Victoria to NSW Interconnector West

The final route is not the most direct and was not based on the least effect on the environment, flora, fauna and people.
Instead it appears to be financially motivated.
The route has been decided before the EIS and it is just a box ticking process.
???

Existing easements such as the NSW railway line easments that are no longer in use, should be used for this project.
We are supposed to be saving the environment but the current route is an environmental disaster.

The EIS has ignored endangered species of flora and fauna.
The current route is also destroying farming families and communities.
There are existing unused railway easements that do not go through any of these environmentally fragile area’s which should be used.
This would be environmentally and economically viable.

Much of the EIS has been done as a desk top study and not on the ground.
The current route is going through environmental critical wetlands and areas of endangered flora and fauna.
Farming families are being destroyed.

This project is based on deception.
The current route is the longest with the most environmental impacts.
It goes through major wetlands and area’s with endangered species of flora and fauna.
This has been ignored by Transgrid and our government.
Desk top EIS is an environmental catastrophe.
Halt the insanity of this route which is destroying farmers and families.

The VNI west NSW connection route has been changed from the original shortest route to the current route which is much longer and goes through wetlands and area’s of endangered flora and fauna.
The physical EIS has not been done at ground level and yet Transgrid is bulldozing ahead with its easements with total disregard for the environment and destruction of farms, families and our future.

I object

This project seems to be extremely destructive to not only the land owners and farmers who have operated in the areas these powerlines will go but also the animals and nature that exist underneath and around. This project seems to have no regard to the natural destruction that will no doubt occur. If it was farmers clearing the land to grow food for Aussies they would be banned! I'm sure there is a better way to do this that doesn't cause as much destruction.
The expected cost also seems to be very light and knowing how these projects go i'm sure it will blow out.
There has to be a better way

As a doctor and member of National medical organisations - these projects are destroying rural and regional communities.
As a farmer and landowner caring for the land and the community I have experienced first hand the divisive and dishonest process by which these projects are being rolled out - with NO consultation.
Informing landowners and communities of what is to occur - the plans that have been more than planned but often well commenced, is not consultation.
STOP
PAUSE
THINK
CONSULT
I am the daughter of a Professor of renewable energy and from a family committed to the environment.
The rollout has a dreadful footprint.
There is no measuring, monitoring, regulation nor consideration of the carbon footprint nor of the cumulative impact.
While this destroys the land and environment for false and OS investment of so said Net Zero, those in the coastal cities burn lights by day, have heating with the window open and doors open and will do the same with A/C.
There is a selfish careless aspect to this that is shameful.

This transmission project is not in the public interest. It is environmentally destructive and will destroy the homes and businesses of thousands of farmers. Between 40 and 50% of our electricity bills is transmission costs, every transmission project in NSW todate has run overbudget before the project has even begun construction. Transgrid is going to profit from this project for decades and costs over runs will have to be worn by electricty consumers for decades. No country in the world believes that they can power industry and homes 24/7 with weather dependent generation. We will spend trillions on new transmission and BESS/Solar/Wind and still not have reliable affordable electricity.

The chair of Transgrid was previously the chair of the Climate Change Authority. The Climate Change Authority set us on this path of spending trillions of dollars on transmission/wind/solar/BESS. In any transparent Government this would be seen as a conflict of interest. We need an ICAC inquiry not the Victoria to NSW Interconnector.

This project is yet another component in the dismantling of Australia as an industrial economy. Transmission infrastructure is already sufficient in Australia for a baseload electricity grid that can power industry 24/7. The Victoria to NSW Interconnector West forms part of the renewable based plan that will be disastrous for Australian industry given the low capacity factor of renewable developments. With solar achieving only around 20% capacity and inland wind approximately 30%, the contribution on a weekly basis by renewables will average 1.75 days per week. Maximum battery storage is estimated to be 4 hours per day on a statewide scale. This means that renewables plus battery storage amounts to less than 3 days per week of power. A modern industrial economy cannot operate on this basis. Furthermore, this renewable based approach will lead to catastrophic blackouts and push Australians standard of living and economy into a death spiral.
This project should be scrapped in favor of replacing aging baseload power stations with modern baseload power stations. Most other modern economies are now pursuing this approach given the abject failure of majority renewables based energy systems the world over.

The ISP is unachievable for many real, engineering and technical reasons. We should not spend any money on it and use the funds for infrastructure that will support productivity and the people of the Commonwealth right across the country.

Unnecessary, costly and invasive transmission that is purely a money making operation for a foreign owned entity. The money earmarked for this could go to new or refurbished coal generators in existing locations and the power distributed by the existing network.

***OUR SUBMISSION IS NOT ATTACHING FOR NUMEROUS REASONS - EITHER TOO BIG/NOT RIGHT FILE TYPE. WE WILL BE EMAILING AS WELL.

Victoria to NSW Interconnector West EIS Submission 22.08.2025

We welcome the opportunity to make a submission to the VNI West (NSW section) EIS, on behalf of our members.

The major opposition to the project in Victoria is not adequately addressed in the EIS (Chapter 5). The NSW section of the project is totally dependent on the construction of the Victorian section being completed; An overwhelming majority of Victorian landholders in the path of the proposed VNI West transmission line are vehemently opposed to the project (see figure one). Moreover, the regions affected by VNI West are also vehemently opposed to the premise of the project, (to transmit the power from proposed renewable energy sources interstate), (see figure two). The complete lack of social license makes the project unlikely to go ahead, to face huge delays and further cost-blowouts, and illustrates that it is an unacceptably damaging project (contrary to the information provided in Chapter Two of the EIS). TRANSGRID has minimised this issue in the EIS, professing that it will only change the project’s timeline, disregarding the implications aforementioned.
Throughout Chapter Two of the EIS there are repeated references made to the ‘low-cost renewable energy’ that VNI West will supposedly deliver, and many references made to the ‘positive cost benefit’ of the project. However, in early August AEMO admitted that the estimated cost has blown out from 3.9 billion dollars, to 7.6 billion, and could be as much as 11.4 billion dollars. This admission erases TRANSGRID’s claims above and renders the EIS factually incorrect and misleading.

