This poisonous Battery will never generate energy—it merely shuffles scarcity, storing unreliable wind and solar power that fails most of the time due to pathetic capacity factors.
Dressing intermittency up as reliability is deliberate deception, not sound energy planning.

Everyone with a brain knows that SWINDLE FACTORIES are all pathetically intermittent, as ugly as sin and imploding fast due to fragility and poisonous substances - as they soon burn, collapse, fracture and poison communities - whilst ensuring we’re subjected to Chinese control thanks to FAILbanese and NSW Government fools.

This hazardous contaminating Molong BESS junk would create a massive, unplanned for, toxic waste burden, with no credible end-of-life strategy.

The Principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development are defied by fake green rubbish like this as burning and spent batteries become ticking time bombs, exporting poisonous pollution today and abandonment costs to future generations.

Nothing Clean about the Dirty Energy Council’s ASBESTOS OF THE FUTURE!

There is no social licence for this RenewaBULL Rort!
It is being imposed against the will of the community - transforming Molong into an unwilling toxic industrial sacrifice zone for a speculative energy experiment that only benefits dodgy vested interests who’re ripping off Australia.

NSW families are continually hurt and suffering from ever escalating electricity prices and the poisoning of our precious biodiversity and the public.

Shame on the deceitful, cruel and evil Government crooks and complicit IPCN for approving such dishonest and damaging garbage like this Trojan Horse - insecure, China reliant BESS BOMB - against our will with no consent!

This project is nothing more than a financially engineered market-manipulation device, designed to exploit price volatility rather than deliver reliable energy.
It will inflate electricity prices, deepen energy poverty, and punish households and businesses while delivering windfall profits to a subsidised corporate entity with zero accountability to the Molong community.

Sack the NSW Government for torturing the public so egregiously and treacherously selling Australia out to Chinese Control of our critical energy infrastructure and toxic ruin-a-bull rubbish!

This treacherous, sabotaging plan highlights Strategic Vulnerability, Economic Harm, and the False Promise of Storage.

The Molong Battery should be rejected on the grounds that it weakens Australia’s strategic, economic, and energy resilience while pretending to strengthen it.

Battery storage does not create energy security; it magnifies dependency—on hostile CCP manufacturing, opaque software systems, complex supply chains, and continuous government intervention.
These are not attributes of a resilient national energy system; they are points of extreme failure.

Large-scale batteries are intrinsically short-lived assets, degrading from the moment they are commissioned.
Their economic model relies on market volatility, not reliability—profiting from price spikes that are themselves a symptom of a broken grid.

In effect, this project benefits from instability, while households and industry pay the price through higher bills and reduced reliability.
This is the opposite of infrastructure that serves the public interest.

From a national security perspective, embedding critical grid infrastructure that can be monitored, controlled, or disabled through external systems is indefensible.
In an era of cyber conflict and geopolitical coercion, energy infrastructure must be robust, sovereign, and simple—not dependent on proprietary technology and replacement components sourced from adversarial jurisdictions.
Approving this facility entrenches vulnerability at the very moment Australia should be eliminating it.

The project also accelerates economic decline by driving electricity costs higher across the system.
Energy-intensive industries cannot survive on intermittent supply patched together with storage devices that empty in hours.
Productivity suffers, investment retreats, and regional communities are left with stranded assets and lost opportunity.
This is not a transition; it is managed contraction disguised as progress.

Ultimately, the Molong Battery is built on a false premise: that storage can substitute for generation, and ideology can substitute for physics.
Australia possesses abundant, reliable energy resources capable of delivering secure, affordable, continuous power with far smaller land and material footprints.
Choosing instead to impose a hazardous, short-term, foreign-dependent technology on an unaware and unwilling community is not leadership—it is strategic self-harm.

FACTUAL REFERENCES DELIBERATELY IGNORED BY: ->
*CCP Prioritising NSW Premier & FAILbanese
*Incompetent, Delusional Energy Ministers
*Deceitful DPHI
*Complicit IPCN
*Dodgy Developers
*Giles’ at ‘RUIN ECONOMY’
*UNCLEAN ENERGY COUNCIL = “DRACULA IN CHARGE OF THE BLOOD BANK.”

