MOD 2 - Worker accommodation facility and infrastructure changes

Issues we are facing

1. The enormous social and economic costs and lack of compensation to near neighbours of Renewable Energy infrastructure and transmission lines is grossly underestimated by all forms of Government and Renewable Energy developers. The cumulative impacts of multiple developments in our local area amplifies this disruption.

Examples are:

Telecommunication connectivity is an ongoing issue since Dinawan HUB construction began in 2023. The 463 bed camp has reduced our telecommunications to near zero.

No Road maintenance combined with hugely increased volume of traffic on single lane raw clay roads has left our roads in ruin.

Security issues – incidences of trespass and damage to properties

Insurance and liability – a huge issue for landholders neighbouring developments which is not being addressed by Project Developers or Government depts or insurance companies. Landholders need legislated protection from claims of damages to renewable infrastructure.

Fire Control – we rely heavily on fixed wing air support to contain fast running grassfires and are extremely concerned that aerial suppression will be compromised with wind turbines.

Social and environmental disruption, mental health, noise and visual disruption, potential decreased land values and the negative impacts on biodiversity are all major issues for our community.

2. Energy Companies are not only failing to acknowledge the hidden costs, stress, and concern about the unknown issues associated with neighbouring their developments, Little respect is shown in the negotiation of individual neighbour agreements by including unacceptable demands. Compensation varies greatly from one Project to another and in one case a large Project developer does not see it necessary to offer much in compensation for their project to go ahead.

Burden is placed on landholders to navigate these agreements with NO support.

Landholders are being pressured to sign agreements, to then lose any right to object to unforeseen detrimental effects that may occur at a later time.

NSW Planning guidelines are too one sided to the developers favour and in some cases being used by developers to minimise their commitment to a negotiated agreement.


3. The transmission lines and issuing of access rights in the SWREZ lacked detailed planning and Departmental scrutiny that Projects of this size and importance to the National Energy transition would in normal circumstances be required.

Example :

The granting of planning consent by NSW Planning to YDWF prematurely in December 2023 has resulted in many and extremely consequential modifications to the project through the EPBC.

There was No detail in original EIS of construction camp (for 890 employees), or camp location, no transmission route to access the Substation, incomplete surveys and gross understatement of disruption to native grasslands, Myall Woodlands and groundwater.

Statistical change in environmental impact from original EIS for YDWF to the amendments sort by the developer:

Natural Grasslands original impact 130 hectares - New Impact 418 hectares - 223% increase in impact

Weeping Myall Woodlands original impact 5 hectares - New impact 159 hectares - 2967% increase in impact

Superb Parrot original impact 31 hectares - new impact 319 hectares - 919% increase in impact

Total project impact on native vegetation originally approved by EPBC 130 hectares - new impact 1269 hectares for a total 978% increase in environmental impact.

4. The coordination of The Energy companies to minimise the environmental footprint in our unique landscape has been nothing short of a disgrace.

Examples: One Developer has the Dinawan Substation Hub landlocked and are not allowing other energy companies access to the substation, resulting in transmission lines along McLennons Bore Road and the unnecessary removal of protected Weeping Myall.

Transmission lines need coordinating with ALL stakeholders. We question the role of Energy Co in co-ordinating transmission lines to the Substation.


5. There doesn’t appear to be a NSW government department willing to make energy companies accountable for their actions.

Local government is not well enough resourced to manage compliance issues.

Under what circumstances would AMEO revoke an energy companies access licence?

6.​Community consultation and engagement has been inadequate as town ‘drop-in’ sessions are not attended by many towns people and they have little comprehension of the impacts of the development of REZ’s. We have suggested an open Q&A session with Energy Co and Project developers to increase transparency.

Where is the Cumulative Impacts Report that Energy Co has committed to (Too late )?
Energy Co committed to putting together a report on Cumulative Impacts. Was to be middle of last year, but nothing has been forthcoming?

Where is the NSW Governments review of the Just Terms Act which enables CGT ruling on Transmission Line compensation ?( Too late )

Please see the attachment for full response

When using acronyms it is best practice to spell it out in the first instance, and the first time used in each chapter. It makes the document easier for the general public to read.
You should include an acronym table at the front of the document if you are going to use acronyms without description in the executive summary.
Check your work, there are often double ups of words e.g. Table E-1 last paragraph has Significant. Significant progress….
Grammer is terrible throughout the whole document.
Mapping is inadequate, quite small, should be full page and scalable.
In the Appendix I there is reference to appendices, however, this document contains no appendices, if referring to appendices in another document, then this should point to the appropriate document.
Show the community some respect and at the very least spell road names correctly, e.g. Caddell Road pg 60 of the TTIA final is actually Cadell Road…
Policy and guidelines
The magnitude of increased biodiversity impact (including a greater than sevenfold increase in impacts to Myall Woodland EEC and over 700 ha of additional clearing) is inconsistent with the legal test for modification under section 4.55(2) of the EP&A Act. The proposal represents a materially different development and should be subject to a new development application and full reassessment.
Issues SEARs including supplementary SEARS for the Modified Project
The Project has failed to adequately address the specific risks as listed below (Appendix A protected matters relevant to the Yanco Delta Wind Farm)
• Lack of detail on the decommissioning stage of the proposed action, including waste removal and management.
• Further detail (with supporting evidence) of proposed measures to avoid, mitigate and manage the impacts on listed threatened species and ecological communities, including the use of enforceable language (‘will’, ‘must’, etc.) and consideration of the S.M.A.R.T Principle.
• Assessment of the proposed action against the principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD)
The modification report did not identify assess and mitigate impacts in relation to potential contamination as specified below (Supplementary SEARs).
• Identify, assess and mitigate social and economic impacts (both positive and negative) of the proposed action, including in relation to potential contamination (e.g. PFAS, PFOS and microplastics), impacts on agricultural land (including fire risk), sediment and erosion, impact of workers accommodation camp on roads/traffic, and impacts on the local community
BDAR and BAM-C
The BDAR explicitly acknowledges that the approved project did not assess a realistic disturbance footprint. This is inconsistent with the BAM requirement to assess the full extent of likely impacts and raises serious concerns regarding the validity of both the approved and modified biodiversity assessments.
The application of partial loss does not demonstrate a robust, evidence-based prediction of future vegetation integrity as required under the BAM. The proposed ongoing disturbance regime is likely to result in progressive degradation rather than maintenance of biodiversity values.
The BDAR adopts an inconsistent approach whereby species are assumed present for credit calculations but simultaneously described as unlikely to occur. This undermines the precautionary basis of the assessment and reduces confidence in both impact and offset calculations.
The conclusion that impacts to Plains-wanderer habitat have been avoided is not supported by a robust habitat assessment. The dismissal of mapped habitat based on land use classification is inconsistent with BAM requirements and risks underestimating impacts to this critically endangered species.
The turbine strike risk assessment is not supported by quantitative modelling or population-level analysis and therefore does not meet the requirements for assessing prescribed impacts under the BAM.
The BDAR does not demonstrate that impacts have been avoided and minimised to the greatest extent practicable as required under Chapter 2 of the BAM. The substantial increase in biodiversity impacts indicates that avoidance has not been a primary determinant of project design
The vegetation integrity assessment may not provide a sufficiently representative or robust dataset to support the assigned condition classes across the disturbance footprint, introducing uncertainty into ecosystem credit calculations under Chapter 4 of the BAM
The BDAR adopts inconsistent logic in applying assumed presence while asserting low likelihood of occurrence. This approach is not aligned with the precautionary framework underpinning species assessment in Chapter 5 of the BAM.
The assessment of prescribed impacts associated with turbine strike does not provide sufficient quantitative or population-level analysis to meet the intent of Chapter 6 of the BAM.
NSW EPA
There is no reference to the NSW EPA Waste classification
No clear compliance pathway demonstrated
Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997
No clear compliance with
waste avoidance and resource recovery act 2001 (NSW)
Battery stewardship schemes
Key concerns
The justification indicating that is is substantially the same development is weak, while it is still a wind energy generating project,
its impacts are excessively much larger than the approved EIS, they have to be when you are moving from a 253 ha project to one over 1100 ha.
There are significant increase in biodiversity impacts without a strong alternatives analysis
Alternatives presented for the connecting transmission line were superficial at best.
The traffic assessment underplays OSOM movements and safety risks.
Cumulative impacts are under analysed.
The BDAR appears superficial at best.
Background summary
Indicates that the Mod 2 was initiated due to constraints imposed by other transmission projects and existing transmission infrastructure.
Where in fact, personal comms between myself and the project lead at the time (insert comms date here) indicated that the changes were required because they had “inherited a non constructable project” Wednesday 14 May 2025.
This is also highlighted pg 23 of the “Engagement Outcomes Report”
“The increase in the project footprint is required for constructability and safe, efficient delivery of the Project.”
At no stage did they indicate that the reason for the modification was for any other reason.
To enable construction, they had to substantially increase the access roads, trenching for cables, areas for construction, inclusion of water treatment and concrete batching plants and connecting transmission line. This led to an excessive expansion of the disturbance footprint.
Engagement
The first inkling of engagement I was notified by concerned near neighbours that Origin was undertaking engagement activities in Coleambally and Jerilderie. As a near neighbour, I have never been approached or consulted by the Proponent, even after requesting information when I have attended the community session (run primarly by EnergyCo) I have been brushed off and not consulted with. I have initiated follow up phone calls on four separate occasions and have not received responses to my requests for information.
Recently I have reached out to a new comms and engagement person and have had less than satisfactory responses.
This is in contradiction to the statement
“Origin will maintain timely, accessible and appropriate communication of project information to enhance community understanding of project activities, outcomes and opportunities for involvement throughout all stages of the Modification Application and over the life of the Project” pg iii
Community engagement
Not well advertised
Not advertised with lead up time to organise availability
Project engagement team refused to engage meaningfully with near neighbours who are within 4 km of transmission line
Project refused to supply information on soil survey after repeated requests both in person, on the phone and online via email
Refused to engage in discussions surrounding safety and security from building a small town of 845 people but have not shown engagement with local law enforcement to help manage this influx of people especially in regard to rural crime where there has already been a spike in theft and trespass associated with the Dinawan substation build (while it is acknowledged that some of this has not been reported).
Consultation – the supplementary SEARS issued with the Modification 2 request indicates that
“The Department emphasises the importance of consultation during the preparation of the modification report and refers you to the Undertaking Engagement Guidelines for State Significant Projects. The Department’s expectation is that Applicants genuinely consider stakeholder views in project design and in identification of appropriate mitigation and management measures.”
From personal experience, it is my firm belief that the engagement to date has been disingenuous. There has been very little response from the Project team to near neighbours when very reasonable requests have been made.
Attachment A – Consultation “Provide evidence of consultation with all relevant stakeholders, including detail of how any issues raised have been addressed by the modification” – this can not be fully completed by the Project as they have not at any stage addressed any issues raised by myself. Engagement Outcomes Report states that non associated receivers within 8km of the project have been identified. I can clearly confirm that we had been missed, and we attended the engagement session in 2025 to highlight our concerns. The engagement activities include a “mail out” we did not receive any communication via email, mail or in person, ever. Agricultural livestock movements LLS legislation regulation requires traffic to give way to livestock, not the other way around. The project should not be burdened with additional

