Gunning Solar Farm

I object to this project.

Yet another foreign developer mining money. This project will ensure we are deprived of reliable and affordable electricity.

The consumer will pay. The developer will profit. The environment will be irreversibly damaged.

I object to the Gunning Solar project SSD-46668486

There will be major inconveniences to residents during the lengthy construction process. The increased traffic will negatively impact residents and local road users, increasing travel times to locals and travellers. The construction noise is also a major concern to residents near to the site – construction traffic will dramatically increase, particularly on the local roads.

Solar panels are NOT environmentally friendly – made with a toxic mix of gallium arsenide, tellurium, silver, crystalline silicon, lead, cadmium, and heavy earth materials. Solar panels deteriorate, resulting in lost efficiency, total failure or even fire. They get damaged by hail, wind and fire and potentially leach their toxic chemicals into the soil and water courses. Major damage does happen – such as with the Beryl Solar plant in 2020 with impacts from heavy rain, a lightning strike, inverter damage and other failures. The contamination risks to the land and through the water courses will not be tolerated by the local community.

PV solar systems are also prone to fires from panel and electrical equipment failures causing risk to nearby farms, native bush and the community, as accessing the fires on/near a solar site is difficult and limited for safety reasons. Gunnedah Rural Fire Service has confirmed that firefighters can only fight fires in a solar plant from the perimeter due to dangerous high voltages and the possibility of toxic gases. In August 2022 a small grass fire near Beryl solar plant required a dozen emergency vehicles and three water-bombing helicopters to protect the solar plant and nearby farm. A small fire of this size could potentially be put out by easily and quickly by minimal fire crew, yet this small fire took four hours and multiple crew to bring the situation under control.

The current proposal also includes a BESS. Batteries use lead, lithium and cobalt, all of which are hazardous materials. This is of much concern to residents and the community as ordinary fire suppression measures cannot extinguish a Lithium chemical reaction fire. A fire that occurred in the 350MW/450MWh BESS during testing on 30 July 2021 in Geelong, Victoria shows how dangerous it can be for nearby residents. When one of the 13 tonne battery packs caught fire, it burned for three days and resulted in the evacuation of residents because of the toxic fumes generated.

Huge solar plants are not visually appealing and will impact near and not-so-near neighbours. As well as potentially impacting the value of neighbouring properties, the natural beauty of this district is very popular with travellers and visitors. Placing solar panels over scenic farmland will likely deter tourists visiting as the once productive farming land will be a reflective sea of solar panels.

Apart from removing land from productive farming for up to 35 years there is the likely long-term damage to the soil. The long term impact to the soil (from compaction and potentially leaching of toxic chemicals into the soil) could ruin its ability to be productive farmland in the future.

I urge DPE to listen to those most heavily impacted by this project and to consider the cumulative impact on the district by multiple developments. This project should be rejected.

As an adjoining landholder, and 6th generation Grazier on my farm, there will be a huge impact on the land, especially when I have a consistent number of 500+ lambing ewes that will be affected by abnormal noise and movement, resulting in reduced productivity and an impact to annual income.

The visual impact statements refer only to where each dwelling is located. From approx. 85% of my 700ha farm, I will have visibility of the solar panels. As I have a full-time operational farm, I spend 6-7 days a week working the area, and this has not been considered from a visual point of view.

Under the current plans, there is no provision for supplied tree line screening from the solar farm. Neighbouring properties should be considered when deciding where to place the screening trees.

For regular periods throughout the year, Hillgrove Road is used for stock rotation and is sensitive to the traffic conditions. Having numerous heavy vehicles using this area of road, will potentially create a stand-still of stock movement, causing extra employee costs.

Lade Vale Road is known for regular flooding and already has 2 inadequate flood crossings that cannot sustain regular heavy vehicles over Hovells Creek.

The Gunning Solar Farm project is expected to provide funding to the Upper Lachlan Shire Council, but this is unlikely to result in funding and improvement to the sensitive receivers of Lade Vale and Oolong community. The residents of the Lade Vale and Oolong community already do not receive adequate attention to roads from our local council, so it is unclear as to how the Upper Lachlan Shire Council will allocate funds to our area.

