Alex Prell
Support
Alex Prell
Support
Lyneham
,
Australian Capital Territory
Message
I am in support of the Rye Park wind farm.I am a 23 yr old student and I am concerned about climate change and the future of this planet. Wind farms are an important part of renewable energy, but will also provide much needed economic stimulation for rural communities. Having grown up in a rural area in the midst of an intense drought, I have seen the devastation it can cause to local farmers and their families. Providing farmers with another income source greatly relieves the pressure of relying on the weather and commodity prices to make ends meet. Wind farm projects such as the Rye Park farm offer significant support to small rural communities such as Rye Park, but also the surrounding area.
Richard Whyte
Object
Richard Whyte
Object
Bonogin
,
Queensland
Message
Further to my previous comments, I have watched and photographed Wedged tail Eagles souring above my Son in-law and Daughters property, I cannot believe that they will be unharmed by the blades of proposed Rye Park Wind farm.
Richard Whyte
Object
Richard Whyte
Object
Bonogin
,
Queensland
Message
As an ex resident of Yass, and a frequent visitor to the district I object to the visual pollution that will occur if this project proceeds.
My three Children and my Grandchildren live in the district. and I have a genuine concern that the landscape of the Rye Park area will be disfigured with this proposed installation.
My three Children and my Grandchildren live in the district. and I have a genuine concern that the landscape of the Rye Park area will be disfigured with this proposed installation.
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
Cootamundra
,
New South Wales
Message
Ok
Lorrainne Flanagan
Object
Lorrainne Flanagan
Object
Rye Park
,
New South Wales
Message
The ABC published a report on Friday 17th June, "Electricity consumption from the grid to flatline for 20 years". If this is the case, then why are we investing our tax in Wind Farm projects at all?
Wind farms are antiquated and not innovative. There are so many other technologies that are still in their infancies that should be considered over Wind Farms.
The requirement of the proponents to pay $2,500 per turbine into community accounts is still "bribery".
According to (don't) Trust Powers revised EIS, they admit that the majority of their planned towers are in bushfire prone areas! (see Fig8-7). There was a fire at a property (Wandoo fire) a couple of years ago where an aircraft nearly collided with a monitoring tower!
Wind Farms are:
Noisy
Unhealthy
Ugly
Dangerous!
Antiquated!
We'd prefer solar!
Wind farms are antiquated and not innovative. There are so many other technologies that are still in their infancies that should be considered over Wind Farms.
The requirement of the proponents to pay $2,500 per turbine into community accounts is still "bribery".
According to (don't) Trust Powers revised EIS, they admit that the majority of their planned towers are in bushfire prone areas! (see Fig8-7). There was a fire at a property (Wandoo fire) a couple of years ago where an aircraft nearly collided with a monitoring tower!
Wind Farms are:
Noisy
Unhealthy
Ugly
Dangerous!
Antiquated!
We'd prefer solar!
Name Withheld
Support
Name Withheld
Support
Red Hill
,
Australian Capital Territory
Message
*Wind turbines can be built on existing farms. This greatly benefits the economy in rural areas.
*It will create jobs for the people in the region.
*Wind turbines don't produce atmospheric emissions that cause acid rain or greenhouse gases
*It will create jobs for the people in the region.
*Wind turbines don't produce atmospheric emissions that cause acid rain or greenhouse gases
Name Withheld
Support
Name Withheld
Support
Red Hill
,
Australian Capital Territory
Message
*Wind power is cost-effective. It is one of the lowest-priced renewable energy technologies available today.
*Wind energy doesn't pollute the air like power plants that rely on combustion of fossil fuels, such as coal or natural gas.
*Wind energy doesn't pollute the air like power plants that rely on combustion of fossil fuels, such as coal or natural gas.
Yass Earth Movers
Object
Yass Earth Movers
Object
Yass
,
New South Wales
Message
Yass Earth Movers has concern and Objects to the Rye Park proposal of the following reasons,
CLEARING AND DISTURBANCE OF LANDS,
635 ac of proposed disturbance
190ac of tree clearing, Including Hollow bearing trees for habitat.
page 82, 6.3.2 it state 705ac, and total of each veteran type impacted 33,215ac !!
This is a lot of land to impacted for such a short life span project.
On page 83, Table 6-3 it states "offset" credit requirements ??
How do you get these ?? Is this all to make it sound better ?
tick the box and make you feel ok for letting such a environmental disaster take place ???
