Culcairn Solar Farm

I support renewable energy as I believe that it is the way of the future and we need to move away from fossil fuels. Having read the EIS in depth it is my opinion that the company has carried out all of the surveys and supplied in depth reports to indicate that this is the perfect site for a solar farm. I am also very pleased to read that the land will also be used to graze sheep. Dual landuse is the best way to go, win win for electricity generation and agriculture in the area.

While I support the idea of solar energy, as demonstrated by the solar panels on the roof of my home and my business, I don't agree that solar farms in this region will bring value to our communities. The short term gains of building solar farms in areas that can still be productive in drought is short sighted. Less farms and less farming families in our towns will have a lasting social effect.

This area can be productive without any extensive irrigation. There maybe other places more appropriate for solar farms, that may require more cost of infrastructure but this would be preferred by me rather than the long term cost to our community.

While building such a project locally, any gains to the towns any my business would be minimal, as I have seen in the past. Being close to a centre like Albury, the small towns will see little effect or benefits as most of any money spent will go the bigger towns.

The disruption to the local community will have a lasting effect. The divide in the community on this project will create extra tension and alienate the communities some more.

I am objecting to the proposed solar farm at Culcairn as the land that the solar panels will be erected upon is very good agricultural land. It seems the company will be paying kickbacks to local community groups & if the project is so great for the community these annual payments should not be needed. Work out how much it will cost to remove the panels and infrastructure at the end of life of the solar farm and ask the company to pay that money upfront into an account that will be used to rectify land at the end of the project. (this company could go broke or new technology comes out that makes these panels obsolete and then who is going to remove panels at end of life). The only reason this project is proposed at this site is due to the proximity of high voltage power lines. If solar farms are so beneficial maybe TransGrid should link some new high voltage lines to a site that is not good agricultural land, that has more sunlight and does not affect neighbours.

Attached is the response from DRG on the Culcairn Solar Farm SSD-10288 request for advice on the EIS documents.

This project will be very valuable to the district,as well as the Planet. Some people think this a loss of farming land , this not so as it suits running sheep perfectly.MEAT and FIBER production would be brilliant with the solar panells providing excellent shelter. This is the best thing to happen locally and it must proceed. It will reduce our reliance on burning COAL the absolute worst thing we are doing!!!!!

Comments uploaded.

I,d like to raise my objection to the Culcairn Solar Farm Project on the basis it is to be situated on a massive area of 3254 acres of prime cropping land and if approved will significantly affected agricultural businesses locally from fertiliser and seed suppliers, machinery dealers and manufacturers, mechanical repairs , freight operators, feedlots. My business relies on hay, grain for livestock production and I currently buy Hay and Grain from this farm and general area each year, To take this prime area out of production would be an economic shame for the local District in the terms of loss of agricultural production income and effect my business by having to travel further for hay and grain supplies out of Victoria to make up the short fall thus adding to cost and in a drought it can't be afforded.
This district would be one of the safest and productive in NSW which in this world of climate change needs to remain for agricultural production there are many marginal areas thats are better suited for this kind of development.

To whom this may concern,

I am writing to provide my support toward the Culcairn Solar Farm. I am also writing to point out some misconceptions about the proposed site and its advertised status as "prime agricultural land".
The proposed solar farm is a very inoffensive, low impact, high output use for the site. I have visited a solar farm constructed in the same fashion as the proposed one for Culcairn and I was surprised at how low the impact was on the site. All the components used in the solar farm where removable (with some difficulty) with no lingering effects. Reduced pasture growth or nil growth under the panels was NOT observed at the site I visited. In fact, increased growth was observed under the panels.
The Solar farm will create 100's of jobs in the construction phase (1-2years) as well as ongoing maintenance positions throughout the life of the site. With the utilization of grazing under the panels additional agricultural positions would also be created. It is my belief that 2-5 times the amount of employment would be created by having the site utilized as a solar farm as opposed to straight agricultural production. Extra economic activity would flow through to all business’s in the area. In addition to this Neon has expressed its desire to use local businesses wherever possible in its procurement, a big plus for locals.
The site itself has been touted by many as "prime agricultural land". This is not the case. The rainfall of the area does make agricultural production more reliable than other areas of the state, however the site and its topography/soil mix could hardly be considered "prime agricultural land". The site is flat and prone to waterlogging. Crop damage from waterlogging have been a feature of the site for many years, in fact more crop damage has been had from waterlogging than drought. Advances in cropping techniques in recent times have mitigated some of the water logging issues however the problem is still a significant concern. I find the title "prime agricultural land" impossible to associate with the site.
That said it is worth noting that due to freehold nature of the land it is not compulsory for the owners or lessees to operate any agricultural enterprise. No law exists that requires any agricultural output to be maintained at all. Freehold is essentially that, you are free to do as you wish, or do nothing at all.
Therefore, I would like to offer my full support of this venture for Neon, Culcairn and surrounding communities as I consider the flow on effects of the business to be only positive towards sustaining community stability and strong economic growth.