Recommendations:
The EIS should be rejected, and the project rejected on the following grounds:
-The EIS is inadequate, incorrect and misleading for the reasons given above.
-The Victorian section is unlikely to proceed for the reasons given above.

We also welcome the opportunity to speak to this submission in person,

Thank you,

Wallaloo and Gre Gre District Alliance
Southern Wimmera Renewables Research Association

If a farmer cleared the amount of land and built these ugly towers, (FYI remember the cost to the environment to build and transport and erect these towers, should include that) we would be charged and titled a criminal in the Land and Environment court to the destruction and continual interruptions to the flora and Fauna. That is not mentioning the endangered species such as the native flora and fauna such as the Plain wanderer's bird.
There are 2 transmissions lines parallel to each other already to provide the energy needed- Energy Connect and the new PEC 500kv line.
Where is the leadership to say NO!!!
To show Money DOES NOT override the environment, does not create duplicity and huge wastage of taxpayer's money.
The original route when it was first considered, was more direct, it had less river/creek crossings, less destruction to ag land and clumps of valuable trees. Now through desktop analysis and people saying no and actual discrimination to certain groups of people, this route has added 100kms north and then East. Totally blown out!!!
When is the environment going to have LEADERSHIP to say NO against this project. I'm standing up for the flora and fauna and objecting to this project....will the committee????

I STRONGLY object to this impractical and disruptive project.
As a directly impacted land owner, the last couple of years dealing with the planning stages of this project have been nothing but an absolute nightmare. The stress involved in order to protect and fight for our rights and our farm is unimaginable and has put a huge amount of tension and pressure on our family as we potentially face the reality of massive ongoing income losses, property devaluation, ridiculous restrictions that disrupt farming practices, safety hazards and the list goes on. None of which we have asked for, and certainly do not want. No amount of compensation will make this project ok with us. It is an utter waste of government money, and is not the way forward. Transgrid have been appalling to deal with, just saying what we want to hear, telling us lies, not responding to our questions and not working with us as land holders in order to accommodate a better route (still on our property) that has less of an impact on our farm.
In conclusion, we do not want this. We are strong contributors to the country's food bowl and this is the repayment we get? These types of projects are making it way too hard for farmers to the point where its easier just to sell, compensation amounts are not enough and it is unethical to put this amount of pressure on families

This submission presents a formal legal opposition to the Victoria–New South
Wales Interconnector West (VNI West) transmission project, exposing its
unlawful trajectory and the catastrophic risks it poses to the ecological, cultural,
climatic, and legal fabric of south-eastern Australia. While publicly framed as
an energy transition infrastructure initiative, the project in fact constitutes a
textbook case of systemic regulatory evasion, proponent capture, and legislative
betrayal. Its progression reflects a wholesale failure to comply with the
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) (EPBC
Act), particularly sections 18, 18A, 74(3), 82 and 145, and represents an
existential threat to what remains of Australia's environmental rule of law.

To Whom It May Concern,
I support the VNI West project as it's a critical piece of infrastructure to connect renewables projects in the area to the National Network, providing a short & long boost to local economies, whilst helping to secure the future of our planet.
Regards, Malcolm Rumbel

I am providing comments on behalf of myself and my husband for the property in the company name of Randbury Pty Ltd of which we are both directors and is in line for the above project. We oppose the use of our land as a pathway for the powerlines as our property is primarily a conservation farm which we are endeavouring to bring back to nature and leave as a legacy. We understand that because this small farm of 700 acres has some cleared patches that it would make it very convenient for the powerlines to be placed. We, however, have quite a few obstacles as in being in a flood plain, creek crossings, narrow bridges, narrow access, winding access only through other farmers' properties, unable to access if flooded or wet, levy banks to be reconstructed to allow for heavy vehicle access. We also have a lake on our property close to where a power pole will be constructed, which is thriving with bird life of which we have 36 species which was recorded within an hour, by your conservationists when they first came to our property. The endangered Growling Grass frog has also been seen on our property and we have a photo in our 2019 annual photo album. The Murray Darling Wetlands Working Group is helping to support our endeavour in developing and improving our natural environment especially with regard to our lake. At this stage we are aware that Transgrid have purchased a neighbouring farm across the Wahkool river and this has been the main access to our property. We are also aware that another neighbour is now wishing to sell his farm and we feel that could be a better option for the power poles to travel in a more direct line, and would be cost saving for Transgrid should they purchase that as well and not have to detour through our property. There is also national forest all around the area which may be easier to access. We would like you to please consider our thoughts and suggestions and I look foward to hearing from you in due course. Kind regards, Johanna Butler

Because wind and solar renewable energy generation is widely acknowledged as being inherently weather dependent, there is a belief by the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) that this intermittency of power supply can be averaged out by high voltage (HV) regional interconnectors, which it hopes will improve reliability through geographic diversity. If one region is experiencing a wind or sun drought, then AEMO hopes other regions won’t be and will generate enough surplus power to supply the ones that are short. PLease refer to attached submission for further details: