Romani Battery Energy Storage System

This toxic Chinese battery dump will permanently poison the irreplaceable Murrumbidgee catchment - Murray–Darling floodplain soils with TOXIC PFAS, PFOS, bis-FASI and lithium salts, turning food producing agricultural land into a poisoned, post-industrial wasteland/superfund site while the NSW Government knows this but keeps on lying by claiming that this ASBESTOS OF THE FUTURE is ‘clean & green.’

This Filthy, Toxic 800 MWh lithium-ion BESS provides zero synchronous inertia, zero fault-level contribution and zero system strength – it is nothing more than THE ASBESTOS OF THE FUTURE & a MARKET MANIPULATING, ENERGY POVERTY RIP-OFF with INCAPABLE, oversized phone batteries that will accelerate blackouts the moment the wind stops and the sun sets.

The EIS for Romani BESS irresponsibly, completely ignores the inevitable, irreversible POISONING of the people, the land, the water, the biodiversity - by omitting thermal-runaway cascade modelling – a single cell failure in one of Samsung’s SDI Mega E3 packs can release 6–8 MW of instantaneous heat and propel burning ejecta 100 m, more than enough to cause large-scale catastrophic fires spreading throughout the Booroorban district, as these BESS burn for days, frequently reignite, there’s no local Hazmat team & no Extinguisher certified by the CSIRO to fight Lithium-ion Battery Fires.
*CSIRO Advisory Note AN-004 Extinguishment of Lithium-Ion Battery Fires.
CSIRO explicitly states it "has not and will not certify … that any fire extinguisher can effectively extinguish a Li‑Ion battery fire." Verification Services

There is zero independent electrical engineering peer review proving this Romani BESS can actually arrest a 1,300 MW separation event on dodgy TransGrid’s unnecessary, unwanted SABOTAGING INTERCONNECTOR — AEMO’s own ISP admits grid-forming inverters are still “emerging technology” and unproven at scale.

This plan is part of the RUIN-A-BULL SWINDLE - an ECOCIDAL, ECONOMICALLY SUICIDAL, ENERGY POVERTY & NATIONAL SECURITY DISASTER!

With self-serving, bullying, environmentally vandalising parasite TransGrid’s imploding Interconnector experiment on the public now exposed as NOT CREDIBLE by honest, independent Experts - with a DISPUTE currently with the NON-independent, complicit Australian Energy Regulator - an IMMEDIATE MORATORIUM & ROYAL COMMISSION IS ESSENTIAL.

Reference:
‘On 13 August 2025, the Australian Energy Regulator (AER) received a notice of dispute from the Centre for Independent Studies (CIS) disputing the conclusions of Transgrid’s Meeting system strength requirements in NSW Project Assessment Conclusions Report (PACR). 

The PACR was published on 14 July 2025, for the Meeting system strength requirements in NSW Regulatory Test for Transmission (RIT-T).
The notice of dispute contends that Transgrid has not correctly applied the RIT-T in that it has not complied with the National Electricity Rules (NER) clause 5.15.2 in identifying credible options.’ (AER)

This proposal introduces unacceptable environmental harm for minimal public benefit. Disturbing habitat corridors and established farmland cannot be undone. Lithium batteries carry inherent fire danger, and even “silent” facilities produce hums and inverter noise that affect rural tranquillity. The public is objecting in large numbers; their voices matter.
Can the proponent prove that a catastrophic battery failure will never occur, when such an absolute guarantee is scientifically impossible?

The Romani BESS risks environmental destruction, noise pollution, and severe fire potential. Lithium fires can smoulder for days, threatening nearby land and stock. A battery that only provides short-duration supply does not justify the permanent loss of habitat. Public concern is clearly growing.
If a fire spreads underground, as lithium fires often do, what contingency exists when even experts acknowledge such behaviour is unpredictable?

This battery project provides only temporary energy support but causes permanent ecological harm. Noise and fire risk remain unresolved. The value of public objection is essential, and authorities must consider it.
If the project claims to have no impact on wildlife, why is no independent fauna-movement study provided?

I object because the environmental damage from clearing vegetation cannot be reversed. The battery’s cost compared with its brief energy support appears unjustifiable. Fire risk is high, and noise levels will affect rural amenity. Many objections reflect real community concern.
How can the proponent verify that emergency response times will be sufficient when lithium fires escalate within seconds?

