thermal runaway may put control of “battery fires” beyond the knowledge, experience and capabilities of local Fire and Rescue Services.
BESS present special hazards to fire-fighters....”
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/352158070_Safety_of_Grid_Scale_Lithium-ion_Battery_Energy_Storage_Systems

**Grid Scale Batteries & Fire Risk
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/656f411497ae14084ad8d03a/t/
66fd2383b56dbc6906390297/1727865736681/Fannon-Batteries.pdf

**Disaster at Moss Landing: The Risk of Battery Storage - YouTube - 16/1/25
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuTaZFQA18E **https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/02/20/massive-green-battery-plant-catches-on-fire-again-weeks-after-major-toxic-blaze/

**https://localnewsmatters.org/2025/02/13/environmental-tests-reveal-elevated-levels-of-toxic- metals-since-moss-landing-battery-fire/

**https://www.sfgate.com/news/bayarea/article/environmental-tests-reveal-battery-metals- around-20163514.php

**https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/elevated-levels-heavy-metals-elkhorn-slough- lithium-battery-facility-fire/

**Lithium-Ion Battery Fire Risks & Extinguisher Limitations
1.CSIRO ActivFire® Advisory Note AN-004
CSIRO explicitly states it "has not and will not certify ... that any fire extinguisher can effectively extinguish a Li-Ion battery fire."
Verification Services

**”There is a General Lack of Guidance and Provisions in Building Codes, Standards, and Legislation in Relation to Safety to Address the Potential Risks From These Technologies.
Part of the problem is that we do not yet know enough about their probability of failure, their mechanisms of failure and potential consequences of failure.”
https://www.fire.nsw.gov.au/page.php?id=940

This Proposal Represents an Unacceptable Risk to Public Health and Safety, Agriculture, the Rural Environment, Vital Water Sources and Surrounding Ecosystems.

We strongly object to the proposed Comet Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) at Yanco - in the Murrumbidgee Irrigation Area’s prime food bowl.

This proposal seeks approval for a large-scale industrial lithium-ion battery installation on productive cropping and grazing land within the Leeton Shire.
The Applicant presents the Battery Energy Storage System as routine infrastructure supporting the electricity network.
It is not.

A utility-scale lithium-ion Battery Energy Storage System is a hazardous industrial facility capable of catastrophic failure through thermal runaway, prolonged fire, toxic gas release and widespread environmental contamination.
Unlike many industrial hazards, these risks cannot be eliminated. They can only be managed after they arise.
That reality alone demands an extremely high level of independent, expert scrutiny which has not been applied in the Environmental Impact Statement.

The Applicant has failed to demonstrate that the risks associated with this development have been comprehensively identified, independently assessed and shown to be acceptable.

Productive Agricultural Land Should Not Become a Hazardous Industrial Battery Precinct
River Road, Yanco is surrounded by productive agricultural land, rural residences, livestock operations and valuable environmental assets.
This proposal would permanently introduce an industrial hazard capable of releasing seriously toxic contaminants into farmland, waterways, vegetation and surrounding ecosystems.
The consequences of a major battery fire extend well beyond the project boundary.
Unlike conventional industrial fires, lithium-ion battery failures generate toxic gases, contaminated smoke, metal particulates and contaminated firefighting water capable of affecting neighbouring properties.
This is fundamentally incompatible with the long-term protection of agricultural land and rural communities.

International Experience Demonstrates That Catastrophic Battery Fires Are Real
The Environmental Impact Statement repeatedly seeks to reassure decision-makers through engineering standards, management plans and operational procedures.
Recent international experience demonstrates that catastrophic battery failures continue to occur despite such measures.
The January 2025 fire at the Moss Landing Battery Energy Storage Facility in California—the world's largest lithium-ion battery installation—resulted in a prolonged emergency response, evacuations and ongoing environmental investigations.
Subsequent independent scientific research has documented deposition of cathode metals within nearby coastal wetlands following the fire, raising serious questions regarding the environmental consequences of large-scale battery failures and the persistence of contaminants beyond the immediate fire zone.
The proposal before the Department gives insufficient consideration to these lessons.
The Environmental Impact Statement instead assumes that engineering controls will perform exactly as intended throughout the project's operational life.
History demonstrates that assumption is flawed and unsafe.