This is not Biodiversity !! Who ever has made this chart needs to come out to site and look at what they are preposing.
You can't agree on something this substantial and this big by looking at google earth and making up a chart of potential offsets for environmental impacts. This will be the new Asbestos of the land scape. Every one knows its not right, But no one is willing to put there name to it to say something incase they loose there job.
We should be protecting the lands and conservation of lands should be our first objective, Not degradation.
This is not feasible in this type of land, The soil reports and mapping are wrong. It states on page 99 6.7 that there is Sand Stone ?? Has this been cut and pasted from another report that no one has bothered to check ??
I have detailed maps of the area showing protected lands and highly erodible tunnelling soils, Areas that Soil Conservation services and YEM have been working on for the last 53 years to protect and conserve.
The area that this is proposed has been untouched and un farmed for a reason.
I am Willing to meet and show who ever needs to see the areas in question, Also have a meeting at my office and go over the maps and prove why this should never be allowed to proceed.
If this is allowed to proceed, All the years of hard work to protect the land and conserve it will be to no avail.
This can not be Engineered, Once the area has been disturbed you will never be able to recover or reinstate the land back to what it is now. No amount of work, Design or money that may be available will never be able to return the virgin timber and habitat areas back to what we have now. It will be lost for ever and remembered as a environmental disaster.
The soils are to fragile and the slopes are to steep, No other work would be approved or be able to be under taken in these areas, So I can not see why this should even be considered.
You can still see the impact of the Gas pipe line that was put in over 40 years ago from Google Earth. This will be a lot worse as they are clearing and striping all the ridge lines 635ac to bear ground.
The erosion can also been seen on the Eastern side of the ride line from Rye Park. Any where that there has been clearing or disturbance you will see degradation of the land scape and scaring that can not be repaired.
The power trenches are proposed to be trenched in the access roads, This will lead to tunnelling and extreme erosion on the access tracks, And all the silt will be washed into the creeks and gullies.
Water degradation will be unstoppable with any and all environmental implementation procedures in place.
The amount of clearing on the road ways needs to be considered, The amount of trees that will have to be removed or cut back to get the towers though will be huge ! The amount of Co2 the trees have collected and stored has to be taken into account.
They keep bring up how green Wind tower are ??
How much Co2 will be emitted for this project ??
and how do you quantify the loss of 190 ac of virgin timber ??
ALL FOR ONLY 20 YEARS !! This is not long at all, We should be doing something a lot smarter with our money.
The NSW Gov Planing and Environment should be looking to propose more Solar that can be put on flat ground, Roof tops with no problems of clearing or erosion.
After 20 years solar is still 80% efficient ! Even as a business decision this is a no brainer.
This is not protecting the environment, This is not conservation of native plant, Animals, Including threatened species,populations and ecological communities and their habitats.
Different land use strategies have been used for years in deciding what is best for the area in which you are preposing the land use is best suited for the best ecologically sustainable out come for future use and conservation.
This wind turbine development doesn't seem to tick any of the boxes.
WATER USE,
The amount of water proposed is way under estimated.
Getting Water from the Yass weir will be unfeasible and very costly carting it over the entire project.
The extra truck movements will not have been taken into consideration and then the road degradation will not have been quantified ether.
The shire councils don't have enough water to maintenance grade the shire roads during summer.
All the creeks and rivers stop running in the summer time, What do you propose then ??
There is no way the Yass weir would be able to sustain such a large amount of water being taken from it over such a long period of time.
Even dust suppression on such a large project with the roads and the area disturbed on the hill tops will not be able to be suppressed with any amount of water trucks and man power.
CONCRETE AND BATCH PLANTS,
The 2 x batch plant proposed at each end of the project will take work away from local operators who are more than capable of suppling. They talk about giving locals work, This is one shore way of taking work away from the locals.
Both plants are located on back roads and are DIRT, When asked if they will upgrade these roads Trust Powers Micheal Head said NO, They are fit for purpose and we will just suppress the dust and grade the road when needed.
The amount of movements on such roads is unfeasible. Est a truck every 4 min when footings are pored.
It states that the area for the batch plant will be 100m x 100m.
I know this is imposable, Where are they getting there info from ?? Are they making it up hoping no one will read it ???
