Modification 1 - Underground Transmission Line

The energy transition from coal in Australia has gone as far as it can go with existing storage technology.

The reason is explained in four pieces from The Spectator.

1. A simple demonstration that wind power will not work in Australia due to the need for continuous input to the grid, the interruption of wind power by wind droughts, and the lack of storage at the scale required to bridge the gaps.
https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/02/the-iron-triangle-of-energy-realism/

2. On wind droughts and lack of storage in Australia. When the next coal power station closes, every wind drought will threaten the power supply and prolonged wind droughts will be potentially catastrophic.
https://spectator.com.au/2022/07/energy-policy-where-parallel-universes-are-set-to-collide/

3. The vital importance of “wind literacy.” Wind droughts have been recognized in Australia for a long time but defective advice (neglecting the droughts) resulted in the the worst policy blunder in our history. This is connecting subsidised and mandated intermittent wind and solar power to the grid.
https://www.spectator.com.au/2022/11/the-voice-of-energy-realism/

4. How did the meteorologists hide the wind droughts?
https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/04/the-endless-wind-drought-crippling-renewables/?

ATTACHED IS A SUBMISSION THAT MAKES THE CASE AGAINST WIND POWER USING THE EXAMPLE OF A SERIOUS WIND DROUGHT IN JUNE 2020

Attention: Jess Watson
Planning Officer Energy Assessments, Department of Planning & Environment
T 02 9373 2845 E [email protected]

Riverina Modification Plan for Jindera Solar Electricity Generating Works - Modification 1- Underground Transmission Line - SSD-9549-Mod-1

Dear Sir/Madam
SOS objections to Jindera Solar Plant Modification

Save Our Surroundings objects to the proposed modifications to the solar works consented to on 22/12/2020 (underground transmission line, increased vehicle movements 242 to 292, increased number of invertors 25 to 38) just 3kms from the town of Jindera because the modifications and indeed the whole 120MWac solar works:

1. poses to many now known risks to the nearby residents, including INCREASED risks of fires, soil and water pollution, road accidents, and habitat destruction

2. will interfere with the enjoyment of the local inhabitants and visitors of the town and its surroundings by transforming rural lands into a huge industrial complex, both during construction and for decades afterwards

3. fails to have a social license from the communities

4. fails to define the source of its 240,000 PV solar panels, inverter stations and other equipment, which if sourced from China will include embedded greenhouse gases and possibly be partly produced by slave labour. It is already known it can require up to 10 years of electricity generation to offset the embedded CO2, but as Australia continues to close down its current coal fired power stations that period can only increase to the point that the CO2 will never be offset.

5. will add to the ever-increasing cost of electricity to the consumers as more and renewable energy capacity is introduced into our now fragile NEM. It is misleading for the Proponent to say its proposal will put downward pressure of wholesale prices when retail electricity bills have risen at its fastest rate in just the last decade since Australia embarked on replacing a cheap working electricity grid with a massively expensive renewables-based grid, which has not succeeded anywhere in the world in reducing electricity delivered to households and businesses

6. is following a pattern of getting approval for an initial project and then not undertaking any construction for years before applying for often a substantial expansion or selling the project. This drags out the anguish of local people as it is not the only project proposed/constructed/to be constructed so they have to go throughout the similar cycle year after year. That is very unfair!

We believe just these few objections are more than sufficient to reject the proposal.

Regards
Save Our Surroundings

Modification Plan for Jindera Solar Electricity Generating Works - Modification 1-Underground Transmission Line - SSD-9549-Mod-1
5/5/23
Atten. Jess Watson - Planning Officer

I strongly object to this project. We have past experience with these types of projects and that are passed on desk top reviews only. This is totally unacceptable. Why can't you make the effort and look into the DA's properly, visit the site, ask the locals and make a common sense decision. It is funny how all these projects have a disclaimer at the front. doesn't that tell you something?