Toxic Contamination Has Been Underestimated
Thermal runaway within lithium-ion batteries generates complex mixtures of hazardous substances including hydrogen fluoride, carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds, particulate matter and metal-containing aerosols.
These emissions present acute risks to emergency responders and nearby communities.

Recent research has also raised concerns regarding per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), commonly known as "forever chemicals", associated with lithium-ion battery manufacture and disposal, highlighting additional uncertainties regarding long-term environmental contamination.

The Applicant provides little meaningful assessment of:
* contamination of cropping land;
* impacts upon livestock;
* contamination of pasture;
* deposition onto vineyards, orchards and horticultural production;
* contamination of dams and waterways;
* long-term soil monitoring following catastrophic battery fires.
These are significant omissions for a development located within such a productive rural landscape.

Thermal Runaway Cannot Be Prevented With Absolute Certainty
No lithium-ion Battery Energy Storage System can guarantee prevention of thermal runaway.
Failures may result from manufacturing defects, internal cell faults, electrical malfunction, mechanical damage, overheating, installation defects, maintenance failures, software malfunction or external fire exposure.
Once initiated, thermal runaway rapidly propagates between battery modules despite sophisticated monitoring systems.
The relevant planning question is therefore not whether thermal runaway is unlikely.
It is whether the Applicant has demonstrated that the consequences of a worst-case failure will remain acceptable.
That demonstration has not been made.

Firefighting Capability Remains Highly Uncertain
Large-scale lithium-ion battery fires present hazards fundamentally different from conventional fires.
Fire and Rescue NSW has publicly acknowledged that there remains a general lack of guidance, standards and legislative provisions addressing the risks associated with these technologies, and that important uncertainties remain regarding failure mechanisms and consequences.
Similarly, CSIRO has advised that it does not certify any portable fire extinguisher as capable of effectively extinguishing a lithium-ion battery fire.
These statements should concern every decision-maker.
As Australia's leading fire authorities acknowledge that knowledge gaps remain, the Department must stop their hasty, reckless approvals and exercise extreme caution before ever approving another large-scale Battery Energy Storage System within a rural district or city precinct.

Rural Emergency Services Cannot Be Assumed To Cope
The proposal is located within a regional area where emergency response resources are inherently more limited than those available within metropolitan centres.
The Applicant has not demonstrated:
* availability of specialist hazardous materials teams;
* prolonged firefighting capability;
* availability of sufficient water during drought;
* contaminated water containment;
* respiratory protection requirements;
* long-duration incident management;
* firefighter fatigue management;
* environmental monitoring following a major fire.
Emergency response plans are not evidence that emergency response capability exists.
Those capabilities must be independently demonstrated before any approval would ever be contemplated.

Existing Standards Do Not Eliminate Risk
The Applicant repeatedly relies upon compliance with engineering standards.
Compliance with standards is necessary.
It is not proof of safety.
Published research has noted that utility-scale Battery Energy Storage Systems are being deployed at an unprecedented scale while engineering knowledge, emergency response capability and design standards continue to evolve.
The existence of standards should not be confused with proof that catastrophic failures have been eliminated.

Long-Term Environmental Liability Has Not Been Resolved
The proposal also fails to provide adequate certainty regarding:
* poisoning of the public from hydrogen fluoride gas plumes;
* contamination remediation;
* long-term hazardous waste management;
* battery recycling capacity;
* financial responsibility for decommissioning;
* future ownership changes;
* financial security should the operating entity cease trading.
Without legally enforceable financial guarantees, future environmental liabilities will ultimately fall upon the Council, community or taxpayers.
That outcome is completely unacceptable.

The Precautionary Principle Must Apply
The Environmental Planning and Assessment framework requires decision-makers to adopt a precautionary approach where scientific uncertainty exists and the potential consequences are serious or irreversible.
This proposal presents precisely those circumstances.
Significant uncertainty remains regarding:
* catastrophic thermal runaway;
* prolonged battery fires;
* toxic gas releases;
* environmental contamination;
* impacts upon agricultural production;
* emergency response capability;
* long-term waste management;
* cumulative environmental liability.
Where these uncertainties remain unresolved, approval must never be granted.