Compensation is required for locals during construction and for the expected life of the solar farm operations. This should be calculated to include increases against the consumer price index.

No evidence has been provided on how the solar farm will impact the local environment and climate to the closest neighbours. Native trees may be removed and any effort to replace trees may take decades to achieve similar growth.

The local Oolong Fire Brigade and neighbouring brigades have not had any information or consultation on standard operating procedures (SOP) and/or training on how to deal with dangers from the solar farm and its electrical infrastructure. As a member of the Oolong Brigade as an Officer for over 50 years, I feel that more details/training are needed for Brigade access in and around the proposed site.

Land values are expected to come down at least 50% than current values. The solar farm land will be unable to be improved with machinery and therefore will affect neighbouring properties. I don’t foresee that selling land in the area will be an easy task, as the rural outlook will not be visible with the solar farm present, as it will be more industrial than rural.

Submission attached

I object to the Gunning Solar Farm on Lade Vale road.
Bush Fire risk - there is not enough water in neighbouring dams to deal with stock requirements as well as a bush fire, especially during a drought when dams are dry or very low.
Road Conditions - Lade Vale road is roughly 16km long. There are no fog lines or centre lines and crumbling edges making the road very narrow in many places. There is currently minimal maintenace along this road and we worry that with the increased traffic the condition will continue to worsen making it even more unsafe.
Stock travel - We travel our stock along Lade Vale road as do many other land holders along the road. This is done any day and time of the week as required for the stock needs. Again the increased vehicle traffic poses a major risk for our animals and their welfare being moved safely between our paddocks.
Weeds - weed control is very important to us. We spend thousands of dollars and many many hours spraying to control our weeds on our property.We have not been able to see a proper weed control program for the Solar Farm and this is worrying as when the weeds go to seed the wind then spread them into all of the neighbouring properties which then become our problem and cost to control.
Local Benefit? There is no benefit for the locals who live or own land along Lade Vale Road and adjoining roads to the solar farm. The benefits are for people who live in the city and we lose the the serene outlook in which we live in as we believe this will be an eye sore for our farming community, especially after we went and viewed the look of a solar farm South of Glenrowan VIC. It is placed in a once beautiful valley which is now ruined by the look of the panels. The Lade Vale area is very good grazing country that will now go to waste.
Decommissioning costs - who pays for this? At the moment it seems like it is swept under the rug and left as a grey area of who pays for it in the future?
Call to Action
We request that the following be improved / changed / updated etc
Bush fire risk - Proper plan needs to be in place to ensure that local farms and their enterprises are not wiped out in the case of a bush fire arising from the solar farm or from not being able to correctly protect their properties due to the solar farm.
Road conditions - the road needs to be correctly updated and then continuously maintained to a high standard to ensure the safety of the local including the children who travel on either a school bus or are driven by their parents to meet a local bus to get their kids to school.
Stock Travel - Anyone who is going to be travelling along Lade Vale road need to understand the rules are stock signs and their obligations to abide by the rules and speed limits require in these circumstance.
Weeds - weed control needs to be completed on all of the land which might hold the panels and be continued quarterly to ensure that they do not spread to all neighbouring properties.
Local benefit - supply solar panels and batteries to all local properties along with a cash financial benefit for the stress and worry we will have forever more if we end up with this project going ahead. Why do country areas have to house these projects and give up their good country to supply power to the cities when you could be putting solar panels and batteries on every house in the city?
Decommissioning cost - Can it be publicized how these will be removed in the future? I have asked many times the questions of - How much of the panels are recyclable verses how much just become land fill? No one has been able to answer and it keeps getting swept away which leads me to believe that it is not a good answer. Our farm has been within our family for over 160 years and we worry what this will do for our grand children and future great grand children.
Please move this to the middle of a city. If it can be done here then why can it not be completed in each city?