The 280 page document of Modifications to the Yanco Delta Wind Farm Project as submitted by Origin Energy are extensive and significant and although the “approved Project is substantially the same”, we argue that the cumulative modifications of worker’s accommodation, increased disturbance footprint, removal of vegetation for road widening and transmission line access to the Dinawan Hub amounts to an huge overall change to the original Project EIS that was granted Development Consent in December 2023.
In particular we are concerned with the following:
Access and Transport Routes
It would be preferable to confine the use of the local road network for all the pending developments in our area.
This would be to have ONE access point off Kidman Way for all developers . Cadell Road provides the ideal entry point off the Kidman Way opposite the Dinawan Substation, it would then mean all traffic would access their developments via McLennons Bore Rd ( western portion ) to Mabins Well exchange and south onto Wilson’s Rd in the case of Origin.
This proposal would concentrate the traffic to a route that will have less impact on local residences, reduce excessive capital expense on multiple road upgrades to accommodate the wishes of developers, reduce the unnecessary removal of multiple areas of roadside vegetation, reduce the need for multiple turning lanes off Kidman Way and ultimately reduce the maintenance costs to Murrumbigee Council post construction.
The original EIS suggested “The road network currently operates well within its capacity and have a satisfactory Level of Service (LoS). During Project construction, all the roads in the network would continue to operate at LoS A, with the exception of a section of Liddles Lane, and a section of the Jerilderie Street, which would experience a decrease in LoS from A to B during peak hours. All roads would continue to see a stable flow of traffic and no significant road performance impacts are anticipated”
“4,388 one way OSOM movements” listed to gain access via Jerrys Lane and Liddles will require significant road widening, vegetation removal and upgrading. In addition, there will be light vehicle access of ?? vehicles. This creates a huge burden to landowners along these roads for movement of stock, staff to and from work and day to day access.
Disturbance Footprint
The modifications include the addition of Worker Accommodation for 850 people, two extra OSOM route options, WTG relocations with increased disturbance footprint for foundations excavation and hardstand, increased disturbance for cable routes not on tracks, a 750mt 330kv line on Kidman Way to Dinawan and expansion of Dinawan substation, this has increased the disturbance footprint by 700% from 238ha to 1,625ha – as stated in the modifications. The inclusion of 30 wind towers south of The Yanco Creek which was originally outside the SWREZ and many kilometres from the rest of the Project is questioned. The impact of further transmission lines to link this portion to the main Project area is highly destructive to vegetation along roadsides and the impact of spanning The Yanco Creek requiring easements to a landowner with NSW Biodiversity Conservation Management Plans on their property is causing great angst.