Conclusion
The proposed Comet Park Battery Energy Storage System would introduce a hazardous industrial facility into a productive agricultural landscape that has not been demonstrated to be safe under worst-case conditions.
The Environmental Impact Statement relies heavily upon assumptions, management plans and future operational controls rather than independent, expert risk research evidence demonstrating that catastrophic failure consequences have been reduced to an acceptable level.

The Department must not accept optimistic assumptions where public safety, agricultural land, water resources and the rural environment are at stake.
Until independent, peer-reviewed, expert evidence demonstrates that these risks have been comprehensively assessed and can be effectively managed under Australian conditions, the proposal fails to satisfy the standard of certainty expected of State Significant Development, so must be rejected.

No due diligence has been done regarding this incapable and dangerous BESS SCAM plan!

Assessments like this are useless when they only rely on predictions and assumptions via garbage in garbage out modelling and fake green propaganda - while deliberately leaving the most vital public health and safety disasters, energy poverty and national security nightmare unaddressed.

Sound environmental policy based on ecologically sustainable development requires a complete examination of foreseeable risks prior to planning let alone approval.

I absolutely object to this horrible BESS plan as the dodgy assessment does not provide any confidence at all that the risks associated with thermal runaway, battery failure, toxic emissions and prolonged fire events have been comprehensively addressed.

International battery incidents demonstrate that large-scale battery storage facilities require rigorous, site-specific risk analysis and emergency planning which has NEVER been done by the authoritarian NSW Government’s DPIE/DPHI or IPCN.
They all need the sack as they just don’t care about public health and safety.

The emergency response capability has not been proven for this poisonous BESS.

We are extremely alarmed that local emergency services will be subjected to life-threatening, lethal hydrogen fluoride if responding to a major battery incident involving intense heat, hazardous gases and unpredictable failure mechanisms.

This developer must provide their own firefighters and emergency responders - who have appropriate training, equipment, resources and procedures for credible worst-case scenarios as no locals should ever be subjected to lethal BESS plumes.

100% foreign owned, 100% foreign controlled, yet funded by taxpayers at the expense of electricity consumers. AND it all has to be built again in about 10 years time!
No decommissioning bond, likely the project will be flipped many times over and at the end of the day the owner will simply vanish back to the country they came from leaving this community with an unrecyclable toxic mess.

This project will result in persistent noise pollution, strain on volunteer RFS and in the event of fire or thermal runaway there will be water, soil and air contamination.

When the inevitable, irreversible environmental harm occurs, who will bear the responsibility and financial liability from this ecocidal monstrosity?

According to the POEO Act - the Local Council is ultimately responsible/liable for any toxic contamination/pollution of the land/water caused by Solar Electricity Generation Works as they are NOT A REGULATED ACTIVITY.
Is it the same for this BESS disaster?

Where’s the essential, upfront Decommissioning +Remediation Bond and the Public Liability Guarantee from the Government to protect all the neighbour victims?

Nobody wants this toxic, life-threatening Asbestos of the Future - Ticking-Time-Bomb BESS JUNK in Rural NSW!

The irresponsible, dictatorial NSW Government must be sacked as it’s completely failing to protect the public from the catastrophic FIRE Risks of Lithium-ion Battery Energy Storage Systems as they threaten our lives and poison our land, water and biodiversity.

It’s SO STUPID and SO BAD that it even appears to be DELIBERATE!

It’s well past time that the NSW Premier gets honest for once and admits these SWINDLE FACTORIES ARE ALL A DANGEROUS, DEADLY SCAM!

Border Force admit that imported BESS, Solar Panels and Wind Turbines are unregulated - with banned substances that they contain like PFAS/PFOS and Asbestos being ignored.

There is no supply chain transparency for unethically sourced components - where the origin, manufacturing standards and environmental practices require far greater scrutiny.

Imported infrastructure should be subject to rigorous verification of safety, security, environmental and ethical standards.

Why does the dodgy NSW Government and NON-independent IPCN keep ignoring these essential facts?

As a parent of two young children, I do NOT support an industrial development of this scale being placed so close to where families live and work. I have serious concerns about the health, safety and environmental impacts this would have on us and the wider community! We live within a 6km Radius of this and I am seriously concerned about this project!