The Yass end batch plant is on the other side of the main rail line between Sydney and Melbourne, This means all material will have to pass over the main line to the batch plant including water and then back over to distribute to the tower locations. This will be a very high risk process that should on it own be rejected.
The environmental risks that comes with setting up and running such plants in these areas is another risk that can be taken out of the project and another risk to the environment that could be prevented. They should be using locally sourced concrete which would cut the truck moments in half as the material would not have to be moved to site, Mixed/Batched then re distributed.
and agian reduce the risk to the environment. Less set up, Less clean up, Less risk for human error.
TRANSPORT AND ROAD USEAGE,
We have a lot of trucks and move heavy and WIDE loads, We know what the roads proposed for use are like as we use all of them. To even contemplate the idea that some of these roads are fit for purpose or the dirt roads can be used as is and just maintained is madness.
Trust power have stated that if they do up grade the road and seal it, The Shire is responsible for maintaining it from then on in.
The only maintenance they will do is on the dirt roads.
No where dose is state the definition of a truck ??
The RMS is anything over 4.5t
Again, The amount of moments in the proposal is grossly under estimated !!
38 float movement for such a large project ??
Who is reading this ?
Has anyone checked this ??
Total movement 30,110 for a 2 year project ?
I think you should putting a 1 infant of this and you may be getting close.
130,110 movements (est only)
The roads around this area are lucky to have tar on them, They where never designed to take the heavy loads and the amount of traffic proposed in this project.
No matter what is said or agreed on the 3 shires and the local rate payers will be left to clean up the mess, Ask the ULSC how they are going with there roads.
The amount of workers traveling on all the roads proposed or not will be 3,000 movement a day for over 2 years.
The risk to the locals traveling the roads will be huge ! whats someones life worth ?? How many Co2 in that ??
The Blakney ck rd NTH is out side the boundary of the proposed works.
Map 6-2 is wrong, It doesn't show the Blakney ck rd NTH at all.
There is a main entrance into 13, This will also be over Blakney Creek a 3rd order stream. (Page 94 6.6.5)
There is no need to go to the entrance 13, They could upgrade the existing crossing on the Rye Park rd at the Blakney Ck rd STH end and then all road users would befit, Not just 1 involved land owner.
The mapping used is a disgrace, There is a lot of roads missing and still some roads that have not been named that are proposed to be used.
The difference between MAP 6-2 and 6-3 is very conflicting, See the difference in main access for the purple roads, Jerriwa and Coolalie roads Yass end have been left off Map 6-3 all together.
The Yellow roads on MAP 6-2 will be main access roads for all traffic excluding extreme loads like tower parts.
All other trucks and staff will travel the shortest distance.
The information given is conflicting from on document to another as is states that Cooks hill and Blackney ck rd STH will no be used, But hear on MAP 6-2 on page 90 of the RTS is is showing that is a Secondary access, Which will be come a primary access for 98% of the project. This needs to be addressed and if these roads are still on the proposal they will need major works under taken to be " Fit for propose "
Even the Cooks Hill Road And Rye Park road have dirt sections.
The Boorowa Rye Park roads are braking up under local traffic now, This sort of proposal will destroy them.
CONSTRUCTION HOURS,
Mon-Fri 7am-6pm
Sat 8am-1pm
This would be onsite proposed hours of work, This will mean that traffic will start from any time after 5.30am with the site forman and office staff going to open up and get ready, They will hold a tool box meeting most days and that will be held at 6.30am. Then everyone will travel from the site sheds to the part of the proposed work area they are in and start work by 7am.
So all people involved will be traveling to site out side the 7am proposed start time and at the end of the day tools down at 6pm and then pack up fuel and grease and travel home. I know this as this is what we do for a living !
There will be traffic on the roads from est 5.30am -7.30pm for 2 years +
On theses roads it should not be even considered with out major upgrades to all roads proposed, even the secondary use roads.
LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLANS,
Boorowa 2012
ULSC 2010
YVC 2013
Do any of these environmental plans include the proposal of a industrial Turbine farm construction ??
Has any one read them ?
They should include the Development of any infrastructure on elevated lands or ridge ways that will affect the look or impact views. This proposal will have very HIGH VISUAL IMPACT.
The Cumulative visual impact should also be under taken, With the proposal of other Wind Farms in such close proximity of each other the area will be saturated with turbines.
549 Turbines are proposed in our area, To Many !
We live in a "Life Style" Area, Most of our client have moved from the larger Cities to get away from it all or have moved out from town to small acreage to better there life style.
