Kamay Battery Energy Storage System

I am very concerned about the following given the amount of residences in a suburd with 1 road in/out:

• Battery fires, thermal runaway and toxic smoke
• Emergency response and Kurnell’s single evacuation route
• Continuous mechanical and low-frequency noise near homes
• The proposed facility’s proximity to existing fuel storage
• Contaminated firefighting water entering our wetlands and waterways
• The cumulative burden of heavy industry on Kurnell
• The protection of our Aboriginal, environmental and historical heritage
• The continued failure to respect the people who live in our community

Huge potential impact of construction traffic on Captain Cook Drive. A project of this scale will require substantial deliveries of construction materials, electrical equipment and battery-related infrastructure. I am concerned about heavy vehicles, road safety, delays and the cumulative effect if other major projects are being constructed at the same time. The Department should require a detailed construction traffic management plan, including limits on heavy-vehicle movements and appropriate delivery hours. The developer should pay for any road damage caused by construction traffic. I also request that the host and developer provide a bond guaranteeing complete removal of the BESS and restoration of the site at the end of its operational life.

To Whom It May Concern,
I wish to formally object to the proposed Ausgrid Kamay Battery Energy Storage System at Kurnell.
While I support the transition to renewable energy and the development of appropriate energy infrastructure, I do not believe this proposal is suitable for the Kurnell community due to the significant risks and impacts associated with its location.
My primary concern relates to community safety. The proposal involves a large-scale battery facility situated close to residential areas and alongside Kurnell's only road in and out of the peninsula. In the event of a battery fire, thermal runaway incident, or other emergency, residents could face serious evacuation challenges. The potential for toxic smoke and uncertainty around emergency response capabilities raises concerns that should not be dismissed.
I am also concerned about the proposed facility's proximity to existing fuel storage infrastructure. Concentrating additional high-risk industrial activity in an area already housing major fuel assets increases community anxiety and raises legitimate questions about cumulative risk.
The environmental impacts are equally troubling. Kurnell is home to significant wetlands, waterways, and environmentally sensitive areas that are highly valued by residents and visitors alike. Any contamination from firefighting activities, stormwater runoff, or accidental incidents could have lasting consequences for these important ecosystems.
In addition, I am concerned about the potential for ongoing mechanical and low-frequency noise generated by the facility. Residents should not be expected to bear the burden of increased industrial noise in an already heavily industrialised area.
Kurnell has a rich Aboriginal, environmental, and historical heritage that deserves protection. Our community has long carried the impacts of industrial development, and it is reasonable to expect that future projects are located in areas where they will have less impact on residents, heritage values, and sensitive environments.
Kurnell is not vacant industrial land. It is a thriving residential community, a place of environmental significance, and home to many families who value its unique character. I respectfully request that decision-makers give proper consideration to the cumulative impacts on our community and reject this proposal in its current location.
Thank you for considering my submission.

I am a long term Kurnell resident and I strongly object to the proposed Ausgrid BESS Project or any other BESS project on the Kurnell Peninsular.
The Kurnell Peninsular is recognised as the Birthplace of Australia, but instead of being protected by all levels of Government it has been used as a dumping ground for toxic chemicals and heavy industry for decades..
It is an environmentally sensitive area of historical significance and should be recognised as such.
My concern are not limited to, but include the following:
Showing respect for the existing people who call Kurnell their home.
Putting residents health & safety needs before multi National companies profits.
The cumulative burden of heavy industry, potential battery fires ( well documented to have occurred where other BESS projects have been built) the potential impact on our environment , wildlife and residents long term health.
Proximity to the proposed Ampol BESS project and an existing fuel storage depot!
Oh and yes people’s lives as there is only one road in and out of Kurnell and no evacuation plans for residents.
Captain Cook Drive is already busy especially during summer, school and holiday periods.
There have been numerous occasions when this access road has been closed for extended periods of time including: traffic fatalities, flooding, and oil spills.
These potentially toxic projects , in my opinion, should not be built in residential areas…especially not in such an historically important one to our Nation.
Thank you for considering my submission
Christine LANSLEY.

My objection is because of the multiple and conflicting developments under consideration presently. Combined with the lack of any plan to widen the Kurnell road.
Two storage battery systems and an aviation fuel storage facility within half a mile of each other must have significant risks to each other and the local community.
Government planning for the area suggests development of enhanced tourist facilities, new wharfs, national park upgrades etc.
Two batteries would suggest, one is for greater network support and the other for a potential data center, both competing for the same energy source to store in the batteries.

I am writing to strongly object to the proposed Kamay Battery Energy Storage System in Kurnell.

I am an elderly resident living only a few hundred metres from the proposed development. I also care for my elderly and unwell mother, who has lived in Kurnell her entire life. This is not simply an industrial area to us. It is our home and has been for generations.

One of my greatest concerns is noise. Despite all the industrial development that has occurred around Kurnell, our village still retains a sense of peace and quiet, particularly at night. For elderly residents, and especially those who are unwell, that quiet is incredibly important. I am deeply concerned about introducing another large industrial facility operating continuously, 24 hours a day, so close to our homes.

I am also concerned about the fire and emergency risks associated with a large battery facility, particularly given Kurnell's concentration of existing industrial infrastructure and our limited road access. As an older person caring for an elderly mother, the prospect of an emergency or evacuation is particularly concerning.

Kurnell has carried a disproportionate share of Sydney's industrial burden for generations. At some point, consideration must also be given to the people who actually live here.

My mother has spent her life in this community. She deserves to spend her remaining years enjoying the peace and familiarity of the place she has always called home, without another major industrial development being placed within a few hundred metres of her home.

I ask the Department to consider the human impact of this proposal, particularly on elderly and vulnerable residents living nearby, and not simply whether technical modelling says the impacts are acceptable.

Please listen to the people who live here.

I strongly oppose the Kamay BESS in its proposed location.

I reside approximately 300 metres from the proposed Kamay Battery Energy Storage System and object to the application due to unresolved concerns regarding operational noise, fire risk, site suitability and cumulative impacts.

The proposal would introduce a substantial new source of continuous industrial noise near established residential receivers. Cooling systems, fans, inverters and transformers may operate throughout the day and night, potentially generating tonal and low-frequency noise. These characteristics can be particularly intrusive during evening and night-time periods when background noise levels are lower.

Of particular concern is that the final battery technology and associated mechanical equipment have not yet been selected. Consequently, the noise assessment appears to rely on indicative assumptions rather than verified sound-power data for the equipment that would ultimately be installed. Development consent should not be granted where compliance depends upon technology, plant specifications and mitigation measures that remain unresolved.

The absence of a confirmed technology also creates uncertainty regarding thermal-runaway behaviour, toxic emissions, fire intensity and emergency-response requirements. This uncertainty is significant given the proximity of existing fuel-storage infrastructure.

The application has not adequately demonstrated that alternative sites have been comprehensively investigated and compared. A robust site-selection assessment should consider whether locations with greater separation from residential properties and hazardous fuel-storage facilities would present lower environmental and safety risks.

The proposal must also be assessed in the context of Kurnell’s existing industrial, traffic and aircraft-noise burden. Existing impacts should not be treated as justification for further development; rather, they increase the sensitivity of the locality to additional cumulative impacts.

I request that the application be refused until the final technology is identified and the suitability of this site is demonstrated through independent noise, hazard and alternatives assessments.

See attachment.

I strongly object to this being built so close to homes and the one and only road in or out of Kurnell. The noise from this will be way to loud and annoying to all who live here. Something goes wrong and it goes up in smoke how do we get past to get out. Please build these out where they dont bother anyone

I object to the proposed project as I feel that it impacts many areas of concern for the Kurnell area. Along with the environment issues which I feel need to be protected, the fact that it has a profound cultural and historic importance being the birthplace of Australia bringing many visitors to this natural and well kept suburb. Surely due to the environment, safety, amenity and cultural impacts that will occur with the proposed project I request that Ausgrid and the New South Wales Department of Planning reject this proposal and consider alternative locations that are more suitable for this infrastructure.

I support renewable-energy storage, but I do not support locating a major BESS on a flood-constrained coastal peninsula with a single access road, beside internationally protected wetlands and within an already complex industrial environment.

My supported reasons are;
High flood/PMF risk and fundamental site suitability.
Captain Cook Drive being Kurnell's sole access and evacuation/emergency route.
FRNSW's documented concern about the special firefighting difficulties associated with BESS facilities.
Risk of firefighting water or other contamination reaching Towra Point, Quibray Bay and Botany Bay.
Cumulative risk from concentrating BESS and other major industrial infrastructure on the Kurnell Peninsula.

This is a good location for a grid scale battery. The existing site is already disturbed and almost entirely concrete hard stand, meaning the environmental impact is relatively low. It is also located adjacent to an electricity substation, requiring limited transmission infrastructure which boosts efficiency and keeps costs lower across the power grid. It may have a negative impact on the nearby community, but the overall benefit of ensuring a reliable energy network and the particular efficiencies provided by locating the battery on this site outweighs the cons, thus this project is in the public interest and should be approved with the appropriate conditions.

I strongly object to the proposed Kamay BESS being built in Kurnell.

My main concerns are community safety, noise, environmental impact and the location of the site so close to homes.

Residents already live alongside significant industrial and fuel infrastructure. Adding a large-scale battery facility in such close proximity to homes is an unacceptable additional risk, particularly when Kurnell has limited road access and essentially one main road in and out.

Noise is also a major concern. The ongoing hum from cooling systems, transformers and other equipment could significantly affect nearby residents, particularly at night when background noise is lower. People should not have to live with constant industrial noise in their homes.

I am also concerned about the potential consequences of a battery fire or other major incident occurring so close to residential areas, environmentally sensitive land and existing fuel infrastructure.