**Grid Scale Batteries & Fire Risk
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/656f411497ae14084ad8d03a/t/66fd2383b56dbc6906390297/1727865736681/Fannon-Batteries.pdf

**Disaster at Moss Landing: The Risk of Battery Storage - YouTube - 16/1/25
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuTaZFQA18E

**https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/02/20/massive-green-battery-plant-catches-on-fire-again-weeks-after-major-toxic-blaze/

**https://localnewsmatters.org/2025/02/13/environmental-tests-reveal-elevated-levels-of-toxic-metals-since-moss-landing-battery-fire/

**https://www.sfgate.com/news/bayarea/article/environmental-tests-reveal-battery-metals-around-20163514.php

**https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/elevated-levels-heavy-metals-elkhorn-slough-lithium-battery-facility-fire/

**Battery recycling plant explodes - twice. (What it means for you.) | Auto Expert John Cadogan - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-nzOJ01Fkc

**Lithium-Ion Battery Fire Risks & Extinguisher Limitations
1.CSIRO ActivFire® Advisory Note AN‑004
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 a general lack of guidance and provisions in building codes, standards, and legislation in relation to safety to address the potential risks from these emerging technologies. Part of the problem is that we do not yet know enough about their probability of failure, their mechanisms of failure and potential consequences of failure.”
https://www.fire.nsw.gov.au/page.php?id=9402

ECONOMIC LICENCE HAS BEEN FORGED:
**Fancy a Model? Wait Till She Moves In - by Chris Uhlmann - 1/12/2025
“The irony is, from the moment humanity first burned wood, we have used fossil fuels to protect ourselves from the fury of the weather.
Now, just as many warn the climate will become more extreme, we are rebuilding our entire power system on the whims of wind and sunshine.
It has the feel of an Icarus moment: a civilisation convinced it can defy gravity, only to discover the wax melts in real sunlight.” https://chrisuhlmann.substack.com/p/fancy-a-model-wait-till-she-moves

**”The idea that adding more & more renewable energy to the grid pushes power prices down has been comprehensively dismissed."
10/2/25 4:48 minutes - Aidan Morrison https://www.skynews.com.au/opinion/peta-credlin/governments-insistence-on-renewables- amid-soaring-power-prices-lashed/video/86bd230860f5514d1e587239c6b913ab

**Energy Transition Masquerade: The $360 Billion You Pay - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0NKDozvO58

**Centre for Independent Studies Zoe Hilton discusses the Liberal Party’s recent move to ditch net zero as well as their choice to stay in the Paris Agreement. | Sky News Australia | Facebook - 14/11/2025
https://www.facebook.com/SkyNewsAustralia/videos/raises-a-few-questions-liberal-party- decision-to-stay-in-paris-agreement-dispute/1158866003084976/

NATIONAL SECURITY NIGHTMARE:
The Government has no measures to protect new energy sources from malicious actors!

**China-linked Belt and Road company involved in Australian net-zero projects sparks security concerns - TA NEA - 17/10/2025 https://tanea.com.au/en/china-linked-belt-and-road-company-involved-in-australian-net-zero- projects-sparks-security-concerns/

**China's Energy Dream - Patricia Adams
“Carbon dioxide reduction only makes sense for those China wishes to harm & supplant." https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2021/12/Adams-Chinas-Energy-Dream.pdf

**Chinese hackers are determined to ‘wreak havoc’ on U.S. critical infrastructure, FBI director Wray warns | PBS News - 2024 https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/chinese-hackers-are-determined-to-wreak-havoc-on-u- s-critical-infrastructure-fbi-director-wray-warns

**Rogue Communication Devices Found in Chinese Inverters
https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/ghost-machine-rogue-communication- devices-found-chinese-inverters-2025-05-14/

**Beautifully Hackable - Irina Slav on Energy - 12/8/24
https://irinaslav.substack.com/p/beautifully-hackable?utm_campaign=email- post&utm_source=substack

**U.S Blacklists Chinese Battery Giant
“These batteries are used in electric vehicles here in Australia,” Mr Danby said. https://www.skynews.com.au/opinion/us-military-is-concerned-america-blacklists-chinese- battery-giant-over-military-links/video/765e12fec5e3b837a5e606e40371a7f9
**China's Sinister Solar Panels and the Plan to Black Out the World! - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqL0s18HXbY - 13:44 minutes