All our clients object to wind power as it will affect the visual outlook of there farms and potentially affect the land value.
A lot of them don't want to say anything as it may affect them in the social status of a small town they have just moved to or don't want to upset anyone.
The impact all the proposed wind farms will have on our area will not be known until it is to late.
Wind towers create VISUAL POLUTION !!
NOISE,
They state that they are using the SA Environmental Noise Guidelines for wind farms from 2003
That is 13 years old !!
What size towers did they use ?
The towers they are proposing are 157m tall and over 3 mw
Most study have been on 1.5mw, How can we approve something when we don't have the data to support it.
Solar panels don't make any noise.
CONCLUSION,
We have been a local business for 53 years, We pride our self in doing it once and doing it right.
I can not as a businessman make sense of the waste of time and resources, Environmental impact and Visual solution that a project like this will cause.
I am willing to meet with any of the Planing and environment team and discuss in more detail or go to site and show them the potential of an environment disaster that could be unveiled.
Regards
Andrew Field
Yass Earth Movers
CLEARING AND DISTURBANCE OF LANDS,
635 ac of proposed disturbance
190ac of tree clearing, Including Hollow bearing trees for habitat.
page 82, 6.3.2 it state 705ac, and total of each veteran type impacted 33,215ac !!
This is a lot of land to impacted for such a short life span project.
On page 83, Table 6-3 it states "offset" credit requirements ??
How do you get these ?? Is this all to make it sound better ?
tick the box and make you feel ok for letting such a environmental disaster take place ???
This is not Biodiversity !! Who ever has made this chart needs to come out to site and look at what they are preposing.
You can't agree on something this substantial and this big by looking at google earth and making up a chart of potential offsets for environmental impacts. This will be the new Asbestos of the land scape. Every one knows its not right, But no one is willing to put there name to it to say something incase they loose there job.
We should be protecting the lands and conservation of lands should be our first objective, Not degradation.
This is not feasible in this type of land, The soil reports and mapping are wrong. It states on page 99 6.7 that there is Sand Stone ?? Has this been cut and pasted from another report that no one has bothered to check ??
I have detailed maps of the area showing protected lands and highly erodible tunnelling soils, Areas that Soil Conservation services and YEM have been working on for the last 53 years to protect and conserve.
The area that this is proposed has been untouched and un farmed for a reason.
I am Willing to meet and show who ever needs to see the areas in question, Also have a meeting at my office and go over the maps and prove why this should never be allowed to proceed.
If this is allowed to proceed, All the years of hard work to protect the land and conserve it will be to no avail.
This can not be Engineered, Once the area has been disturbed you will never be able to recover or reinstate the land back to what it is now. No amount of work, Design or money that may be available will never be able to return the virgin timber and habitat areas back to what we have now. It will be lost for ever and remembered as a environmental disaster.
The soils are to fragile and the slopes are to steep, No other work would be approved or be able to be under taken in these areas, So I can not see why this should even be considered.
You can still see the impact of the Gas pipe line that was put in over 40 years ago from Google Earth. This will be a lot worse as they are clearing and striping all the ridge lines 635ac to bear ground.
The erosion can also been seen on the Eastern side of the ride line from Rye Park. Any where that there has been clearing or disturbance you will see degradation of the land scape and scaring that can not be repaired.
The power trenches are proposed to be trenched in the access roads, This will lead to tunnelling and extreme erosion on the access tracks, And all the silt will be washed into the creeks and gullies.
Water degradation will be unstoppable with any and all environmental implementation procedures in place.
The amount of clearing on the road ways needs to be considered, The amount of trees that will have to be removed or cut back to get the towers though will be huge ! The amount of Co2 the trees have collected and stored has to be taken into account.
They keep bring up how green Wind tower are ??
How much Co2 will be emitted for this project ??
and how do you quantify the loss of 190 ac of virgin timber ??
ALL FOR ONLY 20 YEARS !! This is not long at all, We should be doing something a lot smarter with our money.
The NSW Gov Planing and Environment should be looking to propose more Solar that can be put on flat ground, Roof tops with no problems of clearing or erosion.
After 20 years solar is still 80% efficient ! Even as a business decision this is a no brainer.
This is not protecting the environment, This is not conservation of native plant, Animals, Including threatened species,populations and ecological communities and their habitats.