This project poses serious ecological, safety, and noise-related problems. A battery of limited capacity does not justify destruction of natural habitat. Community objections deserve serious consideration.
What evidence exists that the soil will not be permanently contaminated by chemicals in the event of a battery breach, when such contamination is documented internationally?

I object because farming land and habitat should not be sacrificed for infrastructure that provides minimal benefit. Lithium batteries are known fire hazards, and operational hums impact local residents. Public objections represent democratic input.
Why do planning documents not disclose the precise source of energy the BESS will store?

This proposal threatens the environment and undermines the character of the area. Fire danger and noise pollution are unresolved. The battery’s short output duration raises viability concerns. The number of objections demonstrates deep concern.
Can the proponents scientifically guarantee zero toxic emissions during a thermal event, when no such guarantee exists globally?

I object because the biodiversity of the region is irreplaceable. Clearing vegetation for a project of questionable value is unacceptable. Fire and noise risks persist, and public objection is justified. Why is there no independent certification confirming the absence of hazardous materials in all imported components?

This development degrades valuable habitat and places the community at risk due to potential lithium fires and noise pollution. The battery itself offers limited benefit. Authorities must consider the rising number of objections. If the facility fails during extreme heat, what fallback exists when heat-driven failures are a known international problem?

I oppose the project because it results in environmental loss without long-term benefit. Noise and fire risks are unresolved. Public objections highlight community dissatisfaction. How will wildlife be protected during a toxic-smoke event, when no evacuation plan for fauna is even possible?

The Romani BESS harms ecosystems, creates noise, and carries fire risk disproportionate to its benefit. Objections should be respected.
If the proponent claims absolute safety, why do insurance firms classify lithium sites as high-risk?

I object because natural landscapes should not be industrialised for short-duration energy storage. Lithium battery fires are unpredictable, and noise levels are inadequate addressed. Many have objected for good reason. Can the company explain how it will prevent pollution of waterways during a fire-water run-off event, when such contamination is well documented globally?
how will the land be return after end of use?

This project endangers local habitat and diminishes farming productivity. Fire and noise risks compound the problem. The public objection process exists for a reason and should be honoured. Why is there no emergency plan addressing simultaneous multi-cell failure, an event known to occur in large BESS units overseas?

Wind and solar generation are such inefficient generators of electricity that they must be backed up with gas or coal thermal plants, or firmed by batteries and hydro. Having to build and maintain at least two means of power supply because wind and solar are so bad, destroys any supposed environmental advantage wind and solar generation may have. And then there is the extra transmission required that further destroys the environmental claim. BESS would have to be the worst option due to the large embedded energy and material in their construction, coupled with their relatively short life. They totally destroy any claim that renewables (sic) are the cleanest form of power. Then there are the problems of huge cost per MW of storage and the unmanageable fire and contamination risk that BESS pose for the local community and environment. The whole scheme is an engineering and ideological absurdity that should never have got any serious consideration from a rational person or Government.

I strongly object to ROMANI BESS on the following grounds:
• It is destructive to native flora and fauna;
• Construction will leave a legacy of land destruction that is unlikely to be rectified by the builder;
• It is an abomination on the natural landscape as is the whole Solar/Wind/BESS/Interconnector Scam
• It is part of a system that costs billions, does not work reliably and attempts to solve a problem that does not exist, in other words useless and irresponsible use of public funds;
• All such infrastructures should be built at developer’s expense, NOT on public funds.
As we are told wind and solar are the cheapest, well prove it, remove all subsidises — do not build this system on public funds;
• The TOTAL cost has not been verified by independent experts;
• There is NO verified scientific basis for reduction of CO2 in the atmosphere so this project is a total waste of public money, along with all other such projects. 
There is in fact reliable verifiable scientific proof that CO2 is beneficial to plant life and by extension to human life on earth.

This proposal threatens habitat integrity and rural amenity. Lithium battery fires are well-documented hazards, and noise pollution will be ongoing. Public objections demand consideration.
Why is no vegetation-offset plan provided, if the impact is supposedly negligible?
Why?