Sandy Creek Solar Farm

While renewable energy is vital, the location of Sandy Creek Solar Farm should not be located on such prime agricultural land. This land is integral to our food and fibre production, sustaining livelihoods of producers who have established viable enterprises - producers who contribute greatly to the local community in many aspects. Projects such as this, undermine their livelihoods and reduce our agricultural output, having significant environmental and social impacts as a result.
These adverse effects highlight the importance of ensuring solar farms on non-arable land to avoid these negative outcomes. The government should consider an alternative site for the Sandy Creek Solar Farm, that will not jeopardise our agricultural assets.

My husband and I, with our three young children (next door to my brother, sister in law and their three young children), own and run a highly productive mixed farming operation, producing wool, meat and cereal crops next door to the proposed Lightsource BP Sandy Creek Solar Farm site (in the Central-West Orana Renewable Energy Zone). We have studied, and practice, low impact and high productive farming and grazing methods. We are writing to express some concerns we have if the solar farm were to go ahead. These concerns include the impact the solar farm will have on quality agricultural land, social impacts on our community, environmental impacts and visual impacts.



Agricultural land

In the guidelines it states that they like to encourage development on land with limited agricultural productivity. The majority of the land they are looking at for the proposed Sandy Creek Solar Farm is renowned as some of the most productive land in the Central West.

It is an absolute waste of such valuable food producing land.

Social

We have a vibrant community, all of whom belong to our local Bushfire Brigade and support our local church, tennis competition, pubs, schools, supermarkets, school buses, takeaway shops, sporting establishments etc. Our bushfire brigade will be stretched to support absentee landowners (solar farm).

We feel there is a threat to our community with the potential of attracting the wrong type of people to our area (with construction a large number of people will be introduced to our area- some not ideal).

Our men work long hours leaving women and children isolated- stranger impact. With many new comers to the area it is a threat to our personal safety. Also to the safety of our homes, land, personal belongings, grazing stock and machinery.

There is a good chance the solar farm will force people to leave the area.

There will be a lot more traffic on our roads (safety for families driving on roads, families living near roads, moving livestock along roads and having extra unnecessary traffic driving though our paddocks where the local roads are).



Environmental

The placement of this particular solar farm is taking away from the environment.

The solar farm will take away the homes of many local wildlife being so close to the Dapper reserve and Tucklan Forest. Part of the reserve joins our property. The proposed solar project will remove anything living e.g. homes of birds and lizards (we have a lot of finch living in fence posts).

The impact of introduced weeds on local biodiversity and the lack of control of existing weeds, have the potential to spread onto adjoining farming land costing us time and money to control, and threatening native grasses.

It has been scientifically shown that trees attract rain/moisture and solar panels do not.



Visual Impacts

Our area is a very quiet and peaceful area with amazing views that will be completely destroyed if the mass of proposed solar panels are allowed to go ahead.

It will also take a lot of value away from the land and community we have built up.

It will be in clear view of many homes around here and there are a lot of neighbouring land owners who are also concerned about the project going ahead.





We don’t have a problem with solar energy. In fact, we are supportive of renewable energy, but feel there must be a more appropriate area, where the land is less productive and the solar farms would be less exposed to the entire community. Why do you think people object to solar farms anywhere- because the social and environmental impacts are so great, Why do people sell land to solar development- these people are usually absentee land owners who don’t care, and are paid a lot of money for the land. They have also bought highly sort after country as a good investment and again just want money- short term mind set. Where does our food come from? Why would you build a solar farm on land that is so valuable and productive? It is hard to buy land like it in NSW these days. We have tried to expand and still hope to, but this is very hard when big companies like Origin and Lightsource BP come in and spend a huge amount of money to buy and lease the land hoping to benefit from solar. We are seriously concerned about being able to retain the farming expertise that has taken generations to develop. My family (my parents, my husband and I, my brothers and their families) are currently in the process of intergenerational land transfer. We pride ourselves on being generations of educated people caring for the environment and have serious concerns for future generations. In the guidelines for wind farms it states that turbines cannot be placed within a 4km radius of the house of land owners that oppose the project. We would like to see something similar put in place for this solar farm. We would also like to negotiate a reasonable neighbour agreement as we stand to be very much impacted being bordering neighbours.

I applaud the government's commitment to renewable energy and sustainability in line with the Paris Agreement. However, I strongly oppose the proposed Sandy Creek Solar Farm on prime agricultural land. While renewable energy is crucial, displacing productive farmers and compromising our food and fibre production is unacceptable.

This project poses significant environmental risks, including soil degradation, ecosystem disruption, and biodiversity loss. Moreover, it threatens the livelihoods of local farmers, undermining the community's social fabric and potentially causing injustice.