As landowners for a neighbouring solar project we are of course in favour of renewable energy.

What a great innovative idea for the Southern Riverina - to think that the development of this solar farm could well lead the way and set the standard for other renewable energy ventures in this area. This project should be supported by the general population and at least show by way of example to politicians and other decision making individuals and all levels of Government that projects like these are long overdue and are the way of the future. Let’s stop the procrastination, argument and blame game and get behind those whom have developed an idea and should be rewarded for it. We are over the navel gazing and lack of action by those in power and we as a community need to start to embrace new business developments that support a vision for Australia in both a business and economic sense as well as an environmental sense. It’s now or never!

We support the transition to renewable energy, and this project in particular because from what I understand, Culcairn Solar Farm will;

- Reduce carbon emissions significantly
- Create multiple jobs
- We are in contact with many developers and NEOEN are a well-established and experienced company who have demonstrated that they are committed to the Australian market as a developer, constructor, owner and operator of renewable energy assets, as opposed to selling off developments in chase of a quick financial gains.
- Solar farms have a less visual impact as opposed to fossil fuel generation plants

We hope that this application is approved and that this project can get off the ground and that the job creation, community benefits, and clean energy production can commence.

I support this project as a Renewable Energy supplier and regional and social procurement project

I object to this development based on many reasons.
This development is to be constructed on productive agricultural land and due to my employment being part of an agricultural contracting business including hay and fodder production I understand the value of this land in an area that has good rainfall and ability to produce when other areas are struggling from drought. It is important to preserve the value of agriculture to ensure food production in our country can continue and avoid the need to import and continue the multiplying economic benefits that agriculture brings to many in our community and Australia wide.
Culcairn is a growth area of Greater Hume Shire and this development will inhibit the ability of the area to grow. Many existing homes will be affected by this development and the change of the landscape from agricultural to an industrial look will affect those living in the area, it may devalue the land having financial consequences and in turn cause stress in the community. This development is being undertaken by a foreign company and I believe that agricultural land with the strong ability to produce should remain under Australian ownership for agricultural production.
As a member of the RFS, I am greatly concerned about the bushfire impact this may bring to our area. I understand Solar PV developments have significant workplace health and safety issues and believe that if a fire is to break out in the solar development that local RFS members that are NOT HAZMAT trained or equipped will not be able to enter and therefore it will be necessary to fight any fires from outside the development on neighbouring land. This will definitely bring an increased risk not only to myself as a volunteer RFS member but also the neighbouring landowners and also the nearby town of Culcairn.
My young cousins travel to school along the road and I also understand that this development will bring quite substantial truck movements through town and I am concerned this will be a great risk to school children and the community.
I feel exceptionally worried for the landowners in the area, I believe this development will bring great disturbance to the area and will affect the mental health of the surrounding neighbours and nearby community.
Agriculture in our country is in a dire state with drought, Murray Darling Basin and fire and I strongly object as I believe that the agricultural land proposed for this development should be retained for agriculture and absolutely refute that the sheep grazing proposed by developer will be anywhere close to the agricultural capacity that currently exists on this arable land including that which has been cropped in the past.
I have attached a couple of photos of an example of the area being high yield.