Our children deserve to grow up in a safe environment, and our farming communities deserve to have their voices heard before decisions like this are made. Progress should never come at the expense of the people who call this area home.

I object to this incapable and extremely toxic BESS which is highly likely to result in a life-threatening emergency event - as toxic lithium-ion batteries leak dangerous chemicals and generate complex, lethal hydrogen fluoride gas plumes when on FIRE.

This requires diligent risk research by independent experts without vested interests and far more detailed assessment.

The consequences of contamination, whether cleanup is guaranteed or even possible and the irreversible, long-term, environmental impacts must all be clearly established and transparently provided before these BESS are even planned.

Yanco 1200 population odd - next door to site.
Leeton population 7,000 plus - not far from the site.
I wonder who the Mayor is. Haven't done their homework have they re Risk of BESS.
https://theconversation.com/when-the-worlds-largest-battery-power-plant-caught-fire-toxic-metals-rained-down-wetlands-captured-the-fallout-268848
1 Dec 2025 — The Moss Landing battery fire became an unintended experiment – showing how burning lithium-ion cells scattered nickel, cobalt and manganese ...
https://www.epa.gov/ca/moss-landing-vistra-battery-fire
On January 16, 2025, the Moss Landing 300 battery energy storage system at the Moss Landing Vistra power plant (Monterey County, Calif.) caught fire
https://reneweconomy.com.au/massive-moss-landing-battery-still-smoking-as-authorities-probe-cause-of-devastating-fire/
20 Jan 2025 — About 80 per cent of the Moss Landing battery facility in California has been destroyed in a fire which started on Thursday afternoon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moss_Landing_Power_Plant
At 3 pm on Thursday, January 16, 2025, a fire broke out in the Phase 1 building (300 MW / 1,200 MWh), the portion of the site managed by Vistra Corp.
https://www.montereycountynow.com/news/local_news/one-year-later-the-moss-landing-battery-fire-leaves-more-questions-than-answers/article_996d6185-1fce-4131-90b1-292dbe96a291.html
15 Jan 2026 — One year after the Moss Landing battery fire, health impacts remain unclear. Residents seek answers, oversight, and regulations.
https://community.purpleair.com/t/moss-landing-battery-fire/11233
17 Jan 2025 — The burnt batteries are sending chlorine and/or florine gases into the atmosphere. We are trying to assess the risk to us here in Santa Cruz.Read more
https://heatmap.news/energy/moss-landing-battery-safety
28 Mar 2025 — Nearly all of the batteries at the 300 megawatt facility, one of the world's largest, burned up in the fire, sending a colossal plume of black smoke soaring up ...Read more
https://www.utilitydive.com/news/moss-landing-battery-fire-vistra/737837/
21 Jan 2025 — The site's fourth blaze in five years destroyed most of a 300-MW battery array owned by Vistra Energy and should serve as a “wake-up call” ...
https://sfstandard.com/2025/02/06/erin-brockovich-lawsuit-moss-landing-power-plant-fire/
6 Feb 2025 — Erin Brockovich and Monterey County residents sued Vistra Energy and PG&E Thursday over a January fire at a battery storage site.
https://kioncentralcoast.com/news/monterey-county/moss-landing/moss-landing-storage-fire/2025/03/11/another-town-hall-addresses-the-moss-landing-battery-storage-fire-lawsuit-tuesday-evening/
11 Mar 2025 — There will be another town hall meeting held by Singleton Schreiber and consumer advocate Erin Brockovich at 6 p.m. on Tuesday.
https://www.singletonschreiber.com/newsroom/events/moss-landing-battery-fire-virtual-town-hall-3-4-26
3 Apr 2026 — Join Singleton Schreiber and consumer advocate Erin Brockovich at a Virtual Town Hall on Wednesday, March 4th, 2026, at 5:00 PM, PT. WHAT: Moss ...Read more
https://www.facebook.com/groups/962330675331079/posts/971282871102526/
Never Again Moss Landing Battery Environmental Disaster Community Group. Kathy Sinnott󰞋Feb 1, 2025󰞋󱟠. 󳄫. Erin Brockovich called me last evening.Read more......."Erin Brockovich called me last evening. She is reaching out to those of us who reported the BESS fire on her Community Health Book webpage. Enough of us put pins in the map to get attention. It’s not too late to stick your pin in the map"...