To strike a balance between renewable energy and sustainable land use, I urge the government to explore alternative sites for the solar farm that do not compromise our agricultural resources. By doing so, we can support renewable energy development while preserving our essential food and fibre production and mitigating environmental and social impacts.

The proponent should be made aware of these two recent reports, and advise how they intend to deal with such situations.
A. Lithium Thermal Fire Runaway video 8min https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7UY4ioP4VQ
B. FIREFIGHTERS AGAINST RENEWABLES OVER VICTORIA https://www.farov.com.au/

On the 3 November 1980 5 firefighters were killed while fighting a fire at Waterfall NSW.
Young men who with strong community bonds were taken while servicing their community.
On the 9 January 1983, a further 3 members of the volunteer fire fighting community were killed and a further 6 critically injured.
Heathcote Rural Fire Brigade had suffered a loss of 8 of our community and critical life changing injuries to 6. Someone’s husband, father, brother, son, daughter, and their families’ futures had been stolen from them at the cost of supporting their communities.
The impact to the community and the trauma never ever goes away.
As the years have passed, we continue to lose more and more people and volunteers to fires. We have over time, improved how these fires have been fought and we are individual responsible and have a moral obligation to prepare and insure our properties. To allow increased risks to this volume is irresponsible.
The more recent fires in NSW in 19/20 with figures showing loss of life, wildlife, stock and homes can be supported by visiting the Department of the Environment EPA website.
https://www.soe.epa.nsw.gov.au/all-themes/land/fire#:~:text=The%202019%E2%80%9320%20bushfire%20season,lost%20and%202%2C476%20homes%20destroyed.
Bushfire legislation 1997 needs to be revisited with the ongoing force for overseas Companies jumping on the Green Energy propaganda, taking up handouts from the Federal Government to meet zero admissions. This is without consideration to destroying our natural landscape, our flora and flora and the cost to human life.
Rural 1 zonings have dedicated volunteers who aid with supporting safe environments for their families and livestock. The proposal is based on a Fire Prone Area with no history of fire. The simple answer is that the local community have looked after and supported each other. Industrial size solar and wind farm projects bring with them too many opportunities for fire risk at the cost of the local communities they host. One life lost is one too many. By continuing to destroy the environment to save the environment is a misadventure that will kill communities because of corporate greed.
BHP Lightsource have a history of taking those proposals, getting projects approved, up and running and then sell to another overseas company. There is not bond for decommissioning. The is no or limited remediation for effected landholders.
The amount of renewables within the Sandy Point area is beyond comprehension. It is an invasion to the community and surrounds. It proposes many risks from fires, loss of rural and environment and the natural landscape.

I am concerned about the visual impact this project and other proposed projects in the area will have on the neighbouring properties. The cumulative effect these many projects within the CWREZ is huge and one project alone cannot be looked at individually.
The storage batteries and solar panels do have many toxic materials in their makeup including lithium & cobalt in the batteries. The solar panels are a toxic mix of gallium, arsenide, tellurium, silver, crystalline silicon, lead, cadmium and heavy earth materials. There are also significant unknown health risks related to solar panels. A study completed in the USA found solar panels dumped into landfill leached toxic materials in as little as thirty days.
Erosion will be huge - impacting the local waterways, local roads - the solar panels will be like a huge roof area with increased runoff of water.
After being involved with a number of submission for various projects already I urge you and your team to consider the impacts this project has on those that live with it. It is quite easy to look at these projects and see that they are within guidelines, but at some stage the people that live with the impacts of these projects need to be considered.
Other huge impacts include: loss of prime agricultural land, Bush Fires starting within the solar project, Insurance Liability for neighbouring landholders and the list goes on!

1. Reduced stock numbers and acreage for cereal crops. Most of the good grazing country is taken up by solar panels, which will cause less production of stock (meat) & crops (grain). This is prime agricultural land and it will greatly impact food production
2. The ongoing effects from less livestock & grain production will generate a domino effect of:- less farmers to live and work in the area, less children to attend our schools, less livestock for the very viable local saleyards, impact on the small businesses who supply the local area with seed, fertilizer, fuel groceries, etc.
3. Solar panels cause more runoff from rain causing erosion to the area where the panels are and also to the neighbouring paddocks where there are no panels. Erosion will be hard to fix where the solar panels are and more importantly the surrounding gullies and creeks will run harder and faster, causing more problems on the local roads, causeways and bridges.
4. Farmers are very mindful of looking after their land and looking after the environment – the Sandy Creek Solar Project is taking over this prime agricultural land for renewable energy, which is needed, but at what cost to the community and environment in this area?
5. Bushfires – reduced access to where the solar panels are, will make it much more difficult to contain a bushfire. Who is going to carry out maintenance to reduce fire hazard within the solar project?
6. Home and farm security may be compromised by having a very large increase in the population during the construction stage and maintaining the solar project for years to come.
7. Insurance Liability for neighbouring properties - absolutely no one will answer questions regarding Insurance.

I am writing to express my objection to the proposed Sandy Creek solar farm.
This proposed solar farm is the heart of prime agricultural land that produces some of the best food and fibre in the district, not only will the proposed farm impact on local producers but the impact it will have on local businesses in the agricultural sector will be significant.
I have witnessed losses to local businesses with the developed solar farm at Wellington, that was also developed on prime agricultural land.

Prime, productive agricultural land should not be destroyed by solar panels or wind turbines. If you wish to use this type of energy source, put it where the land is not productive, not destroying a community and not laying waste prime, essential farming operations. These companies are taking developed land because its convenient for them,close to roads and shops and accommodation.
Now that nuclear energy is on the table an even more cautious approach should be taken to these renewable nonsense plans as they may well be obsolete in a decade and the agricultural land will have been destroyed for no gain and for ever.

I am writing to formally object to the proposed establishment of the Sandy Creek Solar factory in our community. The cumulative impacts of this project on our locality are concerning and warrant serious reconsideration. Below are detailed objections outlining various critical issues:

Fire Risk and Firefighting Limitations:
Our region is prone to bushfires, especially during the dry season. Introducing another large-scale solar farm increases fire risk due to the potential for electrical malfunctions or sparks, which could ignite surrounding vegetation. Moreover, the presence of solar panels complicates firefighting efforts by limiting access and creating additional toxic hazards for emergency responders.

Agricultural Impacts:
The proposed site overlaps with prime agricultural land crucial for local food production. This will disrupt existing farming activities, jeopardise the livelihoods of surrounding local farmers with unaffordable insurance premiums and reduce our food security.

Environmental Concerns:
The construction and maintenance of the solar farm will disturb the local ecosystem, potentially affecting wildlife habitats and migration patterns. Furthermore, the use of chemicals and materials in panel production poses long-term environmental risks, including soil contamination and water pollution.

Visual Amenity and Noise Pollution:
The visual impact of a sprawling solar farm adjoining other solar farms in our scenic countryside will significantly degrade our natural landscape and diminish the aesthetic appeal of the area. Additionally, operational noise from inverters and cooling systems will disturb the peace and tranquility of nearby residents. Landowners were never consulted and never consented to living within a “modern day power station” as the Central West Orana Renewable Energy Zone has been aptly described by EnergyCo.

Roads, Transport, and Traffic:
Increased construction activities and ongoing maintenance will place additional strain on local roads and infrastructure. Heavy traffic from construction vehicles and transportation of materials will exacerbate congestion and road safety concerns, impacting both residents and commuters.

Social Services and Workforce Competition:
The influx of temporary construction workers will strain local social services such as water supply, sewage treatment, waste, police, healthcare and education. Moreover, the project's demand for skilled labor may lead to workforce competition impacting agricultural production worker supply, driving up living costs and housing prices in our community.

In conclusion, the proposed Sandy Creek solar farm raises significant concerns regarding fire risk, agricultural disruption, environmental impact, visual and noise pollution, infrastructure strain, and social implications. Therefore, I urge the planning authorities to reject this proposal.
Low footprint Co2 free energy can be produced via a nuclear facility at Lithgow’s existing coal fire power station using existing transmission lines.

Thank you for considering my objections. I trust that these concerns will be carefully evaluated in the decision-making process.

Thank you for the opportunity to submit an objection to this project.

This project is close to where I live and is such a large project. It takes away a large amount of prime agricultural land, which is the livelihood of local family families. And is a significant contributor to the food bowl of NSW.

In a volunteer capacity I am the local RFS president and know that the surrounding area of Elong Elong has a very high bush fire risk rating. A project this size, with the fire risk from the panels, represents a risk that would immediately overwhelm local resources. The idea that fire appliances and volunteer fire fighters could safely manoeuvre through this mass of panels is unfathomable. It presents a significant risk to the safety of local fire fighters.

Our area has an extraordinary number of both turbine and solar panel projects back to back across it. This large amount, including the fact that this specific project is the largest solar panel project in Australia, clearly makes this plan unprecedented. As such there can be no evidence to guarantee or predict the safety and impacts of this project.

Before this project proceeds I would request that the combined impact of these projects be assessed.

For example, I observed the solar panels at Wellington early in the morning recently created their own fog mass. Each panel could be observed to have a rising 'mist' coming from them - boiling off the condensation. This 'mist' formed into a fog that significantly reduced the visibility on the road. Whilst other areas had some form of light fog that morning, this mist was thicker and a brownish colour. Significantly different to the normal natural light fog in our area. In addition to the hazard this is causing motorists the question needs to be asked - what is the air quality of that mist? I have 2 photos, which unfortunately are poor quality due to my phone ability, but they do depict the issues - they are unable to be loaded on this site. I would be grateful for another way to submit them.