I object to the proposed Gunning Solar Farm.
Electricity should be generated where it is needed which negates the need for transmission lines ploughing through agricultural land. Solar projects take valuable food and fibre producing land out of production when in reality Australia's growing population needs more food. How and where will this be produced, and by whom given that our Government is doing everything to chase farmers off their land, and/or restrict their practices?
Visual and noise impacts from solar, and wind projects are felt heavily in rural and regional areas given our scenic and peaceful vistas. The serenity is often a large part of the reason for people moving to these areas. The impact studies are done by professionals who, more often than not live in metropolitan areas where seeing such infrastructure is not unusual, and it is not their homes being impacted. How is this fair to the residents forced to live with such impacts?
The majority of the power produced by large scale solar, and wind, projects will be used in metropolitan areas. Why does rural and regional Australia have to bear the burden of producing all of the power when there is plenty of roof space for solar panels and beaches, golf courses and football fields for wind turbines in our major cities?
The amount of fossil fuels used to manufacture materials, construct and maintain 'renewable energy' projects makes the power from large scale infrastructure projects more brown than 'green'. All of the components of these projects should have to be manufactured, constructed and maintained using renewable energy!
If the "rapid transition to renewables" continues on its current trajectory Australian citizens will find themselves naked, cold and sober as agriculture will be dead.

I object to the Gunning Solar farm on Lade Vale Road, Gunning NSW. The road condition is not suitable for the current traffic and more traffic will make the road a lot worse. There is no proposed work to be completed along the entire road nore is there a guarantee that work will continue on fixing the roads after the heavy vehicles and truck have been along said road.
Weed control - when speaking at the public meeting I asked what the plan in place would be for weed control and I was told that they plan to let people lease back the graizing land and have sheep eat the weeds which I informed the man that sheep do not eat weeds and that is why there needs to be a proper weed maintenance plan on place as the weeds will just seed, multiply and then blow into neighbouring properties creating more work, hassle and money that has to be spent by the surrounding land holders to try to control them.
Dismantling of construction - there is a large grey area when it comes to what happens with the solar farm and how it would be dismantled and removed in the future, be it in 30 years or 60years and who will actually pay for it? Probably the environment if it is left to just rot in place.
View - the look of the panels is not a nice sight to see. we have a gorgeous country side and do not wish to have that taken away from us.
The company plan to sell the rights to the solar farm as soon as it has passed through Government. This was told to me at the local meeting that it will be sold off and then taken over for construction. Most likely to am overseas buyer. How does this benefit Australians?
Call to action - A proper plan needs to be in action for the entire of Lade Vale Road. All of it needs to be sealed, widened and maintenance to continue. Along with fog lines and centre lines and the tress that over take the edges or the road to be trimmed according.
Call to action - a proper weed control plan need to be in place to have weeds sprayed regularly and correctly to stop the spread and not cost neighbours thousands of dollars of their own.
Call to action - please stop selling Australia amd Australian ompanies to people overseas. Keep it local and within Australia.

I object to this unnecessary, unreliable, non base load power source that is expensive and pays scant attention to damaged fauna habitat. I urge the Government to go nuclear, hitched up to the existing grid. We will eventually go nuclear so why not now?

. I represent and Environmental Group known as Save Our Woodlands Inc. our website is http://saveourwoodlands.org

I object to the Gunning Solar Farm on the following grounds:

1: Solar and wind energy is not going to solve our shortage of electricity in the future. Both solar and wind energy are intermittent and will not provide our base power supply. We will need coal, gas or nuclear energy to provide base power into the future. Germany as an example of a country with large amounts of wind and solar energy production, Germany imports power from France, which is nuclear. Germany also exports electricity which is the nature of the intermittent production from solar and wind energy sources. Sometimes there is not enough and sometimes there is too much.

The latest figures are here:
“Germany Electricity Imports: France data was reported at 1,485,644.000 MWh in May 2023. This records an increase from the previous number of 489,358.000 MWh for Apr 2023. CEIC Data (2023).”

South Australia the one so called “green” state in Australia, imports brown coal based power from Victoria.