I object to this proposal for the Culcairn Solar Farm. This is because of the reasons below;
- I am a regular visitor to the area as I have friends here.
- When we come and stay in Culcairn I am worried for my young family about so much electrical infrastructure close by and in one place.
- I think it will totally change the look of the area . It will become very industrial, ugly and will be sad for those living near the site.
- If I feel this way about the area then I strongly believe it will inevitably cause the loss of tourism to the area and the local shops and pubs will be affected in the long term.
- I have been to Morgans lookout and it is very sad that it will be in the view from there.
- I am aware of the environmental value of the Billabong Creek, Back Creek and Waterway areas, birds, frogs, wildlife, treed riparian areas.
- Are you aware that it is not appropriate along the Billabong Creek as it floods.
- I believe that the panels will leach chemicals into the waterways and cause health effects.
- Removing trees for offsets is not acceptable – eg tubestock trees cannot replace mature trees – 99 trees to be removed.
- Tubestock trees take so many years to grow, how would they be effective screening and there are minimal numbers that will not meet mitigation measures.
- When we visit the area we know for fact that the locals are busy harvestin, producing great grain and hay yields and filling all the silos at harvest time. This would cease if the Solar farm goes ahead.
- I understand that the hay and grain produced from this area supports other areas in need from drought and the recent fires and should be protected. This year alone, much of their hay went to northern nsw this year, to help out with drought .
- I believe that this development will affect the productivity of the farmland as it will surround neighbouring land.
- Massive solar developments, such as the one proposed for Culcairn, should be on land that cannot produce crops, there is plenty of land in Australia that has limited farming potential and that Government needs to create infrastructure for better placement. I truely believe that there is a more suitable area for this project.
- Climate change will affect agriculture more than anything so there needs to be more protection of these productive crop producing areas.
- There is already too many farmers taking their own lives because of hardship and i know there is serious mental health issues being caused by this development and the conflict that has been caused in the community. It will split families or make them move at a huge financial and emotional loss.
- Fires in the summer are a concern and this Solar farm will add to the increased fire risk.
- Families in the areas have generation after generation that have farmed the land and their kids are continuing to farm the land. What will their future hold for them if this goes ahead.
- There will then be a flow on affect and there will be the potential loss of employment for those working in agricultural businesses in the community.
- The report mentions that there will be a number of jobs created when installing and setting up the Solar Farm but when it is complete there will only be a hand full of jobs which cannot justify the huge negative impact on the land and the community.
- Once the Solar panels have past their "use by date" where are they put? The Solar panel waste will be the next problem for the future.
- If the solar company goes broke will there be a wasteland left behind if the company cannot afford to remediate the land.
- There are plans to put sheep under the panels. But I feel there are issues with the sheep contracting health issues as a result, from the electrical infrastructure.
- The construction of the development will affect livestock from noise and being scared. It will affect lambs and calving.
- I believe that the loss of productive farmland may result in increased food prices due to shortages in the future.
- Winter fogs will affect the efficiancy of the panels through the winter so another site would be more suitable.
- There are more suitable areas throughout the country to be placing these solar panels. Why does it need to be on productive farmland?
- The negative impact on local community outways the benefits outlined in the 400 page Environmental Impact Statement and the government should protect the benefits of prime agricultural land.
- Not to mention that Solar companies are all foreign owned. The local land needs to be protected.
- The 'Environmental Impact Statement" cannot 100% confidentally predict the changing climatic conditions for the township and surrounds.

I believe this project will be a huge asset to our local economy.
The land can still be used to graze livestock.
Solar energy must be utilized in order to build a sustainable future for Australia.

This solar farm will take away 1317 hectares of important agricultural land. The neighbouring properties will be affected in many ways now and in the future. This is totally unacceptable and needs further research particularly in health.
I’m also very concerned about aboriginal rights Australia and would like to know their opinion on this matter.

I object to the Culcairn Solar Farm as I do not want to see the exceptionally good cropping & grazing land used for the purpose of electricity generation.
I believe that there are significantly better places for these developments to be housed on less productive land where they will not take away the benefits of hay and grain production to our community. Dry areas suffering from the impact of drought would provide an opportunity for this sort of development.
Much of the produce from this area is delivered to local grain merchants in Walla Walla, Culcairn & Henty and other local areas and therefore this development would cause a loss of business and the flow on multiplying effects will be detrimental to our community in the long term. I believe that the short term benefits will more affect regional centres and that the benefits to the smaller local communities will be negigible.
I have concern that there will be increase fire risk from this development particularly along the Billabong Creek and Waterway areas, some of which are mapped as bushfire prone land. I understand that RFS members will not enter the site to combat a fire due to workplace health and safety concerns and therefore the surrounding landowners will be at increased risk which includes local townships and the Walla Walla Gum Swamp.
I am concerned about the vehicle movements with increased traffic and buses on Cummings Road and the Olympic Highway and that there will be increased risk of collisions.
I believe that climate issues will have a large impact on food production and therefore it is most important to protect the strongest agricultural areas particularly when other areas of our food bowl lack production due to irrigation issues and low water volumes.
How can the company guarantee that this development will still remain viable within the 30 year timeframe, one would expect that technology will change offering improved options for electricity generation and therefore what will happen if the company becomes insolvent and cannot afford to remediate the site? Will our community be left with a wasteland should the landowner be unable to afford the cost of remediation and I am also concerned at the cumulative impact of solar waste in the future.
This development has been difficult for our community and there has been conflict affecting many people.

I support the project

I am not opposed to renewable energy but feel it should not sacrifice highly productive agricultural land.
In our changing climate and Increasing national and worldwide population the ability to feed ourselves will become invaluable. Australia has many less productive agricultural areas that would have significantly less impact on people and the environment, that with an infrastructure commitment would have more scope for dealing with our future energy needs.

Because of agricultural purposes the solar panels should not go ahead!