The Social Impact Assessment is irrelevant and misleading.
BESS installation produces solastalgia and property devaluation, toxic contamination, and public health risks.
DPHI must require proper exhibition to ensure transparency and independent review.

Stop destroying rural landscapes and our environment with this dangerous infrastructure.
This project will destroy a small and beautiful rural community. given this, i do not believe that the project should go ahead. Small communities need to be supported, not divided by projects like this. These solar, BESS and renewable energy projects carry significant fire risk and risk of toxic run-off.

DPHI cannot bypass proper exhibition.
This BESS is a completely new, hazardous infrastructure, never included in Manildra Solar.
The Social Impact Assessment is inadequate, the fire risk modelling is desktop garbage, and the BESS lifespan of 10–15 years renders it a short-term, unsustainable energy gamble.

i object to this project. solar and BESS are unreliable and not a suitable source of energy to power NSW. why are rural communities being destroyed in order to power NSW? rural communities did not ask for this, so we should not have to accommodate such projects. this will also have ugly consequences on the landscape. We need food security for Australia and destroying agricultural land is opening our nation up for trouble.

Why are renewable energy projects being dumped on rural landscapes? Why are rural communities left to fend for themselves as a result of bad governance and poor decision making? I object to this project because I do not believe that rural communities should house solar farms, BESS, and renewable energy projects. Not only is this a ghastly and permanent sight on the landscapes, but this would be a disaster when it catches alight due to fire. The toxic implications as a result of this would be of such a significant level and not only the community, but the wildlife will suffer as a result.
This toxic solar panel factory with its BESS is of a major fire risk and will put significant strain on local and rural firefighting services. These local firefighting services are not equipped with the resources or man-power to manage emergency fires for when they do break out at this site. Why should the community risk their lives and step up to fight fires for infrastructure that they never wanted there in the first place?

This infrastructure is too dangerous to the neighbouring properties and communities. Solar, BESS factories and overhead transmission lines are a significant fire risk. Solar and BESS factories cause significant noise pollution. Stop destroying rural land and landscapes with these toxic and destructive projects. I object to this project.

I would like to begin by acknowledging the farmers of the land within our great nation of Australia today. I pay my respects to Australia’s past, present and future farmers who have and will continue to battle setbacks such as renewable energy destruction, drought, floods, vermin plagues, diseases, and government policy, all so they can provide Australia with food and fibre. I acknowledge that these setbacks come at a high price of mental health, and many have taken their lives as a result due to such pressures. I extend this respect and am thankful for the sacrifices those within the agricultural industry make in order to provide Australia with the essentials; I acknowledge the agricultural industry as the backbone of our nation
We need to unite and fight these developers and the Australian government for forcing this upon us.
CONFIDENTIAL:
I object because Solar and BESS projects are too damaging to the communities, landscapes, environment and animals. what happens when they catch fire? How will the noise from BESS impact livestock and native wildlife? Not only are they dangerous, they are an absolute eye-sore. Let's put these closer to the cities so all the NIMBYs can marvel at what their vote has given them. Leave our landscapes alone and our government needs to do better.
Noting the Livestock Producer Assurance accreditation application, they recognise and acknowledge that agricultural land WILL BE POISONED by batteries and solar panels. Given this significant fact, these projects should NOT go ahead as they compromise our food security and environmental safety.

I am worried about the fires that Lithium _ion batteries can create. I am also concerned about the proximity to the Township of Manildra. Concerned that this is a Modification instead of going through more rigorous BESS requirements.
Currently these fires i have been informed are not able to be contained with normal fire fighting extinguishers. Concerned that any smoke from fires can be toxic
Thank you

The proposed modification to the approved solar farm represents a major and consequential alteration to the originally exhibited development. A Battery Energy Storage System was never included in the initial public exhibition, documentation, or impact assessments. The public was consulted on a solar farm only, not on a combined solar and large scale battery installation.
The introduction of a Battery Energy Storage System significantly changes the project footprint, operational risks, fire safety requirements, noise profile, and environmental considerations. These are not minor technical adjustments but substantial additions that alter the nature and intensity of the development.
To characterise this as a simple modification is misleading. The original exhibition did not contemplate battery storage infrastructure, nor were the associated impacts placed before the community for review. The addition of such infrastructure fundamentally transforms the proposal.
This level of change clearly warrants a fresh exhibition process. The community must be given a full and fair opportunity to examine and respond to the revised proposal in its entirety, as it now differs materially from what was previously approved and publicly exhibited.

This solar farm modification constitutes a substantial and material change to what was originally exhibited to the public. The inclusion of a Battery Energy Storage System was never part of the original exhibition documents, assessments, or community understanding. The footprint, operational characteristics, risk profile, fire management requirements, noise generation, and potential contamination pathways associated with a battery installation are fundamentally different from those of a standalone solar farm.
A Battery Energy Storage System introduces additional infrastructure, altered environmental impacts, and different safety considerations that were not assessed or scrutinised during the initial exhibition period. The community was not given the opportunity to consider or respond to these impacts because they were simply not presented at that time.
Given the scale and nature of this modification, it is not a minor amendment but a significant expansion in both scope and intensity. The addition of a Battery Energy Storage System changes the character of the development and materially alters the environmental and safety assessment framework.



This absolutely and unequivocally warrants the project being placed on a new public exhibition so that the community can properly review, understand, and respond to what is now being proposed.