Transmission Routes
Due to the NSW Energy Company’s consistent failure to coordinate projects and reduce the impact they will have in the SWREZ, we will be dealing with a spaghetti bowl of wires leading into the Dinawan Substation. The construction of the Dinawan Substation was outside of the initial SWREZ and this allowed for the landlocking of the substation by one developer. They utilised this to their advantage, preventing competing projects from gaining access via private land.
The proposed route from YDWF to the Dinawan Substation along McLennon’s Bore Rd will destroy a significant stand of Weeping Myall forest. The protection of native vegetation on our public roadsides provides a valued corridor for native vegetation and protected species.
In the initial EIS, the impact to this native vegetation was completely overlooked while the project was still given approval. Now the reality that large amounts of vegetation will need to be cleared shows the need for a better route. A neighbouring landholder who is hosting a competing project has offered land within their project boundary to reduce the impact to the native vegetation. It is our understanding that conversations between YDWF and the competing developer have stalled and so YDWF will push ahead with the clearing of land on public roads for transmission lines. It is now that NSW Department of Planning and Energy Co need to get all developers into the room together and orchestrate how the transmission into the substation will be completed. Competing projects are not constructing the most cost effective and efficient layouts for the energy grid as a whole. Ultimately the consumer will pay for this as power costs will be higher, and construction times longer.
Water
Due to the inclusion of Worker Accommodation for 850 persons in the Modification, the water requirements will be vastly increased. The Yanco region is key part of Murray-Darling Basin and construction of this size must consider the inter-catchment water dynamics and salinity thresholds. Regular soil and water monitoring of impact on groundwater and groundwater eco systems should be provided.
The project area includes flat, low-lying terrain prone to stormwater accumulation and surface runoff, particularly during flood events associated with the Murrumbidgee catchment system. There is risk of pollutants being transported into drainage channels, livestock water sources, and nearby cropland.
Telecommunications
The telecommunications in the region around the YDWF have been majorly affected by the implementation of the SWREZ. During the construction of the Project Energy Connect transmission line, the local community has dealt with major disruptions to telecommunications. There has been no solution to this and when the construction commences of 2 developments the local population will deal with even more disruption. While the YDWF has stated they will advocate with the Energy Corporation of NSW to develop a co-ordinated approach, we expect at a minimum that the local network receives an upgrade before early works are commenced.
Once works commence the local community will be dealing with constant phone call drop outs and internet service that does not provide any download or upload during the day while workers are out of camp and utilising the local telecommunications.
Many family farming businesses in the near vicinity to the project are dealing with major financial impacts while receiving little to no financial compensation. The funding of high quality telecommunications is required to lesson the impact to the local community. It will have immediate impact on the running of our businesses
Insurance and liability – a huge issue for landholders near wind/solar farms, particularly with fast moving grass fires which can be started inadvertently and escalate causing damage to renewable energy infrastructure, resulting in potential liabilities that may not be covered by standard farm public liability insurance.
We understand that the AEIC released a hold-harmless model in December 2025 intended to address concerns relating to farm public liability insurance. We would appreciate clarification as to whether this model is expected to become a mandated requirement for renewable energy developers constructing infrastructure that could potentially be affected by incidents originating on neighbouring farmland.
Security and Social Impacts
Incidences of break in, damage to private property and theft have been experienced to local landowners with the construction of Transgrid line and this is an ongoing concern with the increase in workers in the district. Noise, fire risk and visual impacts will carry a heavy toll on farming families used to the quiet, undisturbed landscape which is already impacting the mental health of those closely affected.
In finishing, it is unbelievable that a Major Project of this importance could be submitted in a rushed and incomplete manner with so many crucial issues lacking – worker’s camp for 850 – where were workers expected to come from??? Additional biodiversity and cultural heritage surveys required which are crucial to protect the native flora and fauna to the area. Increase in footprint disturbance of 700%. Roads not requiring any upgrades when 4,388 one way OSOM movements are now in the Modifications. Advice given by Energy Co representatives at a “drop in information sessions” was that each Project given access to the grid was scrutinised carefully. These Modifications do not reflect this.

The 280 page document of Modifications to the Yanco Delta Wind Farm Project as submitted by Origin
Energy are extensive and significant and although the “approved Project is substantially the same”, we
argue that the cumulative modifications of worker’s accommodation, increased disturbance footprint,
removal of vegetation for road widening and transmission line access to the Dinawan Hub amounts to
an huge overall change to the original Project EIS that was granted Development Consent in December
2023.
In particular we are concerned with the following:
Access and Transport Routes
It would be preferable to confine the use of the local road network for all the pending developments in
our area.
This would be to have ONE access point off Kidman Way for all developers . Cadell Road provides the
ideal entry point off the Kidman Way opposite the Dinawan Substation, it would then mean all traffic
would access their developments via McLennons Bore Rd ( western portion ) to Mabins Well exchange
and south onto Wilson’s Rd in the case of Origin.
This proposal would concentrate the traffic to a route that will have less impact on local residences,
reduce excessive capital expense on multiple road upgrades to accommodate the wishes of developers,
reduce the unnecessary removal of multiple areas of roadside vegetation, reduce the need for multiple
turning lanes off Kidman Way and ultimately reduce the maintenance costs to Murrumbigee Council
post construction.
The original EIS suggested “The road network currently operates well within its capacity and have a
satisfactory Level of Service (LoS). During Project construction, all the roads in the network would
continue to operate at LoS A, with the exception of a section of Liddles Lane, and a section of the
Jerilderie Street, which would experience a decrease in LoS from A to B during peak hours. All roads
would continue to see a stable flow of traffic and no significant road performance impacts are
anticipated”
“4,388 one way OSOM movements” listed to gain access via Jerrys Lane and Liddles will require
significant road widening, vegetation removal and upgrading. In addition, there will be light vehicle
access of ?? vehicles. This creates a huge burden to landowners along these roads for movement of
stock, staff to and from work and day to day access.
Disturbance Footprint
The modifications include the addition of Worker Accommodation for 850 people, two extra OSOM
route options, WTG relocations with increased disturbance footprint for foundations excavation and
hardstand, increased disturbance for cable routes not on tracks, a 750mt 330kv line on Kidman Way to
Dinawan and expansion of Dinawan substation, this has increased the disturbance footprint by 700%
from 238ha to 1,625ha – as stated in the modifications. The inclusion of 30 wind towers south of The
Yanco Creek which was originally outside the SWREZ and many kilometres from the rest of the Project is
questioned. The impact of further transmission lines to link this portion to the main Project area is
highly destructive to vegetation along roadsides and the impact of spanning The Yanco Creek requiring
easements to a landowner with NSW Biodiversity Conservation Management Plans on their property is
causing great angst.

Transmission Routes
Due to the NSW Energy Company’s consistent failure to coordinate projects and reduce the impact they
will have in the SWREZ, we will be dealing with a spaghetti bowl of wires leading into the Dinawan
Substation. The construction of the Dinawan Substation was outside of the initial SWREZ and this
allowed for the landlocking of the substation by one developer. They utilised this to their advantage,
preventing competing projects from gaining access via private land.
The proposed route from YDWF to the Dinawan Substation along McLennon’s Bore Rd will destroy a
significant stand of Weeping Myall forest. The protection of native vegetation on our public roadsides
provides a valued corridor for native vegetation and protected species.
In the initial EIS, the impact to this native vegetation was completely overlooked while the project was
still given approval. Now the reality that large amounts of vegetation will need to be cleared shows the
need for a better route. A neighbouring landholder who is hosting a competing project has offered land
within their project boundary to reduce the impact to the native vegetation. It is our understanding that
conversations between YDWF and the competing developer have stalled and so YDWF will push ahead
with the clearing of land on public roads for transmission lines. It is now that NSW Department of
Planning and Energy Co need to get all developers into the room together and orchestrate how the
transmission into the substation will be completed. Competing projects are not constructing the most
cost effective and efficient layouts for the energy grid as a whole. Ultimately the consumer will pay for
this as power costs will be higher, and construction times longer.
Water
Due to the inclusion of Worker Accommodation for 850 persons in the Modification, the water
requirements will be vastly increased. The Yanco region is key part of Murray-Darling Basin and
construction of this size must consider the inter-catchment water dynamics and salinity thresholds.
Regular soil and water monitoring of impact on groundwater and groundwater eco systems should be
provided.
The project area includes flat, low-lying terrain prone to stormwater accumulation and surface runoff,
particularly during flood events associated with the Murrumbidgee catchment system. There is risk of
pollutants being transported into drainage channels, livestock water sources, and nearby cropland.
Telecommunications
The telecommunications in the region around the YDWF have been majorly affected by the
implementation of the SWREZ. During the construction of the Project Energy Connect transmission line,
the local community has dealt with major disruptions to telecommunications. There has been no
solution to this and when the construction commences of 2 developments the local population will deal
with even more disruption. While the YDWF has stated they will advocate with the Energy Corporation
of NSW to develop a co-ordinated approach, we expect at a minimum that the local network receives an
upgrade before early works are commenced.
Once works commence the local community will be dealing with constant phone call drop outs and
internet service that does not provide any download or upload during the day while workers are out of
camp and utilising the local telecommunications.

Many family farming businesses in the near vicinity to the project are dealing with major financial
impacts while receiving little to no financial compensation. The funding of high quality
telecommunications is required to lesson the impact to the local community. It will have immediate
impact on the running of our businesses
Insurance and liability – a huge issue for landholders near wind/solar farms, particularly with fast
moving grass fires which can be started inadvertently and escalate causing damage to renewable energy
infrastructure, resulting in potential liabilities that may not be covered by standard farm public liability
insurance.
We understand that the AEIC released a hold-harmless model in December 2025 intended to address
concerns relating to farm public liability insurance. We would appreciate clarification as to whether this
model is expected to become a mandated requirement for renewable energy developers constructing
infrastructure that could potentially be affected by incidents originating on neighbouring farmland.
Security and Social Impacts
Incidences of break in, damage to private property and theft have been experienced to local landowners
with the construction of Transgrid line and this is an ongoing concern with the increase in workers in the
district. Noise, fire risk and visual impacts will carry a heavy toll on farming families used to the quiet,
undisturbed landscape which is already impacting the mental health of those closely affected.
In finishing, it is unbelievable that a Major Project of this importance could be submitted in a rushed
and incomplete manner with so many crucial issues lacking – worker’s camp for 850 – where were
workers expected to come from??? Additional biodiversity and cultural heritage surveys required
which are crucial to protect the native flora and fauna to the area. Increase in footprint disturbance
of 700%. Roads not requiring any upgrades when 4,388 one way OSOM movements are now in the
Modifications. Advice given by Energy Co representatives at a “drop in information sessions” was that
each Project given access to the grid was scrutinised carefully. These Modifications do not reflect this.

I wish I could share the confidence that these projects are being properly scrutinised, but the pattern suggests otherwise The NSW Independent Planning Commission appears to approve the vast majority of applications and rarely, if ever, refuses one outright, which raises serious concerns about the integrity of the process

Even more concerning is what happens after approval Developers routinely return with modification requests, and these too are almost always approved regardless of the objections raised by local communities It creates the impression that the initial approval is only the beginning of a rolling process where projects can expand or change with little real accountability

Evidence presented through parliamentary inquiries and recorded in Hansard shows this is not an isolated concern but a widespread one There have been more than 150 documented instances of community opposition across Australia, along with hundreds of formal submissions and letters objecting to the industrialisation of productive agricultural land and the imposition of high voltage transmission infrastructure, including land acquisition across farming regions

Voices from within regional communities are also raising alarm Gary Stroll has described the situation as absolutely diabolical for rural areas, arguing that no one in these communities truly benefits from the developments

The use of large workers camps further undermines claims of regional benefit These camps are largely self contained, with accommodation, catering and even licensed facilities such as bars provided on site, meaning workers have little reason to spend in local towns Instead, they place additional strain on local resources such as water and diesel while contributing very little to the surrounding economy There are also growing concerns within rural communities about the social impacts of large temporary workforces, including increased pressure on local policing and reports of antisocial behaviour, concerns which are often raised by residents but dismissed without thorough investigation or transparent reporting

Meanwhile, it is local residents and ratepayers who are left to deal with the consequences, including damaged roads, increased traffic and long term impacts on agricultural land and community wellbeing It is not reasonable that the cost of this infrastructure is effectively shifted onto rural communities while the benefits flow elsewhere

This process needs genuine reform, with stricter assessment, greater transparency and real consideration given to the people who live and work in these regions rather than treating their concerns as an afterthought

I am a directly affected adjoining landholder submitting on behalf of Silesian Downs Pty Ltd, RL & AH Rollinson Pty Ltd, and RB Rollinson Pty Ltd with properties spanning the entire length of Origin's proposed power line corridor along McLennons Bore Road, Wilson Road and Cadell Road.

I am not opposed to renewable energy development. I am a host landholder for the Dinawan Energy Hub, a member of the VNI West Community Consultative Group, and I have engaged constructively with renewable energy proponents throughout the development of the South West REZ. My concerns are specific to the scale, conduct and local consequences of this modification.

**This is not a minor modification.** Modification 2 represents a more than five-fold increase in full-loss biodiversity impact (from 174 ha to 946 ha), a 208-turbine single-stage construction program, a workers' camp for up to 420 personnel, major transmission changes including 6.8 km in the Cadell Road reserve, and an additional oversize/overmass transport route from Adelaide. It should be assessed on the basis of what it actually proposes, not on the basis of the label applied to it.

**Road and traffic impacts are inadequately assessed.** The Traffic and Transport Impact Assessment projects 527 two-way daily movements in peak construction months and 4,388 one-way oversize/overmass movements over the construction period, falling heavily on low-volume unsealed roads that farming businesses and residents depend on. Goolgumbla Road — the primary access road for my properties — is not assessed at all. The workers' accommodation traffic has not been included in the overall road impact assessment. Constructing 208 turbines in a single stage on roads of this standard is operationally unrealistic. The construction of Project EnergyConnect provides a direct precedent: roads in this region sustained significant damage under similar construction pressures. Those lessons have not been incorporated here.

**Cumulative impacts have not been properly assessed.** This project will be built concurrently with the Dinawan Wind Farm, Dinawan Solar Farm and VNI West. The conclusion that the network will remain "within capacity" is the wrong test. It does not measure the compounding physical deterioration of specific unsealed roads under years of heavy traffic from multiple concurrent projects — particularly during wet weather periods.

**Origin has not genuinely considered viable alternative routes.** I approached Origin directly about using the firebreak on my property on the northern side of McLennons Bore Road as an alternative transmission corridor. I offered the easement and free access for biological surveys. I then made a formal EPBC submission in June 2025 supporting this corridor to avoid clearing Weeping Myall woodland and Black Box–Lignum woodland. The firebreak route would also deliver cost savings to Origin by minimising road relocations and reducing tower requirements. Origin rejected this option, citing landholder consent as an obstacle. That claim is factually incorrect — my family proposed the alternative. Origin also cited a native title claim on the Travelling Stock Reserve as justification, yet Origin's own proposed route runs through the same TSR. That argument cannot credibly apply to the alternative but not to Origin's chosen route.

**Biodiversity impacts require independent scrutiny.** A more than five-fold increase in full-loss biodiversity impact cannot be accepted on the proponent's own offset calculations. The Department should require independent verification of the 31,406 ecosystem credits and 5,759 species credits claimed, and impose conditions that prioritise avoidance over offsets.

**Long-term accountability is unresolved.** Origin CEO Frank Calabria stated publicly in December 2025 that the company intends to develop the project, secure the offtake contract, and move most of it off balance sheet. If Origin exits after construction, there is no clear answer to who is responsible for road reinstatement, who enforces biodiversity offset obligations, or what financial security exists. Road reinstatement and offset obligations should be secured by bonds tied to the land and the approval, not to Origin as current proponent.

I ask the Department to require a road-by-road cumulative impact assessment, an independent engineering assessment of the 208-turbine single-stage construction program, assessment of Goolgumbla Road, a genuine comparative assessment of the firebreak easement alternative, independent verification of biodiversity offset calculations, and financial guarantees for reinstatement and offset obligations tied to the land.

Yanco Delta Wind Mod3 SAY NO TO! YANCO DELTA WIND FARM CEASE AND DESIST OUTRIGHT IMMEDIATELY.
Cease and Desist 208 turbines across 33,000ha Now!
Save Migratory Birds Critically Endangered!
Cease and Desist BESS. Moss Landing reasons!
Gross Mismanagement reasons please Dismiss gov.au Federal State Local Multinationals Global as a entity aiming Harm and Loss to All On Country Lands Waterways and Communities Australian and World's Unnecessarily and without consequences.
What is law?
A bit of this a bit of that to serve those as whoever they are in NSW State Government, named of course, Ministers of blah blah blah undergoing Gross Mismanagement yes, Gross, of a Once Pristine Waterways NSW to now having serious serious issues re Waterways to Murray and then to sea Southern Ocean Adelaide and surrounds where That SA State Premier somehow got back in, ignoring significant Murray River issues!
It just shows how little Australians generally have NO RESPECT for Water, basically!
Gross Mismanagement means what?
Obvious. Hey, are you there? Are you? What did I say? Hey?
Basically, Gross Mismanagement of the Murray Darling Basin Food Production Catchments, serving Every Australian, nb Every Australian, is Cumulative Impacts RE transition in on upon into over across Our Precious Precious Farmlands MDB for No reason at all when Alternatives exist to include Rooftops Only for all wind and solar energy generation for Households backed up for obvious reasons by Three and Only Three Brand New Low Emissions Coal Fired Power Stations built obviously same Catchments area as now - for obvious reasons, in NSW.
Gross Mismanagement Costs you see. Who? We as Australians and add Our Food, Water, Waterways, Land, and it is Land Land Land taken Offshore for Absolutely No reason at all.
Also affected effected by Gross Mismanagement of the state of NSW into Victoria into SA to the western shorelines southern Australia being Migratory birds, Endangered of course - for No reason at all- by Cumulative Impacts 3-Bladed Wind Turbines/Farms increasing NOT Ceasing Outright in Australia and the World.
Gross Mismanagement includes energy Wasted every day nb, just because nb. Not a good reason is it.
How Dare You all as gov.au Federal State and Local.
Cease and Desist Yanco Delta Wind Farms Mod3 plus the Wind farm Outright, for the Reason Threat to Critically Endangered Migratory Birds some of us are concerned for yes, some of us, yes!
Why aren't you, Labor Greens Teals Libs Nats as abhorrent representatives of peoples Australia NSW Vic SA WA QLD Tas NT , Unable to offer Care for Country Care To The All On Country Lands Waterways and Communities Australian and deal Appropriately with changes in the Entire Catchment region MDB, Our, Australians Ours, Precious Food Production Catchments nb, under Unnecessary Threats Unlike Ever before for No reason at all, being RE transition Unnecessary.
Add Origin marketing gas uh-oh - Not Gas !!! Most harming to Planet Earth Herself is Gas exploration/extraction. Isn't it Methane?
"Liquefied natural gas (LNG) is predominantly methane (CH₄), along with some ethane (C₂H₆). It is natural gas that has been cooled to liquid form for easier storage and transport". Says Search Assist, also saying:-" Yes, methane is a greenhouse gas that traps heat in the atmosphere, contributing significantly to global warming. It is more potent in its heat-trapping ability...". GGs are MAN MADE Only.
Well? Anyone there? Need some comments.
I say Shame on You All for Harming and Causing Loss to All On Country Lands Waterways and Communities Murray Darling Basin Food Production Catchments, and Vital, yes VITAL for Migratory Birds National and International, gov.au Federal State and Local just don't give a Damn about. Why is a Question yeah?
You get away with it you see. All your pathetic statements meaning Nothing, yes Nothing, when Not One Single action has been undertaken to LESSEN ANTHROPOGENIC CHANGES/IMPACTS/ TO ALL ON COUNTRY LANDS WATERWAYS AND COMMUNITIES MDB - A PRECIOUS CATCHMENT AREA SERVING ALL AUSTRALIANS NB TO INCLUDE THOSE EON-EVOLVED SPECIES GOV.AU FEDERAL STATE AND LOCAL DONT GIVE A DAMN ABOUT. WHY?
You tell me Why. You, as emailed you. Premier include. Yes you, hiding in your city away from us you Pathetic Coward you, without a Care toward OUR Lands Waterways Communities Rural MDB, Shame On You, and You, Minister for ohhh what ! How on Earth did you get those portfolios?? Minister for:-
-Environment
- Heritage
- Climate change
- Energy
Food Technology studied. Huh? City girl. Inner city now. Don't take risk OUR MDB just for an Experiment. UK be in view. Big Mistake created for nothing! Lessen Electricity usage if you want Net Zero! Oh dear oh dear.
Net Zero is A Scam! We know that. Why don't you???
Know Nothing, in other words. You know Nothing at all, nor Care for, about Catchments, Farming, Wildlife, Endangered Species because Wind Farms threaten all of the above. Do. Infrasound is a Issue Well Documented too. Won't affect you will it ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penny_Sharpe
Again I ask how did she get her current portfolios? She has No experience in any subject. No experience at all but gets to DECIDE MDB future, oh dear. How Does this happen? What it means is basically she has No idea how to Care for Country for Future Generations. Wind Farms won't do it. Plus they Kill, Maim, Harm, Cause loss to Endangered Species too. Critically Endangered include. I say Ban Wind Farms Now, Immediately Now.
Net Zero is A Scam. We know that. We do. It's Obvious.
The Waste of Energy in All forms, increasing nb, is DESPICABLE nb. Shame on you All as gov.au Federal, State and Local Multinationals Global!
Belgium - get Out of Our Country. Stay in yours. You use Nuclear. Nuclear is Banned in Australia. Yeah, so what are you doing here, Virya Energy, eh?? Claiming this and that. Sustainable Crap. Yes I said Crap.
I want My Country in Better hands than All of yours misleading the ignorant every day you don't fool us. You should all be Ashamed of yourselves!
Sack NSW Premier. 800 reasons he doesn't even know about! Oh that's what you get when City people Mismanage NSW Murray Darling Basin I need in My Care. I know what to do.
First thing will be to Moratorium Wind Farms, Solar Farms, BESS ( dear oh dear, talk about Heavy Metal Threat Fire Risks Toxic Risk evacuating populations , yet ignored still by you as gov.au Federal State and Local but HOW is a Question. Read all about Moss Landing.
Next - Dismiss gov.au Federal, State and Local. Gross Mismanagement reasons. Gross.
Next - Green Armies. Quick Quick Quick. 80,000 permanent jobs there yes yes yes, 80,000!
What next? Well you wouldn't know, gov.au Federal, State and Local because you haven't done a Thing to Protect, Restore, Repair, Protect More Wetlands nb nb nb Vital to Our future here on Australia.
I will put Mulloon Institute in charge of NSW, and Australia. Heaps of Jobs there - ALL CARING FOR COUNTRY AND ALL ON COUNTRY LANDS WATERWAYS AND COMMUNITIES RURAL AUSTRALIA for the Benefit of Next 8 Generations.
Energy - well USE LESS, BAN RENEWABLES AND BESS, BAN AI, KNOW WHY, LIVE SIMPLY, CARE FOR COUNTRY ALL ON COUNTRY, CARE FOR MOTHER EARTH, EH!!!