Different land use strategies have been used for years in deciding what is best for the area in which you are preposing the land use is best suited for the best ecologically sustainable out come for future use and conservation.
This wind turbine development doesn't seem to tick any of the boxes.
WATER USE,
The amount of water proposed is way under estimated.
Getting Water from the Yass weir will be unfeasible and very costly carting it over the entire project.
The extra truck movements will not have been taken into consideration and then the road degradation will not have been quantified ether.
The shire councils don't have enough water to maintenance grade the shire roads during summer.
All the creeks and rivers stop running in the summer time, What do you propose then ??
There is no way the Yass weir would be able to sustain such a large amount of water being taken from it over such a long period of time.
Even dust suppression on such a large project with the roads and the area disturbed on the hill tops will not be able to be suppressed with any amount of water trucks and man power.
CONCRETE AND BATCH PLANTS,
The 2 x batch plant proposed at each end of the project will take work away from local operators who are more than capable of suppling. They talk about giving locals work, This is one shore way of taking work away from the locals.
Both plants are located on back roads and are DIRT, When asked if they will upgrade these roads Trust Powers Micheal Head said NO, They are fit for purpose and we will just suppress the dust and grade the road when needed.
The amount of movements on such roads is unfeasible. Est a truck every 4 min when footings are pored.
It states that the area for the batch plant will be 100m x 100m.
I know this is imposable, Where are they getting there info from ?? Are they making it up hoping no one will read it ???
The Yass end batch plant is on the other side of the main rail line between Sydney and Melbourne, This means all material will have to pass over the main line to the batch plant including water and then back over to distribute to the tower locations. This will be a very high risk process that should on it own be rejected.
The environmental risks that comes with setting up and running such plants in these areas is another risk that can be taken out of the project and another risk to the environment that could be prevented. They should be using locally sourced concrete which would cut the truck moments in half as the material would not have to be moved to site, Mixed/Batched then re distributed.
and agian reduce the risk to the environment. Less set up, Less clean up, Less risk for human error.
TRANSPORT AND ROAD USEAGE,
We have a lot of trucks and move heavy and WIDE loads, We know what the roads proposed for use are like as we use all of them. To even contemplate the idea that some of these roads are fit for purpose or the dirt roads can be used as is and just maintained is madness.
Trust power have stated that if they do up grade the road and seal it, The Shire is responsible for maintaining it from then on in.
The only maintenance they will do is on the dirt roads.
No where dose is state the definition of a truck ??
The RMS is anything over 4.5t
Again, The amount of moments in the proposal is grossly under estimated !!
38 float movement for such a large project ??
Who is reading this ?
Has anyone checked this ??
Total movement 30,110 for a 2 year project ?
I think you should putting a 1 infant of this and you may be getting close.
130,110 movements (est only)
The roads around this area are lucky to have tar on them, They where never designed to take the heavy loads and the amount of traffic proposed in this project.
No matter what is said or agreed on the 3 shires and the local rate payers will be left to clean up the mess, Ask the ULSC how they are going with there roads.
The amount of workers traveling on all the roads proposed or not will be 3,000 movement a day for over 2 years.
The risk to the locals traveling the roads will be huge ! whats someones life worth ?? How many Co2 in that ??
The Blakney ck rd NTH is out side the boundary of the proposed works.
Map 6-2 is wrong, It doesn't show the Blakney ck rd NTH at all.
There is a main entrance into 13, This will also be over Blakney Creek a 3rd order stream. (Page 94 6.6.5)
There is no need to go to the entrance 13, They could upgrade the existing crossing on the Rye Park rd at the Blakney Ck rd STH end and then all road users would befit, Not just 1 involved land owner.
The mapping used is a disgrace, There is a lot of roads missing and still some roads that have not been named that are proposed to be used.
The difference between MAP 6-2 and 6-3 is very conflicting, See the difference in main access for the purple roads, Jerriwa and Coolalie roads Yass end have been left off Map 6-3 all together.
The Yellow roads on MAP 6-2 will be main access roads for all traffic excluding extreme loads like tower parts.
All other trucks and staff will travel the shortest distance.
The information given is conflicting from on document to another as is states that Cooks hill and Blackney ck rd STH will no be used, But hear on MAP 6-2 on page 90 of the RTS is is showing that is a Secondary access, Which will be come a primary access for 98% of the project. This needs to be addressed and if these roads are still on the proposal they will need major works under taken to be " Fit for propose "
Even the Cooks Hill Road And Rye Park road have dirt sections.