2: When solar farm are decommissioned can the area be returned to agriculture? Solar panels carry toxic waste in the form of heavy metals, (lead, cadmium, lithium, strontium, nickel, barium, zinc, and copper) and metalloids (selenium). We cannot envisage that a huge solar farm will have no broken panels during its lifetime. Panels are broken during construction, they are broken during the life of the project and large numbers can be broken if there is a major storm event.

Robertson et al. (2019) states that Selenium, strontium, lithium, nickel, and barium levels measured in soil samples increased significantly in samples close to PV (solar) systems. The heavy metals then contaminate the land and the water surrounding the land. As these substances do not disintegrate the land can never be returned to agriculture.

3: Can solar panels be recycled? Peplow (2022) states “today’s technologies for recycling these units are inefficient and rarely deployed. That is an enormous problem. PV panels contain toxic materials, like lead and cadmium, that can cause environmental pollution, yet many are dumped in landfills when they die. They also contain valuable materials that could be reused to make new solar cells, but today these resources are mostly wasted.”

4: There is no provision in the legislation for the decommissioning of solar or wind farms. If a company wants to set up a mine, they have to pay a bond for the remediation of the area but a solar of wind farm does not have to pay anything. Our planning bodies hope that the final company owning the farm will remediate the area, as promised, but what if they just say, “Too bad, we're leaving?” These are overseas companies, and we have no recourse. Then the land holder becomes liable, and after they declare bankruptcy, it will be up to the people of NSW, via the Government to clean up the mess. Our Government's planning process needs some serious rethinking.

The Solution.

We are not against the use of renewable energy but we do not need to destroy our environment to achieve our aims. We could easily place solar panels on every building in Sydney and other cities and towns. We could store the energy locally (for each suburb or town) and distribute this locally.

Big Business could still make a lot of money without the environmental cost, each household could be paid for the use of their roof instead on one landholder being paid a huge amount. We would not need destructive and expensive transmission lines and we could start this Immediately instead of having to wait 10 or more years.

In addition we do need to recycle solar panels BUT this cost must be carried by the developer and there needs to be an up front deposit for the decommissioning of any major renewable project.

References:

CEIC Data (2023)
https://www.ceicdata.com› electricity-imports-and-exports

Robinson, S. & Meindl, G. (2019), Potential for leaching of heavy metals and metalloids from crystalline silicon photovoltaic systems. 10.5027/jnrd.v9i0.02.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339029474_Potential_for_leaching_of_heavy_metals_and_metalloids_from_crystalline_silicon_photovoltaic_systems
Peplow, M ( 2022), Solar Panels Face Recycling Challenge, ACS Cent. Sci. 2022, 8, 3, 299–302
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acscentsci.2c00214

Stop the green washing! This project will not lower retail electricity prices nor effect the climate. Nor will it be reliable as it is dependent on highly variable weather conditions. This year my electricity cost will already be 4.38 times greater than it was in 2019 for exactly the same consumption pattern and number of days. It rose every year despite changing to the lowest cost retail plans five times. Why? Because subsidised projects such as these cannibalise reliable near 24/7 base-load power plants. There are now low emissions high efficiency 24/7 base-load power plants being built around the world to meet emissions, affordability and reliability requirements. The Proponent knows this but is driven by profit regardless of the realties for Australians and the damage it will do to them and our businesses. Shame, shame, shame and shame!

I oppose this project because the supply chain involves the use of slave labour. Cobalt and copper artisanal mining relies in slave labour in the DRC and the production of components in China uses slave labour. Stop these degrading projects.

I oppose this project because it is very unlikely that the decommissioning, removal and land rehabilitation will occur due to the exorbitant cost that will be involved. The cost in 20 years or so time will likely exceed today's cost to build the project. Unlike mining companies there is no requirement for this developer to lodge a bond to cover this future cost. Who will ultimately pay? The new owner of the plant, the host landholders, the local ratepayers or the State and/or Federal governments. The project must not be approved unless such a bond is in place.

Save Our Surroundings objects to this project because:

The proposed project is not "fit for purpose". It will generate substantial CO2e emissions immediately in its production and installation that will take many years if ever to offset from the relatively little electricity it may generate. Therefore, the project is immediately detrimental to the climate. The project must therefore be rejected.

