Sandy Creek Solar Farm

The Sandy Creek Solar factory will remove more agricultural land, cause dismay to surrounding landholders, and do much environmental destruction.
This 'renewable' development will only deliver around 20 % of its stated capacity, and so will contribute to a dangerously unreliable electricity grid in NSW.
Like all renewable developments, Sandy Creek Solar will be entirely funded by taxpayers and will see the developer pocket big reliable profits with virtually no risk.

This is yet another environmental disaster for a community that is already expected to host over 9 million solar panels.
This is currently agricultural land. The proponent is not building this project to supply us with electricity. This will only ever produce intermittent electricity but permanent devastation to the community.

I object to the Sandy Creek Solar project for the following reasons:
*The area is currently an agricultural area and will become an Industrial zone with this project and at least 2 other solar projects side by side. It will take up valuable agricultural land that currently produces food and fibre for the nation, where will this be produced if this valuable land is taken up by industrial solar?
*Bushfire risk: I don't believe that the bushfire risk and how a fire would be controlled if one was to be within the solar installation has been adequately addressed. How would a fire truck get between the panels and how easy would it be to escape if a fire truck was to get into trouble amongst the panels? Why do the community's volunteers have to put their lives at risk if there is a fire at the Sandy Creek Solar Installation?
* Clearing of Endangered and Critically Endangered native vegetation; these trees and vegetation are hundreds of years old and provide habitat for numerous animals and insects, they can not be simply replaced by new, very small plantings. Where will the displaced mammals, birds and insects live and breed until the planted trees grow?
*Roads and traffic. I don't believe that the roads will be able to cope with the thousands of extra vehicles that will be travelling on them due to this project and the many others proposed in the CWO REZ. The regions roads are already badly damaged and to have so many extra OSOM trucks and cars travelling along them will only cause extra damage. Who will pay to fix this damage? Will it be left to our already struggling local councils? How will local businesses cope with the extra traffic? Especially those taking goods to and from The Port of Newcastle.
*I note that the EIS states(pg 67, 3.6 Activities During Operation) that The Project will operate 24 hours per Day. How does a Solar installation operate when the sun isn't shining???
There are many other social, environmental and economic issues with this project, hence why I am objecting.

This project intends to cover 3650 acres (1489 ha) with solar panels and electrical infrastructure. At present this is agricultural land.

The cumulative impact of this project and the projects around it will ensure that the environment is permanently destroyed. Increased fire risks, increased risks of soil contamination, loss of visual amenity for neighbouring residents, increased transport and traffic on roads not fit for purpose, increased noise for neighbouring residents and loss of community all indicate that this project is not in the public interest. The only beneficiary will be the proponent and only because of current government subsidies.

I object to this project. It is environmentally toxic to the soil, with shocking impacts on land spatial footprint.

I am very much opposed to a solar farm being constructed next to our property "St Edwards" 403 Dapper Road, Dunedoo 2844,
The house is only 100 meters away from the proposed solar farm.
My daughter and son in law manage this country and we had hopes of expansion.
If a solar farm is constructed next door, a better option would be to sell out. The main problem would be the land would not be worth as much as we would like, as no one would want to buy land next door to a solar farm.
I have attached a submission which was written two years ago. My thoughts on solar on next door land have not changed.

I object to the Sandy Creek Solar farm .
The roads in the area are not going to support the amount of traffic that the area will be subjected to. There will be a significant increase in heavy traffic on local roads impacting on local business and residents.
The visual impact to the area surrounding this solar farm and all of the other proposed renewable energy projects will render this beautiful rural agricultural area an industrialised, ugly area where no on one wants to visit or live. This whole REZ will have a devastating impact on the tourist industry in this area.
This solar farm and all of the many others proposed in this area are taking valuable, productive agricultural land that helps feed and clothe the country for an unreliable, insufficient, expensive idea that will not solve the energy problems of the country.
The environmental impacts that this solar farm present are disturbing. Many thousands of trees will be cleared and ground levelled to build this project. The loss of habitat to native animals is huge and seems to be largely ignored.
All solar farms including Sandy Creek Solar Farm will create a notable fire danger to local residents and to surrounding property. The firefighting restrictions and limitations involved in fighting a fire near a solar farm pose a life threatening danger to firefighters, animals, livestock and humans. Toxic gases from burning solar panels and batteries are deadly.
No clear answer can be given as to what happens to the batteries and panels at the end of their use by date. Where are the millions and millions of panels and batteries going to be disposed of. Landfill ??
What compensation will be given to the neighbours of the massive Sandy Creek Solar Farm for the loss of property values and the stress caused by the worry over this issue.