As much as I am in favour of renewable energy projects and the movement towards sustainability is incredibly valuable and needed, I strongly oppose to the Sandy Creek Solar Farm Project.
These Solar Farms, are far from being “farms” when the negative impacts are going to be far greater to the longevity of these communities, now and into the future.
The sheer extent of the culmination of these projects is not being taken into consideration and due diligence is not being undertaken.
The area of this proposed project is taking up some of the most productive agricultural land providing food and fibre to the nation and the world. Surely greater consideration to the placement of these projects on prime agricultural land must be considered. The impact is on the livelihoods of the backbone of Australia and what we provide for everyone’s survival now and in the future. No amount of renewable energy is going to keep us fed and clothed when these projects are taking up the land that provides these resources. There is so much unviable, unproductive land (for example mining land that is never going to be regenerated to the same “natural” extent) that could be used to place solar projects.
The social fabric of these communities is being abolished. These projects are not just affecting those whose land is being used but the neighbouring properties adjoining.
I would hate to think of the pressure on Australia’s health system that has been caused by the mental, physical and emotional toll on everyone affected by these projects. Landholders in the Sandy Creek area have been dealing with projects like these for years and have been working to save their future and the future of the next generation.
Anyone with some common sense can see that a project like Sandy Creek has a negative impact now and into the future that far outweighs the good that it can contribute to sustainability to these communities.

I strongly object to the Sandy Creek Solar Farm on Wiradjuri country due to the following reasons:

1. 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.

2.The environmental impact includes the loss of fertile soil, disruption of local ecosystems, and a reduction in biodiversity.

3. The project threatens the sustainable livelihoods of local farmers, forcing them off their land and disrupting the community fabric. It poses a significant risk of injustice to farmers whose lives depend on the production of these natural fibres.

Ensuring that renewable energy projects do not compromise our agricultural resources is essential for maintaining a balanced and sustainable approach to land use.

We ask that the government consider alternative sites for the Sandy Creek Solar Farm that do not jeopardise our agricultural assets.

I believe the determination of the Sandy Creek solar farm project should be defered until such time as the cumulative impacts of more than 40 large scale wind, solar and transmission projects across and adjacent to the Central West Orana REZ are adequately identified and the environmental, social and economic costs are properly calculated.

The large scale of the project of 1713ha with 1.5million solar panels, a 700MW BESS and a temporary workers camp for 350 people (plus 200 car parking) will result in unacceptable fire risk and fire fighting limitations, severe negative agriculture impacts, environmental issues, visual amenity and noise problems, roads, transport and traffic overloading, social services and competing workforce.

I oppose the proposed Sandy Creek Solar Farm.
While renewable energy is vital, the selection of prime agricultural land for this solar project is wrong. 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. It poses a significant risk of injustice to farmers whose lives depend on the production of these natural fibres. 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.

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. It poses a significant risk of injustice to farmers whose lives depend on the production of these natural fibres. 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. More thought needs to be taken when choosing a site. Land with low agricultural and environmental value should be used.
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.

Please find attached.

While I support a transition to renewable energy, I do oppose the proposed Sandy Creek Solar Farm. The selection of prime agricultural land for this solar project has many negative consequences. For example, agricultural land of this caliber is fundamental to our food and fibre production and it also sustaining the livelihoods of producers who have established viable enterprises. Displacing these producers and their families 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 ultimately destroying small communities. It poses a significant risk of injustice to farmers whose lives depend on this land. These adverse effects highlight the importance of siting solar farms on non-arable, very low population dense land to reduce the risk of 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 will not jeopardise such agricultural assets and communities
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 am opposed to the Sandy Creek solar farm proposal.

While I realise the importance of renewable energies in the Australian economy, I feel that too often the government does not consider the impact that these types of projects have on valuable agricultural land and the farmers that food and fibre to the Australian economy.

The sites of these solar farms need to be strategically considered and this is just one of 3 proposed solar farms in the same area that combined would take up 7000 acres of what is extremely productive and valuable farm land.

While renewable energy is vital, the selection of prime agricultural land for this solar project is hugely 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. It poses a significant risk of injustice to farmers whose lives depend on the production of these natural fibres.

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.

While I fully support the commitment to renewable energy in Australia, I am opposed to the proposed Sandy Creek Solar Farm.

While renewable energy is vital, the selection of prime agricultural land for this solar project is hugely 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. It poses a significant risk of injustice to farmers whose lives depend on the production of these natural fibres.

We also do not want to displace viable and productive farms and farmers who are providing food for the Australian population and if the government continues to allow valuable farm land to be replaced with solar, we may just face crucial food shortages and have to rely on imports.

These adverse effects highlight the importance of siting solar farms on non-arable land to avoid these negative outcomes. This project combined with others proposed in this very same region is going to result in far too much valuable land in the one community being destroyed by solar farm.

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.