**Crying Shame inside the Demise of Australia’s only Battery Maker
https://www.afr.com/companies/energy/crying-shame-inside-the-demise-of-australia-s-only-battery-maker-20250901-p5mrl4

**Editors' picks for 2024: 'Australia’s climate ambitions have a modern slavery problem: examining the origins of our big batteries' aspistrategist.org.au

To the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure,
I write to object to the proposed mixed-use development at 881–885 Bourke Street, Waterloo NSW 2017 on the grounds that the scale and intensity of the project are incompatible with the capacity and established character of the existing neighbourhood.
The proposed building height is entirely out of character for the precinct, which is defined by a lower-scale built form. The height and massing of this development would create an inappropriate visual impact, overshadowing, and a sense of overdevelopment that is inconsistent with the surrounding streetscape.
In addition, the excessive number of apartments will place significant and unsustainable pressure on already overstretched local infrastructure. Roads in the area are consistently congested, parking availability is severely limited. Traffic is already congested and many secondary roads are being used as a "rat race" with speeding and traffic infringements a plenty. The limited policing in the area simply creates a new norm.
Public transport services are frequently overcrowded. Local schools, community facilities, medical facilities and essential services are operating near or at capacity, and this development would worsen these conditions.
Pedestrian footpaths have become increasingly hazardous with the rising use of e-bikes. Public transport (particularly buses) during peak times are already overwhelmed and over crowded. Furthermore, the distances to Green Square Station, the Light Rail, and the new Waterloo Metro Station, make these options impractical for many commuters and do not provide a reliable alternative to car use. The size and height of the 35+ storey tower will
The proposal does not demonstrate that the surrounding infrastructure or local environment can support such a substantial population increase, nor does it provide adequate mitigation measures. Approving this development in its current form would diminish local amenity, reduce quality of life for existing residents, and undermine responsible, evidence-based urban planning.
I respectfully request that the application be refused or significantly amended to address these concerns.

We object to SSD-80441462 on the following grounds:
1. Late and inadequate notification: Exhibition letters arrived after the exhibition began, preventing fair opportunity to review extensive SSDA material.
2. Failure of community engagement: Despite claims of pre-lodgement contact, no residents on Morehead Street received any engagement material or invitations to briefings/webinars. More than 70% of the street consists of public housing tenants who face barriers to participation.
3. Excessive height and bulk: The proposal seeks an uplift from 29m to 125m with oversized frontages (up to 71m), far exceeding local context and eliminating vistas, sunlight and ventilation. Reliance on distant Green Square towers for justification of heights is inappropriate in the existing and planned context of the area.
4. No transition to the Waterloo Heritage Conservation Area (HCA): The proposal presents a 10–19 storey street wall at the edge of a 2–4 storey HCA. The VIA testing did not adequately cover the impact of the proposal when viewed from residential streets at the edge of the Waterloo HCA.
5. Heritage and visual impacts: Overlays show the proposed form overwhelmingly dominates views from Morehead Street and Grosvenor Terrace, removing sky views and altering the heritage setting.
6. Residential amenity: Deep floorplates, overshadowing, limited cross-ventilation and an investor-heavy apartment mix undermine both internal and neighbouring amenity. Lack of family housing contradicts strategic housing goals.
7. Missing CMP: No construction timeline or staging plan is publicly available despite references in multiple documents. The community cannot assess construction impacts.
8. Barriers to participation: The Planning Portal requires new login accounts and rejects existing Service NSW emails; the site was also offline for times during the exhibition period. These barriers make submissions inaccessible to many residents.
We support redevelopment and believe the site is under-utilised by the approved DA, but cannot support a proposal that exceeds reasonable density, disregards design excellence principles for transitioning building scales and undermines equitable participation of the community through a short and inaccessible review process.
We request reduced heights to the north and western edges in keeping with principles of the approved DA to transition from the higher density to the south-east, full HCA visual testing, improved housing mix to address the lack of affordable family-sized dwellings, release of a CMP, and re-exhibition or extension of the exhibition period.