It is funny how PG&E Still operate in the US despite causing Serious harm and Serious illness to many, even death, in a small local community affected by Water Quality issues, hidden by PG&E, and deliberately. Serious issues are governments and the people working for governments. Don't you agree ?

Murrumbidgee National Park is close by, also. Wildlife issues then hey.
Also, the area is Western Riverina Food Production region - Feeding AUSTRALIANS note not just a farmer Note !
Talk about siting one of these Risk projects ( BESS ) in the middle of Prime Agricultural Lands !!
I Have to wonder WHAT you people EAT, I really do. You just Don't Care, do you, about yourselves, or others. You cannot plan OUR future then.
Dismiss yourselves. You DON'T CARE about your Fellow Australians, their Health, their Food, the Land, Water, Wildlife.
The Wrong people are in charge of NSW and Australia.
Named. Shame on you.
We have your names. You allow this outrage of a Energy transition which is completely Unnecessary across OUR Rural regions, note.
And what a Bunch of Hypocrits you are, gov.au Federal, State and Local, accepting goods and infrastructures en masse from China - you know - Made in China Re-new-ables, - future Toxic infrastructures upon Our Precious Farmlands, Future risks to air, water, land, soil, food, add Future toxic junk, when Coal - minimal Impact Coal Fired Power Stations - renewed, or updated, or properly maintained on SAME Sites as has been, or current, can take care of it All - NSW Energy future.
Revoke Matt Kean's Energy policy Immediately. He hasn't considered All Round COSTS !
Isn't the concern about " emissions" ?
Clean Energy ! Huh ???? Lies lies lies is all you ever offer , gov.au Federal, State, and Local - how dare you. How Dare you Risk OUR FOOD QUALITY AND WATER QUALITY, UNNECESSARILY. 
Time for a Full Investigation.
In the meantime, Cease and Desist all further BESS applications/ developments in NSW, and Australia Immediately, before you RISK OUR FOOD and WATER QUALITY. I said OUR Food and Water Quality, Australians, Ours.
We Eat from this Land did you know !!
None of you seem to understand what you are doing to OUR Food Production Lands.
Cease and Desist BESS and ALL Lithium Ion Batteries in NSW/Australia Immediately . We cannot afford to lose Precious Farmlands Murray Darling Basin just for a Scam, being eight in total, including the one about emissions.
Asia in view.
There are No Morals in you people.
What happened ? Were you educated by a screen ? Have you Never seen rice grow ? Pulses ? Aka Crops. You.
You as gov.au, nsw.gov.au, vic.gov.au, sa.gov.au, need an education and an immediate Dismissal from your jobs ! You have NO right to have OUR Precious Farmlands sadly in your hands, oh dear.
How are you with your Food, eh ?? Don't Care, eh ! Well I Bluddy Do !.
I Only Eat Australian Grown Only, Wholefoods Only, Chemical Free, Pesticide Free, GMO Free foods - every day too. Why ?? To Clean up the environment, be well in mind body spirit, offer Care for Country to the Lands I receive from and also Clean Water - Yeah - Clean it, as in Look After Water, aka Life Itself Water humanity Must Care for from today into a future from now.
What Prevents that ?

You do, as gov.au Federal, State, local, Multinationals Global, planning Hideous futures all over OUR, yes OUR, OUR Food Production Catchments, for No reason at all Shame On You All !
I am asking you what you Eat please ? Do you know ? Obviously you do not Care ! Sack yourselves then ! Today ! We need Better than you, as gov.au, who cause Harm and Loss to OUR Most Precious Resource - OUR Food Production Catchments. Food is everything to everyone, and Not even Federal or State Health Ministers Care about human health, soil health, water quality, water itself.
You really need to Sack yourselves. You have No Conscience, How Dare You!
Sack the lot of you thank you. Shame on you, OK. You have No right to plan OUR futures, No right, NO right at all. You simply do Not Care about Food. F o o d. Food. Proven.
Cease and Desist Re-new-able Energy transition in on upon over across OUR Precious Precious Farmlands including Murray Darling Basin Food Production Catchments. Alternatives exist. 
Open Yanco up on screen. What do you see in front of you as you pan outwards from Yanco, near the Sacred Murrumbidgee, in the Wrong Hands including scandalous [email protected], GM sack, town Planners sack. 
Take a Good Look. See all those squares and rectangles of different colours. They grow Food for you and the nation.
Those Green bits are probably Swamps Murrumbidgee.
The region Needs Trees grown here, not Junk Toxic infrastructures Inappropriate anywhere near Food Production Catchments. Ohh  YES!
Western Riverina Food Production Catchments embracing Sacred Murrumbidgee Protect from gov.au Federal State and Local in the hands of Multinationals Global, UN scandal, 












