MOD 1 - Turbine and infrastructure changes

The Modifications should be subject to a fresh application

I object to the modification of the proposed Liverpool Range (LR) wind farm for the following reasons
*The increase in height of the turbines of over 50% represents a substantial change. On any reasonable basis this can only be considered a new project
*The ability for aerial fire tankers to effectively control bushfires, such as the Sir Ivan fire, will be greatly curtailed
*The developer is avoiding addressing cumulative impacts arising from both the LR wind farm and Valley of the Winds wind farm ( EIS pg 115) by claiming the LR project has been approved. For this reason the LR project should be considered a new project so that the developer is forced to address the cumulative impacts of back to back projects.
Yours Sincerely
Trevor Nash
Old Turee

I am objecting to the proposed modification for the reasons below
-Visual impact on the Coolah Valley and the Community. The larger towers will have a huge visual impact and should not be able to be built within a 10km radius of townships.
-Environmental impact on endangered species habitat ie the Regent Honey Eater. The NSW Gov and LLS had spent much time and money protecting this habitat. This modification is therefore a contradiction.
- Coolah Tops National Park is Coolah main tourist attraction and home to many native species both flora and fauna. The project will have serious impact on the area and the drive to it from Coolah. Power lines in this area should be underground and no substations, batch plants or battery storage areas should be visible along Forest Road.
-The power lines on the Forest Road will need to be underground so as not to impact on the ability to use airstrips on properties This puts the property and surrounding properties at great risk during bush fires. These airstrips are also needed for flying ag planes in and out for supering purposes.
-The land values around this area have a real probability of decreasing in the short and long term due to this project getting the go ahead.
- There is a real concern of dividing a very productive and cohesive regional community. The community must see a benefit for them. ie long term jobs assured, improvement of facilities, educational and medical improvements.
Thank you for reading my submission. After all is considered it is us who has to live here both in the short term and in the long term. We want to do our bit, which i believe we already do, using our prime agricultural land but at the same time we don't want to be over towered.

I am lodging an objection to this ridiculous mod 1 turbine and infrastructure changes….. it is a pathetic waste of taxpayers money plus uglyfying a beautiful regional area…… giving no consideration to birds and other flying creatures … that will be killed by the blades. and.not considering the people who already live in this area … the noise pollution which it will cause….. and the toxic materials that are used to make these monstrosities. which will not make any difference to the world's….. climate change that the cultist propaganda keep spewing out……….

Please refer to the attached letter

I object to coolah Valley windfarm

I am objecting to the proposed changes to this Liverpool Range Wind farm project for the following reasons.
# Once again, the lack of consideration of what the visual impact will be by increasing the size of these turbines and hence the infrastructure that is necessary to service them
# There has been lack of consultation between the Energy Co , the Project managers and the Hosts and definitely the surrounding landowners, as the information given and discussed, is vastly inconsistent.
#Due to the above, the communities surrounding this project are already becoming incohesive. This is not the result we want during and definitely not after this project , if it is ever completed.
# People live in this area because of its agricultural productivity and its natural beauty. The latter, it is a free gift and I can't believe that local people are happy to sabotage that, to make themselves some more money. Its not all about money! Renewable energy has to be economic, and this has been, and continues to be proven that these large scale renewable projects are not the way to go, especially when the power sourced is so unrealistically far from where it will be consumed.
# If people want to contribute to being proactive with renewables, and to be fair to the whole community, then lets look into micro renewables, whereby, No large scale industrial infrastructure has to be used,hence, observed daily for 25 years, ie, transmission lines included.and not a handful of people benefitting from massive payouts. Those in favour of these large scale renewable projects, mention that the community of Coolah and other, will benefit form handsome amounts of compensation . Sounds like bribery to me! They are forgetting that these communities have been already receiving money from the government , through grants and this can continue , without this large scale project going ahead.
# The foot print is massive, from the commencement of freighting the components to their destination , the inputs with construction, maintaining , operating and finally the disposal when decommissioned.
# The overload of the local services eg. local council initial and continued maintainence of all the local roads, will be paramount.
# We are NOT just saying a straight out NO to renewables, but offering another less invasive and fairer way, whereby EVERYONE can benefit as a whole community .

I Unreservedly Object to the Liverpool Range Wind Farm Modified Project.

I am Opposing this project because of the Imminent Massive Destruction of the Environment, Wildlife, Rural Community and FArmland.

And I Completely Oppose the Claims that Wind Farms Are cheap and efficient.