Kurnell has already carried more than its share of industrial development. There are better locations for large scale battery storage that provide greater separation from homes and sensitive environments

I strongly urge the decision makers to reject this proposal and investigate alternative locations

I am 100% opposed to the Kamay BESS proceeding at this location

Objection to the Proposed Kamay Battery Energy Storage System, Kurnell

I am writing as a lifelong Kurnell resident to formally object to the proposed Kamay Battery Energy Storage System at Kurnell. I have lived in Kurnell for 40 years and am now raising my children here. This is our home, and I care deeply about the safety, environment and future of our community.

While I understand the need for renewable energy and reliable electricity storage, I do not believe this is an appropriate location for a large-scale battery facility.

My biggest concern is the safety of our community and our children. Large battery storage facilities can present significant fire and emergency management risks. Kurnell is a geographically constrained peninsula with limited road access, which raises serious concerns about evacuation and emergency response in the event of a major incident.

I am also concerned about the potential impact on our environment and waterways. Kurnell is surrounded by sensitive coastal areas, native wildlife, Kamay Botany Bay National Park and significant Aboriginal cultural heritage. A major fire or chemical incident could have serious consequences for these areas.

Kurnell has already carried a significant industrial burden for generations. After 40 years of living here, I have seen firsthand how much industry already surrounds our community. I do not believe our suburb should continue to be treated as the default location for additional large-scale industrial infrastructure.

The cumulative impact on residents, including safety, emergency response, environmental risks, traffic, noise and our overall quality of life, needs to be properly considered.

I strongly urge the NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure to reject the proposed Kamay Battery Energy Storage System at Kurnell.

Kurnell is a community, not simply an industrial location. I want my children to grow up in the same safe, unique community I have called home for 40 years. I believe our residents, environment and the future of Kurnell deserve to be protected.

Please formally record my objection as part of the assessment of SSD-92494458.

Yours sincerely,
Kurnell Resident

BESS projects are critical to a clean energy future for Australia. People who claim they are prone to fires or other hazards are either wrong, or intentionally working in bad faith based upon ideology. Clearly oil and gas infrastructure is more dangerous e.g. the Geelong refinery fire in April 2026.

Build the BESS away from our national parks, homes and schools. It should be located in an area with better road access and multiple evacuation routes in the event of an emergency. Kurnell is already a ticking time bomb when it comes to emergency access and evacuation, and adding a major BESS facility here would only increase the risk to the local community.

I think we need to get projects like this moving asap. Batteries are perfect for soaking up excess solar power during the day for use at peak times.

To whom it may concern:
I wish to formally object to the proposed Kamay Battery Energy Storage System (BESS).
While I recognise the role renewable energy may play in NSW's future energy supply, I do not believe this large-scale battery development is appropriate for this location.
My concerns include the potential for battery fire and thermal runaway, toxic smoke, contaminated fire-water runoff, noise from cooling systems, construction and operational traffic, environmental impacts and the ability of emergency services to safely respond to a major incident.
I am also concerned about the cumulative impact of large-scale energy infrastructure on surrounding communities and whether sufficient consideration has been given to the long-term environmental, safety and amenity impacts of the development.
Given the potential consequences of a major battery incident, I believe the project should only proceed if it can be demonstrated through independent and rigorous assessment that the risks to surrounding residents, the environment and emergency services are genuinely acceptable.
For these reasons, I respectfully request that the proposed Kamay BESS not be approved.
Yours sincerely,

I object to the proposed Kamay Battery Energy Storage System in Kurnell.

My reason is simple. Kurnell already has enough risk.

We already live beside the Ampol fuel terminal, which stores large amounts of fuel and is classed as a Major Hazard Facility. I do not believe another development with its own fire and safety risks should be added so close to our homes.

The proposed BESS would contain a very large number of lithium batteries. Battery fires can be difficult to control and can produce smoke and toxic gases.

Kurnell also has only one main road in and out. If there was a serious emergency, residents would all be relying on the same road while emergency services were trying to get into the area.

As an elderly resident, this is a real concern for me.

I understand that Ausgrid says the risks can be managed, but I do not believe Kurnell should keep being asked to accept more industrial risk simply because we already have industry here.

We have lived with the fuel terminal for many years. That is enough.

I ask the Department to refuse the Kamay BESS at this location and require Ausgrid to find a safer and more suitable site.

This project bring forth broader food-security and land-use grounds.
Food security depends on maintaining access to land, water and resilient environmental systems.
I am concerned about the cumulative conversion of land around major urban areas to permanent infrastructure and the loss of future options.
I am not claiming that this particular site is currently a major food-producing farm. Rather, my concern is that planning decisions should consider whether land could have future value for food production or other essential uses.
The Department should require the applicant to explain why this location is preferable to alternatives that may have fewer long-term land-use conflicts.
Any approval should require eventual restoration of the site.