The Boorowa Rye Park roads are braking up under local traffic now, This sort of proposal will destroy them.
CONSTRUCTION HOURS,
Mon-Fri 7am-6pm
Sat 8am-1pm
This would be onsite proposed hours of work, This will mean that traffic will start from any time after 5.30am with the site forman and office staff going to open up and get ready, They will hold a tool box meeting most days and that will be held at 6.30am. Then everyone will travel from the site sheds to the part of the proposed work area they are in and start work by 7am.
So all people involved will be traveling to site out side the 7am proposed start time and at the end of the day tools down at 6pm and then pack up fuel and grease and travel home. I know this as this is what we do for a living !
There will be traffic on the roads from est 5.30am -7.30pm for 2 years +
On theses roads it should not be even considered with out major upgrades to all roads proposed, even the secondary use roads.
LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLANS,
Boorowa 2012
ULSC 2010
YVC 2013
Do any of these environmental plans include the proposal of a industrial Turbine farm construction ??
Has any one read them ?
They should include the Development of any infrastructure on elevated lands or ridge ways that will affect the look or impact views. This proposal will have very HIGH VISUAL IMPACT.
The Cumulative visual impact should also be under taken, With the proposal of other Wind Farms in such close proximity of each other the area will be saturated with turbines.
549 Turbines are proposed in our area, To Many !
We live in a "Life Style" Area, Most of our client have moved from the larger Cities to get away from it all or have moved out from town to small acreage to better there life style.
All our clients object to wind power as it will affect the visual outlook of there farms and potentially affect the land value.
A lot of them don't want to say anything as it may affect them in the social status of a small town they have just moved to or don't want to upset anyone.
The impact all the proposed wind farms will have on our area will not be known until it is to late.
Wind towers create VISUAL POLUTION !!
NOISE,
They state that they are using the SA Environmental Noise Guidelines for wind farms from 2003
That is 13 years old !!
What size towers did they use ?
The towers they are proposing are 157m tall and over 3 mw
Most study have been on 1.5mw, How can we approve something when we don't have the data to support it.
Solar panels don't make any noise.
CONCLUSION,
We have been a local business for 53 years, We pride our self in doing it once and doing it right.
I can not as a businessman make sense of the waste of time and resources, Environmental impact and Visual solution that a project like this will cause.
I am willing to meet with any of the Planing and environment team and discuss in more detail or go to site and show them the potential of an environment disaster that could be unveiled.
Regards
Andrew Field
Yass Earth Movers
J Dungey
Object
J Dungey
Object
Goulburn
,
New South Wales
Message
Dear Sir
I write to express opposition to the proposed Rye Park Industrial Wind "Farm" proposal for a number of reasons.
I have issue with the use of the word farm (an area of land and its buildings, used for growing crops and rearing animals). The proposal introduces significant heavy industry along some 26km of predominantly ridgeline bush (Look at the aerial map find the green wooded ridgeline...spot the turbines).
I believe the visual and environmental destruction is unwarranted in an already over saturated location with wind turbines - recently approved Yass, Cullerin, Gunning, Grabben Gullen, Crookwell.
Yet these Rye Park turbines will dwarf previously built turbines.
Why some many in such a limited area, given the small population and limited benefit it will provide locally.
I implore you to consider the need, are these turbines proposed because there is a need? , because I as a tax payer subsidise them, or because they can!!!
On the issue of need the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) the Body corporate responsible for the administration and operation of the wholesale national electricity market in accordance with the National Electricity Code released its report in June 2016 which states
"Flat forecasts for consumption from the grid" - 20 year outlook to 2035-36
Maximum demand is forecast to remain flat then reduce rapidly with forecast increases in rooftop PV, despite increased use and capacity of heating and air conditioning as growth is offset by energy efficiency and rooftop PV. This is already the case in South Australia.
http://www.aemo.com.au/News-and-Events/News/News/Flat-forecasts-for-consumption-from-the-grid
So the proposal surely cannot be capacity driven!
Yet the NSW Dept of Planning is about to approve this destructive heavy industry along kilometres of bush ridgeline, which is likely to generate power far below the proposal projections but what the heck. The impacts to wildlife, birds, threatened species, waterways and people who live there, what does the report say - inconsequential. The Dept of Planning won't be able to undo this bad decision, and us few who live in this area will be reminded constantly.