Their claim that you get cheap reliable power is false. I am a food producer and rely on the weather everyday to grow food for the population of Australia and know first hand how unreliable it is. Why are not the public told that in a twelve month period wind only producers 30 to 35% of its name plate MW? How reliable is that.
The only thing free is the wind everything else costs a lot of money and human suffering to produce. No one takes into account the time, energy, resources, transport installing and especially the pulling down and cleaning up at the end of life. This cost is left out of any dicussion. The issue of slave labour to produce these panels has not been addressed properly. Who is policing this?
The promise of many jobs is a fass, at the end of constuction there will be less than a hand full of permanent jobs.
Regards, An Australian Food producer.

Water runoff-Storm water is very much a concern as adjoining neighbours to this Solar works section in Klinberg Road, the qualified reporting and management re erosion and contamination procedure. Ongoing testing and reporting of any problems associated with the sudden storm runoffs, clean ups and harm that this may cause.
Toxic risks as Solar panels age, damaged with hail, burnt etc. Contamination of the good agricultural land rendering it with great biodiversity risk as a close neighbour and when the Solar Works returns to agriculture capabilities. Also the carcinogenic and teratogenic smoke hazard risks for the surrounding farming community and Jindera township.
NSW Parliament Modern Slavery Act 2021-which commenced 1st Jan 2022- no slave labour supply chain components be used in construction this is very important aspect of Jindera Solar Works, residents here are well aware of this Act.
The increase in transport movements will be a constant concern both with congestion and road maintenance.
We are very opposed to this Solar plant being pushed through as a Significant project especially on good agricultural lands, due to false claims that this renewable energy will be cheap , reliable and Government ignoring any discussion on an alternative secure power for all Australians such as nuclear.

I wish to object to some aspects of Modification-1 Underground Transmission Line.
The increase in peak traffic volume during construction, upgrading and decommissioning increasing from 30 heavy vehicle movements a day to 80 heavy vehicle movements per day, is a substantial increase and will have an impact on my wellbeing and enjoyment of life. The modification proposal refers to this on P6 1.4 as '...slightly increasing traffic requirements ..'. I disagree. An increase of 166.67% could hardly be called slight!
In addition to the heavy vehicle movements there is also the 210 light vehicle movements in each of the peak hours (P14, 3.3)
Sounds pretty busy.
It seems no noise impact study was carried out on the traffic volume increases; it was only on inverters. This combined with the noise of the construction will make life very unpleasant for nearby receivers. Consider also the increase in dust in the dryer months.
The construction day is stated as 7am to 6pm. So, eleven hours to endure and even on Saturdays, starting at 7am once again (in NSW normally Saturday is an 8am start).

Whilst feeling that this objection is a futile exercise, I have some hope that somebody will consider the impacts these changes will have on nearby receivers and show some level of consideration to their right to enjoy their homes, without disruption.
I have no major objections to the other aspects of the modification proposal.

I object to this project on "environmental grounds" as the NSW DPIE & IPCN both neglected to assess the toxic contamination risks from solar panels. There is no plan mentioned for the clean up of toxic solar waste from storm/fire incidents etc. during the whole operational life of the Solar EG Works and the environmental harm caused by toxic solar fire residue and the carcinogenic smoke hazard risks for the surrounding community.

I also object on economic grounds since there is no evidence that electricity prices are headed any way but up, up, up. This puts cost-of-living pressures on everyone, but particularly on local residents who are forced to endure the total disruption and upheaval in their lives for a supposed benefit. Contrary to how the advantages are portrayed as 'creating jobs', this only amounts to around 200 employees for the 3-to-4-month peak of construction and thence just two to three operational staff for the life of the project. It's way more job destroying.

Objection attached

There is no mention of storm water management, we have flooding concerns for excess run off from panels on Dead Horse and Klinacroft creeks, can we have some clarification on what could be expected in a say a 50mm storm event?
No proper assessment of a heat island effect that will effect local agriculture activities, EIS is done a 13Ha installation when this site is over 500ha
The increase in local traffic is unacceptable as it was in the original EIS
Panel installations are still to close to residential homes and roads and create a visual eyesore.
No mentioned plan for clean up of solar toxic waste from storms/fire during the operation life of the project

I support this project.