please be advised that I object to this project the renewable energy circus must stop immediately.
no wants these obnoxious solar panels, excessive traffic and noise in their backyards.
this beautiful agriculture land does not need to be destroyed by these companies that will eventually sell up as soon as their government grants are available
these farmers have generally inherited their parents farm and are cashing in on their parents hard work and dreams we have all seen it before

I object to the Sandy Creek Solar Farm due to the following points;
- insufficient community consultation
- the accumulative effect of so many renewable energy projects on such a small community. How will we cope with increased demand on services like healthcare, emergency services, Rural Fire Service, SES, especially those run by volunteers.
- the accumulative impact on our roads from so many projects
- the impact on prime agricultural land
- the strain on the mental health of so many
- the demand on water supply
- insufficient research in to flood prone areas
- how will the projects ensure that when decommissioned the correct process will take place for removal and regeneration of land
- the visual impact of landscapes and views
- the impact on agricultural practices, during construction, once established and following decommission
- the emotional impact placed on families who may decide to leave the community
- no empathy or understanding shown for a people who choose and enjoy to live within a small rural farming community
- no real understanding of the accumulative impact such a project and several projects of its magnitude will have on the day to day lives of individuals, families and the community
- impact on flora and fauna in such are large area. Surely this will have a significant impact if all proposed projects for the area take place

Objection submission documents attached.

I wish to object to the Sandy Creek Solar farm for the following reasons:
* I have serious concerns about the fire risk caused by these massive solar farms. They are renowned for fires and pose a huge danger to surrounding people and properties. I also have concerns about the limitations put on the ability of firefighters to manage a fire given the safety risks posed to those trying to contain the fire. Toxic fumes from burning panels and batteries and restricted access to the solar farm areas.
*The environmental impact and destruction of native habitat and the clearing of timber does not bode well with a greener future. These areas become industrialised and uninhabitable to native wildlife.
*The visual impact to neighboring properties is horrendous and devalues the surrounding property values. How is this fair to people who just happen to live in a renewable energy zone that was zoned this without their consultation.
*This solar farm is taking valuable farming land that could be used for food and fibre production for the country, and instead spending money on a project that is unreliable and unproven, as well as supporting overseas owned companies for manufacture and ownership. None of these projects are owned or run by Australian companies. None of the manufacture production is Australian owned.
*Heavy and over use of local roads and infrastructure that the Renewable Energy Zone is unprepared for and unable to manage as is. A definite objection from me.
*Noise of construction to neighboring properties, Mental health issues with neighbors who are along side the project and are all adversely affected by the building of industrialised solar farms in rural areas.

Opposition letter attached.

This solar farm is slated to be built on prime agricultural land. Zero consideration has been given to the fact that this land has been used for generations to help feed the world. Wheat for bread and pasta, barley for beer, Canola for oil sheep, cattle, pigs and goats for meat and milk. Not to mention that the nearest sub station is located in Wellington nsw. Over 40km away.
Energy production should be done where the energy is needed. Currently only 50% of homes in the Greater Sydney region have solar panels on their rooftops. Most energy in nsw is used in metropolitan areas. Why not put more solar there instead of shutting down prime agricultural land.

On top of this with more and more agricultural land being removed from production. A higher % of food will need to be imported from overseas where less stringent controls are in place for the safe production of food and fibre

The sandy creek solar project is proposed on prime agricultural land. The proposed location is used to produce quality food and fibre in a well resourced, highly productive area within the State. The objection to the solar project is based on not only a loss of agricultural production but a consequential visual destruction to the native landscape, a loss of water security and any negative impacts that arise from utilising the aquifer and a destruction of a close and long running community.

The government's commitment to renewable energy transition is commendable and aligns with the Paris Agreement. I fully support this transition as a crucial step toward sustainability. However, I do oppose the proposed Sandy Creek Solar Farm.
While renewable energy is vital, the selection of prime agricultural land for this solar project is problematic. This land is integral to our food and fibre production, sustaining the livelihoods of producers who have established viable enterprises. Displacing these producers will not only undermine their livelihoods but also reduce our agricultural output, having significant environmental and social impacts.
The environmental impact includes the loss of fertile soil, disruption of local ecosystems, and a reduction in biodiversity. Socially, and perhaps more importantly, the project threatens the sustainable livelihoods of local farmers, forcing them off their land and disrupting the community fabric. These adverse effects highlight the importance of siting solar farms on non-arable land to avoid these negative outcomes.
Ensuring that renewable energy projects do not compromise our agricultural resources is essential for maintaining a balanced and sustainable approach to land use. Therefore, the government should consider alternative sites for the Sandy Creek Solar Farm that do not jeopardise our agricultural assets.
By doing so, we can continue to support renewable energy development while preserving our essential food and fibre production and mitigating the environmental and social impacts