Time we had a Review of Battery Energy Storage Systems and wait a while to see if issues arise before it becomes a Big Mistake on in over OUR Precious, Dear God, Precious Prime Agricultural Lands, Murray Darling Basin Murrumbidgee Riverina Prime Agricultural Lands. In the view Despicable humans just following orders but from who ? Who decided BESS were acceptable infrastructure across Our Rural regions that Grow Food for Australians and the nation.
Risk assessments are fully understood are they by Local Community and Australian of course.
Project site not far from Vital Murrumbidgee either !!! Aboriginal Culture kept Water Pristine. Pristine. There is NO need for this TYPE of Renewable Energy transition you see.
Rooftops Only for all Solar and Wind energy generation thank you.

The renewable “hypocrisy” industry currently supports human atrocities in China by the their use of slave labor or next to it and other human rights such as child labor abuses in other countries mining the rare earths required by the renewable industry.
CO² is not a poison; it is a necessity for plant growth, i.e. FOOD.
The hype of a 30 year effective solar farm life span is a “happy face” con. Currently, effective battery life is about ten years with no allowance of deterioration of energy storage calculated into the life span, therefore two if not three sets of batteries for the supposed life of the panels. Contrary to the hype, effective panel life is about twenty five years, with deterioration of energy production over the life span of the panels dropping to about 75/80% of the original design at that point.
Whilst I am sure that the massive quantity of solar panels and batteries will eventually be able to be recycled, currently there are no efficient facilities to recycle either solar or wind farm components, which are already being deposited into council landfill sites with the local ratepayer picking up the cost.
The political hypocrisy of the proponents of alternatives are conveniently ignoring the chain of the required materials: from the prospecting for, the mining of, and the continued supply of the rare earths and metals required to manufacture that are required to create the alternatives. It does not register to the world that most of these rare earths actually come from China. They are called “rare earths” as the reason is that, that is what they are, RARE!
The actual cost of the complete chain has not been publicised. A realistic cost of creating the chain from prospecting the mines, to effective recycling end of life for the components has ever be done or if it has been done, the end result is so financially disastrous that the results have not been released.
The current concept of renewable energy is flawed and challenges all the practical laws of physics
I object to this battery storage system and all other battery storage systems!
it is a practical impossibility to build enough battery storage to be of long term viable reliability
The site of this particular facility is remote and requires massive transmission lines, hence high capital and maintenance costs
The danger of these transmission lines to aerial agriculture. again be it grazing (helicopter mustering) or crop sowing/spraying
The biggest percentage of batteries are manufactured by Chinese controlled slave labour - no acknowledgement of this or embargos on Chinese manufactured components
The irresponsibility of supporting a belligerent aggressive nation that is proving to be a threat to our nation
The majority of rare earths for battery storage centres come from China
Short term life span of batteries
Recycling of batteries and control systems not planned
Heavy metal contamination of land, rendering it dangerous for food production, be that grazing or ag produce
The blind adherence to a confined road to renewable energy without exploring ALL alternatives and pursuing the new technology becoming available

This extremely hazardous, CCP reliant, unethical plan defies every aspect of the National Electricity Law Objective.

Comet Park BESS disaster is a massive waste of taxpayer’s money for a Fake Green Scam that does not demonstrate that it will ever deliver electricity outcomes that are genuinely safe, secure, reliable, high quality and affordable for consumers.

The assessment prioritises predatory vested interests and hasty deployment over a complete examination of long-term risks, costs and consequences.

Testing