The proposed project is not "fit for purpose". It will not reduce electricity costs to consumers, as evidenced by not only the huge frequent increases in Australian NEM prices to date, but also the experience in every country where wind and solar are 30% or more of the capacity mix. Sweden recently dropped its target of 100% renewables as wind and solar generation do not work (unreliable and intermittent). Instead, Sweden is to build more zero emissions nuclear plants, as other countries are doing. Australia must do the same! The project must therefore be rejected.

Save Our Surroundings (SOS) objects to proposed BESS Works in this project because there are still so many unresolved concerns about risks and issues involved with Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS), for instance:
1. Lack of research into the life-cycle of BESS
2. Resource intensive requirements
3. Involves slavery in mining and production
4. Environmentally damaging
5. Fire starting risks increased
6. Fire-fighting dangers increased
7. Local fire risks considerably increased
8. Expensive
9. Short life-span
10. Variable operation
11. Very little Australian content
12. Increased energy and sovereign risks
13. Roads and road travel are impacted
14. Electricity charging and air-conditioning requirements are high
15. Classed as hazardous goods
16. No certainty at end of the short life of a BESS
17. Increased dependency on intermittent electricity generation
18. Poor viability
19. Increase retail electricity prices.

Please refer to the attachment for details.

Dear NSW Major Projects,
Attn: Cameron Ashe of (Department of Planning and Environment), and all those concerned.
Re: Gunning Solar Farm, Application SSD-46668486.

I am writing as a resident and landowner in the Lade Vale area with significant concerns regarding the Gunning Solar Farm project. My objections are multifaceted and pertain to several aspects of the project that I believe will detrimentally impact the local community, environment, and rural landscape.

Heavy Truck Traffic on Local Roads: The use of large trucks on our already unfit, narrow and unsealed roads presents serious safety risks. There are no central lines marked to aid lane separation. There are many visual blind spots around road corners. There are overgrown trees that have branches meeting low levels of vehicles. Our local roads are not designed to accommodate constant repetitive heavy construction vehicles. The roads are shared with School buses, local traffic, farm machinery and livestock, raising grave concerns about road safety and the potential for accidents.

Visual Impact and Glare from Solar Panels: The installation of the solar farm will significantly alter the landscape visible to local properties, introducing an industrial element into our rural vista. The visual impact from the panels and potential glare from framing materials is particularly concerning, as it poses an aesthetic issue that will be there for decades and likely many generations of our children to come. Strategic placement of trees, plants and vegetation on local properties outside of the Solar Farm boundary could aid the visual eyesore to dampen the impacts post construction.
Our particular property received two separate visual impact meetings from experienced photographers, but results and/or reports are yet to be provided directly.

Infrastructure in Rural Setting: The construction of large transformers, substations, and battery storage facilities is inconsistent with the grassland rural RU2 zoning of our area. Such industrial-scale infrastructure disrupts the rural character and potentially introduces environmental hazards.

Inappropriate Fencing: The proposed high fencing is not in line with rural zoning guidelines. It is visually intrusive and creates a stark contrast with the surrounding landscape, resembling a prison yard more than a rural farming area.

Non-Compliance with Rural Planning Principles: The project does not align with the Rural Planning Principles for Zone RU2 Rural Landscape. It fails to preserve the rural character and scenic quality of the area, instead introducing an industrial element that is out of place in this setting.

Weed Spread and Pasture Degradation: The presence of the solar farm is likely to exacerbate weed spread due to limited access for machinery to complete pasture improvement and weed management under the panels. This could lead to a decline in agricultural productivity for direct neighbouring properties.

Fire Hazard and Emergency Response: The project increases the risk of grass wildfires and can impede the ability of local RFS brigades to effectively manage and fight these fires, given the access limitations and lack of appropriate training around high voltage power of the solar farm's infrastructure. The bush fire assessment claims that the water from local farms is considered adequate for firefighting requirements – This is not calculated or accurate given the same report states “it is unknown if they are permanent”. The same report states “No BAL applicable”, however recent houses built close enough to be sensitive receivers have been subject to a minimum of BAL19 and BAL29 building requirements.