I strongly object to the Sandy Creek Solar Farm development. This project is destroying the local community and the families that live there. Why is the government even considering allowing a solar project to be developed over arable farming land? How will the 75% of current capacity be reached with no crop or intensive pasture production? You can't grow a crop under solar panels, even if you could, crops need sunlight. It would be expected that carrying capacity under panels would be somewhere in the range of 10-20% of existing carrying capacity, when conditions are favorable. These projections would decrease as time goes by and as more nutrition is removed from the soil.
What are the cumulative impacts of this project along side 2 other solar projects (Dapper Solar and Cobbora Solar), the EIS fails to detail these cumulative impacts. Food and fibre production should take priority, solar needs sun not prime agricultural land.
The insurance issue of neighbours to this site has not been addressed, what if its deemed the neighbour is negligible due to header fire or similar? That damages or destroys the solar farm. Who will cover the difference between $20M Public Liability and the value of the solar project??
The flow on effect of food and fibre producers leaving the area has not been addressed.
How many farming families will not be in the local community as a result of this project? How many children will not be at the local schools? How many less volunteers will be in the community? How much money will be lost from Agriculture and the associated practices/businesses from this area?
As per ES5.5 the EIS states “If fully removed from agricultural land use, the study area would account for 0.27% and 0.19% of the agricultural land in the Dubbo and Warrumbungle LGAs being removed, respectively, which is insignificant”.
These figures are not a true representation as to what is really occurring. This area of land is suitable for high intensity sheep and cattle production as well as high production cropping enterprises. The area that is to be removed is amongst some of the better soil and production areas in the respective LGAs. It is false and irresponsible to compare this calibre of country to that of those in the same LGA and presume they are all of the same productivity. These soils here may be treble the production capacity of other soils in the LGA. An example of this is table 6.21 indicating indicative cropping yields from the area that were obtained via discussions with the landowners. These yields are well above that seen across the LGA.

The project is entirely unnecessary.
So called renewables are anything but, they require complete REPLACEMENT every 15 to 20 years.
They require HUGE tracts of arable land and massive transmission lines to take the energy to the cities
They are unreliable and force Australia to cede to a power source that is solely dependent on the vagaries of the weather.
Solar panels in particular are susceptible to severe damage from hail
I know from first hand experience as I have been off grid for 14 years with both wind and solar. If it wasn't for a RELIABLE fossil fuel generator I would have had my own personal blackouts as often there is not enough wind or solar to charge my battery bank.
It would be FAR cheaper to install nuclear power plants on the sites of decommissioned coal fired power plants
Australia needs cheap reliable energy and wind and/or solar offers neither

My name is Angus Roberts and I live at Dunbogan Merino Stud and I’m 11 years old and I go to Dunedoo Central School
• I enjoy where I live and I don't want to leave.
• If we must leave, I’ll leave all my friends and my teacher.
• I’d like to live at Dunbogan without being surrounded by solar panels.
• I’m worried we’ll run out of water because the project needs so much water, what are all our livestock and us going to drink.
• Our roads are dirt and are not meant for heavy duty trucks and they will tear up our roads and we’ll struggle to get along it to get to school, how will we get to a doctor if were hurt, town if we need supplies.

I object to the Sandy Creek Solar Farm development. The documentation attached is so extensive with multiple appendices, containing countless discrepancies and non-committal comments - it has made it difficult to understand. The productive agricultural land in which the project is located should not be allowed to be developed into a large scale industrial solar project. This is land with a reliable rainfall, quality soils that is continuously cropped for food production - this land should be saved for many generations of farmers. Solar needs sun, not prime agricultural land.
The visual impacts as a result of a project this size must be immense. Why does the government this its suitable to destroy such a pristine environment? That produces food? What toxins will be released into the local rivers should there ever be a fire within this project? This is not saving the environment, food vs energy is not the answer. Our producers should be supported, bullying communities to live amongst these forced projects will result in people leaving the community and deter the next generation to enter into the ag industry. This is highly productive food and fibre producing country and it should remain this way.
I strongly object to this development.

I support the governments commitment to the renewable energy transition however projects such as the Sandy Creek Solar should not be allowed to be constructed on agricultural land, it should not be a case of food vs energy! Solar needs sun, not quality arable agricultural land. We should be supporting the agricultural industry, why is the government insisting on constructing the largest solar farm in NSW on food producing land? The social impacts of a project like this must be devasting for small communities. This land is integral to our food and fibre production. I do not support the Sandy Creek Solar Farm development.