Thankyou in anticipation
Yours
I write to express opposition to the proposed Rye Park Industrial Wind "Farm" proposal for a number of reasons.
I have issue with the use of the word farm (an area of land and its buildings, used for growing crops and rearing animals). The proposal introduces significant heavy industry along some 26km of predominantly ridgeline bush (Look at the aerial map find the green wooded ridgeline...spot the turbines).
I believe the visual and environmental destruction is unwarranted in an already over saturated location with wind turbines - recently approved Yass, Cullerin, Gunning, Grabben Gullen, Crookwell.
Yet these Rye Park turbines will dwarf previously built turbines.
Why some many in such a limited area, given the small population and limited benefit it will provide locally.
I implore you to consider the need, are these turbines proposed because there is a need? , because I as a tax payer subsidise them, or because they can!!!
On the issue of need the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) the Body corporate responsible for the administration and operation of the wholesale national electricity market in accordance with the National Electricity Code released its report in June 2016 which states
"Flat forecasts for consumption from the grid" - 20 year outlook to 2035-36
Maximum demand is forecast to remain flat then reduce rapidly with forecast increases in rooftop PV, despite increased use and capacity of heating and air conditioning as growth is offset by energy efficiency and rooftop PV. This is already the case in South Australia.
http://www.aemo.com.au/News-and-Events/News/News/Flat-forecasts-for-consumption-from-the-grid
So the proposal surely cannot be capacity driven!
Yet the NSW Dept of Planning is about to approve this destructive heavy industry along kilometres of bush ridgeline, which is likely to generate power far below the proposal projections but what the heck. The impacts to wildlife, birds, threatened species, waterways and people who live there, what does the report say - inconsequential. The Dept of Planning won't be able to undo this bad decision, and us few who live in this area will be reminded constantly.
Thankyou in anticipation
Yours
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
Blakney Creek
,
New South Wales
Message
To whom it may concern,
As the family living on the property listed as R68 on your residential maps. The proposed power line locations place them at approximately a 200m distance from our residence. For this reason we feel we have to object to this project.
The effects of having a power line at such a close proximity to a residential house are significant. Some specific ones which concern us are:
- The detrimental health effects due to the proximity of the power line: As you well know power lines have a strong magnetic field circulating them and the health effects are not entirely known but they cant be good. The distance from our house, lack of cover and direction of magnetic curves although they curve downward would leave a magnetic field at our front door.
- The ability to sell house/property if we desire: I know from first hand experience that prospective buyers are hesitant to buy a property with power lines at proximity to the house, especially those with families such as us (or prospective buyers of our house)
- Fire Dangers it presents: High winds on power lines of such large spans cause them to touch, hence leaving the area at high risk of fires being started. at a distance of 200m from our house, we would have no hope of reacting in time if this event occurred. It puts our safety in our home at risk.
- The visual impairment of our serene location: One of the reasons we live where we are is the view. The power lines directly impair this.
If the proposed wind farm goes ahead, at the very least it is our desire that the power lines are moved to the western most point of the proposed corridor or further. This would mean it wouldn't be as close to our residence any other for that matter.
Thank you
As the family living on the property listed as R68 on your residential maps. The proposed power line locations place them at approximately a 200m distance from our residence. For this reason we feel we have to object to this project.
The effects of having a power line at such a close proximity to a residential house are significant. Some specific ones which concern us are:
- The detrimental health effects due to the proximity of the power line: As you well know power lines have a strong magnetic field circulating them and the health effects are not entirely known but they cant be good. The distance from our house, lack of cover and direction of magnetic curves although they curve downward would leave a magnetic field at our front door.
- The ability to sell house/property if we desire: I know from first hand experience that prospective buyers are hesitant to buy a property with power lines at proximity to the house, especially those with families such as us (or prospective buyers of our house)
- Fire Dangers it presents: High winds on power lines of such large spans cause them to touch, hence leaving the area at high risk of fires being started. at a distance of 200m from our house, we would have no hope of reacting in time if this event occurred. It puts our safety in our home at risk.
- The visual impairment of our serene location: One of the reasons we live where we are is the view. The power lines directly impair this.
If the proposed wind farm goes ahead, at the very least it is our desire that the power lines are moved to the western most point of the proposed corridor or further. This would mean it wouldn't be as close to our residence any other for that matter.
Thank you