Financial Benefits to Local Community: The project, while ambitious in its scope and potential contributions to renewable energy, appears to allocate improvements and benefits to the local council and greater NSW that may not directly benefit the Lade Vale community. The project does not seem to include direct financial incentives or compensation for those living in the Lade Vale area. Unlike broader benefits that might be experienced in the general Upper Lachlan shire area, our community appears to be overlooked in terms of economic gain, such as revenue sharing, community investment opportunities, or direct subsidies. While improvements to local infrastructure might be anticipated, there's a lack of clarity on how these will directly benefit the Lade Vale community. There is a concern that these improvements will primarily serve areas outside of Lade Vale, Oolong, Gunning and all other local areas, failing to address our specific needs and priorities.

Prolonged Construction Nuisance: The undefined duration of construction poses a considerable disturbance. This prolonged period of noise, dust, truck traffic and general disruption is incompatible with the peace and tranquility characteristic of our rural farming community. The lack of a clear timeline exacerbates these concerns, leaving residents uncertain and unprepared for the length of this disruption. Prolonged exposure to construction nuisance can have detrimental effects on the health and wellbeing of community members, especially those with pre-existing health conditions.

Microclimate Change: The heat generation by solar panels, capable of reaching up to 90 degrees Celsius, could induce a local microclimate change that is not clearly documented in the EIS. This alteration could have unknown ecological impacts and affect local farming practices for the generations.

Decline in Land Values: The establishment of the solar farm will lead to a decline in property values for neighbouring landowners. The industrial appearance, general visual eyesore, and other nuisances will detract from the desirability and market value of nearby properties.

Request for Action:
In light of these concerns, I urge the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the project in the view of the “little people”. It is vital that mitigation strategies are put in place for each of these issues and that the project is revised to better align with the rural character of the area and the needs of the local Lade Vale community.

The Gunning Solar Farm project, in its current proposed form, poses significant challenges and potential detriments to our community, environment, and way of life. I strongly advocate for each concern raised to be addressed thoroughly, ensuring the preservation of our rural landscape and the wellbeing of our community.

I appreciate your attention to these matters and await a response that acknowledges and addresses each of these serious concerns.

The success of such a significant project should not only be measured by its scale and technological achievements but also by its positive impact on the nearest communities.

Thank you for considering this objection. I am looking forward to your response and to the opportunity for further engagement on this matter.

I OBJECT TO THIS FORM OF ENERGY. The Australian government needs to investigate into a better and more reliable source of energy to power NSW/Australia. Too much rural/regional land is being destroyed as a result of poor decisions. Solar farms are ugly on the landscapes and toxic.

I OBJECT TO THIS FORM OF ENERGY TO POWER NSW/AUSTRALIA. Why are rural/regional regions being destroyed in the name of unreliable forms of renewable energy? There needs to be a deeper level of investigation into this. Solar factories are too toxic on the surrounding environment, communities and animals. Why are we destroying agricultural land to power Australia/NSW? Why is rural/regional NSW/Australia taking one for the team and sacrificing our land for these unproven projects? PUT THESE IN THE NATIONAL PARKS CLOSER TO THE HIGHER-DENSITY CITIES.

I am objecting to this project because I do not believe that rural agricultural land should be the home for industrial renewable energy zones. Solar infrastructure has too many negative side effects on both the health of people, environment, animals and landscapes These should be built closer to the cities and not in rural/regional communities.

Project not needed - we do not have a climate emergency - see attachment.

Contamination to waterways, soil profiles and waste management arising from solar components is ackowledged worldwide as a ticking time-bomb.

Presently under Schedule 1 of the POEO Axt 1997, electricity works that generate electricity through the use of solar is not scheduled. That means that the DPE, EPA and presumably any LGA is absolved from any responsibility regardingcontamination caused or waste management arising from solar generation. So who then is resonsible.

Until such time as this conundrum is resolved and an environmentally acceptable plan is legislated, I call on the NSW government to apply 'the precautionary principal' and initiate a moretorium on all solar farm applications.