Ban AI is First actually. Australia is the Driest Continent on Earth. Hint hint.
Ban AI - a Globalist attack on Catchments serving L i f e, Minds, Societies, Children, and so on. Ban AI Now. No need for RE transition. No need. Hopefully Society will Awaken and Change Dramatically its Attitude toward Nature - a Phenomena, they will finally Respect and Care for.
Dismissing Critically Endangered Species shows such Disrespect toward Endangered Species Australian and Should be Dealt with!!!
L i f e, Life. Are you Alive or Robots? You cannot continue in your current positions you see. I mean - All of those as gov.au Federal, State and Local. Don't worry. You'll get a Job planting Trees for the Rest of your Lives and saying Sorry to the Land you have Not understood or Cared for. Add Water you have No Respect for. Where is that Minister for Agriculture. Hmmm. Hmmm. I haven't looked that one up yet. I don't need to. All Ministers for NSW Government are Complicit in Harm and Loss to Precious Precious Precious Farmlands including Murray Darling Basin Food Production Catchments, plus Endangered Species National, International, Migratory, Under International Agreements - for No reason, No reason at all when Alternatives to energy generation exist that are NOT such a High Cost All Round.
Origin..hmmm...endangerment of a Critically Endangered Species by a Wind Farm proposal within their Habitat region. Suggesting mitigation attempts will what - protect them?? Come off it!! Eagles are gone in our region you see. Smaller Wind Turbines too. Nesting pairs gone once enjoyed by farmers enjoying their Eagle friends bringing up families every year or so. They don't see them any more. Understand ? What's it say? Moratorium Wind Farms in Australia Immediately thanks and do so thanks. Surely a Critically Endangered Species is far More important than a High Cost All Round Wind Farm, Inappropriately located in a Critically Endangered Species habitat region. Why increase the Risk to this Critically endangered species. MAKES NO SENSE!!!
Migratory refers to the seasonal movement of animals, particularly birds, between different habitats, usually for breeding or feeding purposes. This behavior is often driven by changes in climate and food availability.
Everything would have been fine and cheap for Every Australian if Coal Fired Power Stations had been maintained and updated and built anew for future generations Australians, benefiting yes Benefiting. No Threat to Migratory Species all over Australia either, as is RE transition- Ridiculous, Costly, Inappropriate and in no way shape or form able to tackle address stop Anthropogenic Changes To Environments Australian causing Changes To Environments Eon-Evolved. Get it?
So who is Responsible for the MESS we are in?

Noise, fire risk and visual impacts will carry a heavy toll on farming families used to the quiet,
undisturbed landscape which is already impacting the mental health of those closely affected. We travel
to and from work and to Jerilderie and schools and worry about safety with huge increase in volume of
traffic on dirt roads and Wind Farm workers who are not used to sharing roads.

The increased load on the telecommunications services is also a concern, we already have very limited reception which impacts daily life and can be essential in an emergency. The load on services such as starlink is also felt by those of us who run business' and rely on it.

I strongly object to the proposed Modification 2 to the already approved Yanco Delta Wind Farm project. This modification specifically seeks approval for a worker accommodation facility along with associated infrastructure changes, and it is deeply concerning that such a significant component was not fully addressed in the original approval. The introduction of a large workers camp, together with changes to turbine locations, road widths, access routes and an increased disturbance footprint, represents a substantial expansion of the project in both scale and impact. This raises serious concerns about transparency and suggests an incremental approach to development where key impacts are introduced after initial consent, rather than being properly assessed upfront.

The proposed worker accommodation facility approximately 10 kilometres from Jerilderie will place additional and ongoing pressure on already constrained regional resources, particularly water and diesel fuel supplies. In the current national climate, these demands cannot be dismissed as minor or temporary. As noted by Professor Ivan Kennedy, large scale energy developments can impose cumulative burdens on essential services that are often underestimated at the planning stage. The logistics of supporting a large, remote workforce further compound these pressures, creating demand for water, fuel, waste management and transport that is difficult to sustain without impacting local communities.

There are also serious concerns regarding governance and transparency in associated infrastructure planning. The Dinawan substation, which is integral to the transmission of electricity generated by this project, cannot be separated from the overall development. Reports of closed meetings and altered proceedings relating to the NSW Independent Planning Commission raise questions about whether community input has been fairly considered. When critical enabling infrastructure is addressed in a way that limits open participation, it undermines public confidence and suggests that the cumulative impacts of interconnected developments are not being fully disclosed.

International experience demonstrates that large scale renewable installations can result in long term and sometimes irreversible land contamination. Overseas cases have documented issues arising from turbine component degradation, including leaks of oils and coolants, as well as failures in Battery Energy Storage Systems leading to fires and toxic runoff. In addition, damaged or broken solar panels have been shown to release heavy metals into soils, while the breakdown of protective outer coatings can contribute to the leaching of persistent chemicals such as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances. These forms of contamination are extremely difficult to remediate and can leave lasting impacts on agricultural land and water systems.

Finally, the burden of associated infrastructure must be addressed. The expansion and heavy use of local road networks during construction and maintenance will inevitably result in accelerated degradation. In many cases, once construction is complete, responsibility for these roads falls to local councils, leaving Shires and ratepayers to fund ongoing repairs and upgrades. Without enforceable guarantees from the developer, this represents an unfair and unsustainable transfer of cost to the community.

Given that this modification introduces significant new impacts to an already approved project, it should not be treated as a minor amendment. A full and transparent reassessment is required to properly consider the environmental, social and economic consequences and to ensure that regional communities are not left bearing long term costs and irreversible impacts.

I am a young adult who has grown up in rural Australia, and I am writing because this directly affects the future I am hoping to have here. This modification to the already approved Yanco Delta Wind Farm, especially the addition of a large workers camp, does not feel like a minor change. It is deeply concerning that the need for a workers camp was not included in the original application. It feels like the developers are only now admitting it, after the project was approved, which comes across as an attempt to avoid scrutiny and to deceive the community. The full impact of this addition on our town and our land has not been properly assessed.
What worries me most is the long term impact on the land and environment. Large scale energy projects overseas have caused contamination from turbine leaks, battery failures, damaged solar panels and chemicals in protective coatings. These risks affect soil, water and farming land, and once contamination happens it is often irreversible. People my age will be the ones living with these consequences long after construction is finished.
I am also uneasy about the impact of a large workers camp. This is a small town where people feel safe and connected. Bringing in a large number of outside workers all at once will change that. It will put pressure on local services and raise real concerns about safety and community wellbeing. These are not things that can just be brushed aside. They need to be properly planned for, and I do not feel confident that they have been.
The area now known as the South West Rez is getting smashed and inundated with installations. We will have a spiderweb of transmission lines and a big 500 volt line weaving its way through food producing agriculture. This is not just a visual or local issue. It will affect farmland, water systems and the safety of communities living next to heavy infrastructure that carries high voltage power. Where is the consideration for the next generation future?
Another serious concern is fire risk. Many people in our community are volunteer firefighters, and they already put themselves in danger to protect homes and land. High voltage lines like the proposed 500 volt lines can produce lightning-like discharges, and fires from such incidents cannot be safely fought from the air using water bombing. Introducing this much infrastructure increases the risk to both firefighters and residents, and it seems there has been little explanation of how these risks will be managed.
There are many concerns about transparency and whether the community is being properly heard. The fact that the workers camp was not included in the original proposal makes it hard to trust that the developers are being honest. Decisions appear to be made after approval, with key impacts added later, rather than being assessed fully and openly from the start. I keep coming back to a few questions that matter to me. How will the developers guarantee that our land and water will be protected not just now but into the future? What happens if contamination occurs and who is held responsible? How will they ensure that people in Jerilderie feel safe with a large workers camp nearby? How will fire risks from high voltage infrastructure be managed, especially for volunteer firefighters who put themselves in danger? And how can young people like me trust that our future is being properly considered in these decisions?
I choose to live in the rural landscape, and I should be able to feel confident about its future. Right now, I do not. Until there are clear, honest answers and proper reassessment, this modification should not go ahead.

This is a comprehensive condemnation of Origin’s Yanco Delta SWINDLE FACTORY – Modification 2
208 Turbines - 1,500 MW
BESS 800 MW / 800 MWh
Footprint: 33,000 hectares
Location: Jerilderie–Coleambally
Edward River Council
SSD-41743746-Mod-2

This is no “renewable energy project.” It is a predatory industrial incursion into productive rural communities, masquerading as clean energy development, imposing massive, destructive infrastructure on unwilling landowners and residents.

1. Environmental Carnage
Biodiversity Devastation:
Direct removal of 1,176 hectares of native vegetation, including threatened ecological communities and habitats for threatened flora and fauna.
Biodiversity offsets proposed are farcical money-making exercises; there is no credible evidence that offsets will ever compensate for the permanent destruction of ancient ecosystems.
Cumulative impact with despicable Dinawan Wind/Solar and obnoxious Argoon Wind multiplies ecological destruction across the region.

Toxic Contamination & Fire Risk:
Turbines shed toxic Bisphenol A, PFAS, and asbestos.
BESS (Battery Energy Storage Systems) pose catastrophic fire hazards and release lethal hydrogen fluoride gas when they typically explode in flames.
Wake effect of turbines dries out the landscape, further endangering fire-prone areas and biodiversity as well as reducing agricultural productivity.
Aircraft tankers required for emergency firefighting are unable to operate over the turbine fields—a risk entirely ignored by Origin and the Modification 2 Report.

Air, Water, and Soil Destruction:
Increased construction traffic and site works elevate sedimentation, soil compaction, and contamination risks.
Watercourses and groundwater are vulnerable to pollution from construction runoff, chemicals, and leachates.
Local soils and agricultural productivity are directly threatened—food security for the region will be jeopardised.

2. Social and Community Harm
Invasion of Rural Communities:
Temporary Workforce Accommodation (TWA) 10 km from Jerilderie imposes transient, largely male construction workforce on small towns.
Disruption to community cohesion, social infrastructure, and population composition is inevitable.
Roads, councils, and local infrastructure are ignored and decimated, leaving rural residents to bear the brunt of the destruction.

Deceptive Public Relations:
Local consultation has been superficial and misleading, with promises of cheap, clean, reliable energy being blatant lies.
The public is presented with propaganda while facing noise, dust, and visual blight. Turbines are sickeningly visible even from Jerilderie Racecourse!

3. Economic Absurdities and Energy Poverty
Intermittent, Inefficient Energy:
Wind capacity factor averages a pathetic 30%, insufficient to meet base load.
Requires 100% backup generation from fossil fuels, making claims of “reliable, efficient, affordable energy” entirely false.
Eye-wateringly expensive taxpayer subsidies and regulated returns for Sabotaging TransGrid and other predatory operators inflate electricity prices rather than reduce them.

Land Grab & Opportunity Costs:
33,000 hectares of productive agricultural land are being sacrificed for intermittent power that cannot ever reliably serve NSW communities.
Construction and operation of this ecocidal, fake green fraud will compromise food production, water access, and local employment in far superior, worthwhile industries.

Geopolitical & Supply Chain Risks:
Turbine and BESS components are China-reliant, threatening energy security and national security.
Vulnerable supply chains risk catastrophic outages, leaving the NSW public detrimentally exposed.

4. Legal, Regulatory, and Ethical Failings
This is a controlled action under the EPBC Act, yet the project ignores core principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development:
Precautionary Principle: Ignored; toxic hazards and ecological risks are underestimated.
Intergenerational Equity: Promises of clean energy totally fail; soil, water, biodiversity and the public will be poisoned for future generations.

Conservation of Biological Diversity: Biodiversity destruction is rampant and irreversible.

Efficient Use of Resources:
Energy generation is intermittent and wasteful; blade and lithium-ion battery recycling is non-existent.
NSW and Federal Governments have prioritised industrial wind scams over citizen welfare, enabling predatory operators to extract resources while leaving communities like Bundure, Jerilderie and Coleambally exposed to ecological and economic ruin.

5. Cumulative Impacts: Regional Devastation
Disingenuous Origin’s ecocidal Yanco Delta 208 toxic turbines + filthy Fire hazardous BESS, combined with:
Despicable Dinawan Solar: 750,000–2,000,000 heavy-metal leaching, PFOS-coated panels + filthy Fire hazardous BESS
Diabolical Dinawan Wind: 200 toxic turbines + filthy Fire hazardous BESS
Ghastly Argoon Wind: 106 toxic turbines + filthy Fire hazardous BESS
Result: Permanent environmental contamination, toxic chemical exposure, fire hazards, and landscape destruction across the South West Renewable Energy Zone.

6. Strategic and National Security Threats
Wind and BESS are unreliable, intermittent, and unethical supply-chain dependent, threatening food security, energy reliability, and national sovereignty.
Essential services, including emergency firefighting and agricultural operations, are compromised by turbine placement.
This disastrous plan undermines Australia’s viability, independence and the stability of our critical electricity grid which requires far superior and sovereign 24/7 coal power and future nuclear power industry capability which only needs a minimal environmental footprint which is critical for retaining Australia’s essential life-sustaining, uncontaminated food resource land, for economic stability, benefiting all our livelihoods, our energy security and vital national security.

7. Conclusion: A Project of Ruin
The Yanco Delta Wind Modification 2 project is a predatory, toxic, socially destructive, economically ruinous, and strategically hazardous swindle.
It:
Invades and disrupts productive rural communities against their will.
Permanently destroys biodiversity and arable land.
Risks toxic contamination, fire hazards, and air/water/soil pollution.
Provides intermittent energy with false economic promises, forcing reliance on costly backup.
Exposes Australia to geopolitical and supply chain risks while ignoring energy sovereignty.
Ignores all principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development.
Defies all aspects of the National Electricity Law Objective.

In short, this is not a renewable energy project—it is a RenewaBULL swindle: a toxic, intermittent industrial experiment masquerading as green energy, devastating rural Australia, enriching predatory corporations, and sacrificing the public interest and future generations.
This plan must be rejected outright before it imposes irreparable harm on land, water, biodiversity, the public and the Australian energy system.

We categorically reject and condemn Origin Energy’s Yanco Delta Wind SWINDLE FACTORY – Modification 2
This project is a toxic, predatory industrial incursion into productive rural communities that flagrantly prioritises corporate gain over human, environmental, and national interests.

1. NSW Planning Failure & Regulatory Negligence
NSW planners have never set foot on the site, failing basic due diligence while approving industrial-scale wind and battery infrastructure on prime agricultural land.
Predatory TransGrid and ACEREZ operations, including worker camps are receiving unlimited diesel, water, and aggregate under emergency services priority, while local food producers and communities are unjustly rationed and deprived.
This constitutes systemic mistreatment of rural NSW/Australia.
The NSW Energy Minister’s disgraceful mockery of upfront Decommissioning/Remediation Bonds as a “tax on renewables” demonstrates willful avoidance of responsibility for the inevitable environmental catastrophe.

2. Environmental & Public Health Devastation
Biodiversity: 1,176+ hectares of native vegetation destroyed; threatened ecological communities and species permanently displaced.
Toxic contamination: Turbines she’d Bisphenol A, PFAS, asbestos, and BESS units leak toxic contaminants and releasing lethal hydrogen fluoride gas when they catch fire.
Wake effects dry out landscapes, increasing fire hazards.
Cumulative impacts: Yanco Delta + Dinawan Wind/Solar + Argoon Wind = irreversible contamination of soil, water, and biodiversity, including the Murray and Murrumbidgee Rivers, Yanco Creek, and numerous, essential irrigation channels.
No credible waste or recycling plan exists for turbine blades or lithium-ion batteries.

3. Social & Community Harm
Transient workforce influx from onsite Temporary Worker Accommodation (TWA) threatens the local community, public safety, and social infrastructure.
Visual, noise, and dust pollution disrupt local life—turbines visible from Jerilderie Racecourse are totally unacceptable let alone the seriously detrimental noise and infrasound health impacts for neighbouring families and agricultural workers in the vicinity.
Local consultation has been deceptive or absent, with claims of cheap, reliable energy entirely false.

4. Economic & Energy Security Failings
Intermittent wind power has an average capacity factor of a pathetic 30%, requiring 100% fossil fuel backup.
Promised economic benefits are illusory; more toxic contaminating, pathetically intermittent wind factories and incapable, filthy BESS do not ever lower electricity prices, as proven by independent experts.
Australia’s food security energy security and national security is being shockingly jeopardised, relying on China-dependent supply chains for turbines and BESS components that can be remotely disabled.

5. Legal, Strategic & Ethical Breaches
The project flouts the Four Principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development: precautionary principle ignored, intergenerational equity violated, biodiversity conservation dismissed, and resource efficiency misrepresented.
No independent oversight or lifecycle regulation exists for imported toxic materials.
Official correspondence from ABF/DCCEEW confirms high-risk chemicals are entering Australia without essential regulation and legislation - leaving communities at the mercy of corporate negligence.
The most credible, independent Expert Witnesses such as Professor Ivan Kennedy are relentlessly highlighting the unacceptable lack of risk research - confirming PFAS, Asbestos, BPA contamination risks and SF6 GHG leakage yet government agencies continue to fast-track approvals without any genuine safeguards.

How Much Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) is to be Installed by Origin Energy in the Bundure District - Jerilderie-Coleambally area from Yanco Delta Wind Swindle Factory?
As Professor Ivan Kennedy recently highlighted -->

“How Much Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) to be Installed at Dinawan, Bullawah and Walcha?
Can Planning Minister Paul Scully guarantee that almost five hundred 300-metre-high wind turbines proposed at Dinawan and Bullawah for the Riverina and at Walcha in the Northern Tablelands will be free of serious environmental consequences if fast track approved in his recently announced No-appeal Public Hearing?
In fact, he can't because there is a legally negligent lack of diligent independence by public authorities like the IPCN and financial promoters in conducting environmental risk research in hot, dry Australia.
What are the effects on production of food and fibre by our farming community?
Submissions 53 to the Senate Inquiry into Energy of December 2024 and to the cross-border Warracknabeal Victorian Planning Panel meeting on December 9 (46 and 150), 2025 show the turbulent wake of wind turbines is very likely drying landscapes, possibly increasing bushfire intensity and there are serious questions to answer about long term environmental impacts of PFAS and Bis-Phenol A (BPA).
The Royal Australian Chemical Institute (RACI) recently drew attention to the need for prohibition of PFAS imports, recommending monitoring for long-lived PFAS used in turbine blades for tempering surfaces to limit corrosion of stressed longer blades.
Moreover, by 2027, both the EC and the UK intend to prohibit turbines lubricated internally with gaseous sulphur hexafluoride (SF6), 1 kilogram of which has greenhouse effects equivalent to 24.3 tonnes of carbon dioxide but a much longer lifetime of 3,200 years, so accumulating slowly from leakage.
It can also make toxic products if electrically arced.
Most turbines so far installed in Australia have at least 1 kg of SF6 and perhaps all of these should be dismantled now?
Mr Scully will also need to explain how these major Farrer Electorate installations and at Walcha will require farmers housing turbines to pay to clean up afterwards, just as our Premier, Chris Minns honestly explained recently about responsibility for decommissioning, possibly costing more than they will earn farmers leasing land while turbines operate.”
Ivan R. Kennedy
Professor Emeritus in Agricultural & Environmental Chemistry, University of Sydney Ph: 0413071796
Email: [email protected]

6. Total Lack of Social Licence
Local leaders, including Murrumbidgee Council’s Garry Stoll, state unequivocally: “There are no benefits – all pain and no gain. All social licence has been lost.”
The project continues to sacrifice productive land, water, biodiversity, and community wellbeing for the enrichment of predatory energy corporations.

7. Conclusion & Demand
Yanco Delta Wind – Modification 2 is not a renewable energy project; it is a predatory, toxic, intermittent industrial experiment. It is:
Poisoning life-sustaining land and vital water sources
Destroying biodiversity and rural communities
Threatening national food and energy security
Imposing immense economic, social, and intergenerational costs
We demand:
Immediate halt to Yanco Delta Wind – Modification 2.
Full implementation of upfront decommissioning and remediation bonds.
Comprehensive, enforceable regulation of imported PFAS, BPA, asbestos, and SF6-containing components.
Recognition that essential 24/7 coal and future nuclear power must underpin food security, energy security and national security.
The project must be rejected outright to prevent irreversible harm to rural NSW, Australia’s environment, and its people.

Damage Bills Mount as Renewables Rollout Leaves Councils Feeling Powerless - ABC News* - 27/02/2026
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-02-27/road-damage-bills-mount-amid-renewable-energy-rollout/106385356

IMPACT OF RENEWABLE ENERGY ZONES (REZ) ON RURAL AND REGIONAL COMMUNITIES AND INDUSTRIES IN NEW SOUTH WALES - HAY - 18/02/2026
https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/lcdocs/transcripts/3736/Transcript%20-%20CORRECTED%20-%20PC4%20-%20Renewable%20Energy%20Zones%20(REZ)%20-%2018%20February%202026.pdf

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DVNNTR5jxuV/

Origin used to be trustworthy & credible until they went WOKE & totally disingenuous.
They know full well that Eraring COAL is essential and financially viable.
They also know that Yanco Delta Swindle Factory is totally disingenuous, the antithesis of clean, cheap, reliable and secure energy - a total rip-off of electricity consumers and absolute curse to the SW FARRER Electorate who’ll be voting for ONE NATION because the Climate Change Department and Swindle Factories are on their hit list!👏

I support all the the modifications. The Yanco Delta Wind Farm will provide a welcome boost to the local economy. When the project is built and operational it will provide 30 permanent staff jobs. Our local schools have had declining numbers of students attending for many years. Jerilderie will welcome the additional student numbers.
The camp will host and provide essential onsite worker accomodation for 850/895 people building the Yanco Delta Wind Farm. The surrounding towns have very little available accomodation. Without the onsite worker camp site the project would not function efficiently.

We object to Origin’s Toxic Contaminating and irreversibly destructive Yanco Delta Bird/Bat Blender.
This proposed Swindle Factory is an environmental time bomb.
208 turbines, BESS facilities, and 33,000 hectares of industrialisation will contaminate life-sustaining soil and water with Bisphenol A, PFAS, and asbestos.
Origin claim “minimal impact,” yet these chemicals are persistent, bioaccumulative, and irreversible.
The local rivers, irrigation systems, and groundwater face permanent PFAS, BPA, Hydrofluoric Acid, Asbestos and Heavy Metal contamination.
This is unclean, unsustainable, toxic contaminating industrialisation of prime agricultural land under the guise of fake green “renewables.”

I support the Yanko Delta Wind Farm project. I personally know one of the farmers involved and understand how important opportunities like this can be for local farming families and small rural communities.
Farming can be unpredictable, and projects like wind farms help provide a stable additional income that allows farmers to keep their land productive and continue supporting their families. It also helps keep farms in local hands instead of being sold off when times get tough.
Developments like this also bring jobs and spending into small towns, which supports local businesses and services. Rural communities often miss out on large investments, so projects like the Yanko Delta Wind Farm can make a real difference.
At the same time, wind energy is an important part of creating cleaner electricity for the future. Supporting projects like this helps both regional communities and the broader transition to renewable energy.
For these reasons, I believe the Yanko Delta Wind Farm should be supported.

The project is a welcome relief to the local communities of Jerilderie and surrounding towns, that have been shrinking for decades. The local primary school has under 20 kids once had over 100.
These projects enable local business and community services to stay open in the future.
Thank you

I support the project

I believe the project will be better for the land to generate electricity than a coal mine. Coal mines rear up large chunks of land where Turbines are spread at quite a distance from each turbine and the land can still be used for farming.
Thank you

I support the workers camp being on farming land as it creates less impact on housing in Jerilderie.
Being situated well out of town is a good idea. The support will give the town a much needed boost creating jobs.