I Object Outright to Liverpool Range Wind Farm Modification. Plus the original application put forward by Tilt Renewables. Under the name Liverpool Range Wind Farm Pty Ltd.
This Project will offer Harm and Loss to our Rare and Threatened Wildlife including rare Forests become the Next Threat from Renewables en masse, across whose Land. Whose Land. A Few agreeing to receive money to host Skyscraper High Wind Turbines. Plus councils Dealing for money from Profit making Shareholding Companies. It's a Horrible World you see. A Continual Harm and Loss to our Original Rare and Endangered Wildlife, being Every Species still here on Country, in a Land named Australia. Still here. The Survivors. When will it Cease. Impact upon the Land. When we lose More Species. Hope not. What about some Care for Country. It isn't Skyscraper high Wind Turbines. Not is it Solar Farms. Nor is it Gas. Nor is it Selling Coal to OS Nations for them to use ? Really. How Ridiculous this government named Australian Government are. They are Always giving Rights to Foreigners. Never to the people who had managed this island of two in a way called Care for Country. Where species held numbers on Country under First Nation Land Management. If we continue the Harm and Loss Land Management Ideas this government enable, we will Lose our Species by another 84 %. That's calculated on Loss over years Since 1873. When Clearing of Forests, now named Native Vegetation, Impacted Catchments from north QLD to the end of Tasmania into western Catchments unable to Capture Rainfall. Which is how the Continent Australia receives its Flow. From Rain. Different so much it is from 1874. That's when the Great Artesian Basin altered flow you see. Altered Flow. Flow. The Catchments from QLD into Northern Tablelands water the Darling River Tributaries into the Darling River Food Bowl. Impacted every Drought. Impacted by the Worst Ever Dry Drought Ever in History in the Entire state of NSW into QLD into Victoria. Yet Not One comment was offered by a report for Liverpool Range Wind Farm Pty Ltd by Umwelt Consultants. Who need Investigating for Consultancy offering Harm and Loss to EEC areas and their Associated Rare and Endangered Wildlife. Impacted by the Worst Ever Dry Drought Ever in History in the Entire state of NSW. And Fires followed 2019 Worst Ever Dry Drought over an area named Protected National Parks plus Farmland plus Nature Reserves and Crown Land not managed. Habitats Lost during That year , in 2019. Yet Not One mention of it by Consultants working for a Foreign Investment company. I Object Outright to Liverpool Range Wind Farm Modified Project. Plus the original application put forward by Tilt Renewables. Under the name Liverpool Range Wind Farm Pty Ltd.

It is an Objection. It is a Completely Different Project. The Liverpool Range Wind Farm Modified Project. It's Completely Different. They have to offer a Completely Different EIS. Yes. Yes they do. It's Not the same Project. Little Eagle are are rarer than possibly Wedgies. They're Rare now. The Dry Drought killed Many. That's Another Objection because The Worst Ever Dry Drought Ever in History destroyed Habitat plus associated Wildlife.

That was After 2018 Approval.

You have to Include the Impacts of That Worst Ever Dry Drought EVER in History on our Rare Threatened Endangered Wildlife. Plus Eucalypt species. We need to Protect them. What's survived. Whatever Survived That Awful Dry Drought must be Protected. Protected. This is a Protest. 

Sign " THREATS TO REGENTS HONEYEATER BY TILT RENEWABLES AND AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT ", All on Country.

Please do so, All on Country. In Towns termed Rural. On Farms Protesting Renewables. On Rare EEC areas Threatened by Big Dollar companies. If Regents Honeyeater become Extinct, then the Australian Government Is Responsible. As are Consultant firms working for Foreign Investment companies. Our Australia Land is Not Europe or Asia. It is Not Glacial Flow Country. This Land is Dependent on Rainfall. Dependent on Rainfall. Wind Farms interfere with Cloud. Yes Cloud. Yes. Cloud. That is, Cloud. Clouds offer our Continent moisture. Impact Clouds, you Impact Catchments and their associated vegetation and associated Wildlife. My Research proves Wind Farms Impact Catchments. They Alter Cloud you see. Our Catchments Depend on the Patterns we Had prior to when. Every time you Change Cloud you change a Catchment. That Worst Ever Dry Drought Ever in History in the Entire state of NSW into QLD into Victoria has Altered almost Every Catchment in these areas. Correct. Our Rare and Vulnerable species Have No Rights. When Will They. I Demand Our Native Vegetation and Associated Wildlife Have Rights to their Existence as they stand today. No More Forest destruction of the Rare EEC areas please. We will Lose up to 47 % More species If Renewables are the dominant Land management I term Industrial. Industrial. And where is the Zoning termed Industrial in this Coolah region. There Isn't any Industrial zoned Land in this Liverpool Range area. How can Industry get Rights on Land deemed Agricultural ? I Demand a Reply to this question please.

Why do we Continue to Threaten our Rare Habitats and the Rare Species we Know Are Rare. I Demand government Cease and Desist managing this island of two, named Australia. I Demand that the DPI and DPIE Cease and Desist from Today. I Demand All personnel in these departments undergo investigation for Harm and Loss Land Management, impacting Catchments, impacting EEC regions, impacting Every single Original Australian Native Species now. Now. Disgusting are government. Disgusting are those with jobs in government. How Dare You All Threaten the Future of Rare and Endangered species. I Demand Australian Government Cease and Desist from Today. Your Lack of Care for Country is Why. How Dare You All in government seats jobs departments DPI DPIE and Ridiculous legislation from Unaware and Ignorant people. People Without Awareness Harm our Wildlife. Yes they do.

We MUST All fight Renewables. They are Creating HEAT in northern Hemisphere areas. = Drought then floods. What next. More Drought. They create Drought. They do. How. They Alter Clouds. Clouds. We need Clouds as they are. Heat Alters them. Changes them. They get Warmer you see. And drop moisture you see. And that Alters regional rainfall. That's what happened in That Worst Ever Dry Drought. It brought Immense Loss of Wildlife. We Have to Protect our Wildlife. That is a Priority. Regents Honeyeater live in this region. They Cannot have Windfarms near them anywhere. They will leave this Habitat region to be where. Where. This is a rare area Under Threat from an Industrial Profit Making Foreign Investment.

Sign:" Regents Honeyeater Under Threat". "Protect EECs. Under Threat from Australian Government. DPI. DPIE. Tilt Renewables. Renewables."

The EEC's Today Survived That Worst Ever Dry Drought Ever in History. They Have to be Protected. Have to Be.

Two wind farms proposed nearby - the Valley of the Winds (148 turbines 250m high) and the Liverpool Range wind turbine projects (currently 220 turbines 250m high). The former is awaiting the proponents response to Objections. The latter was approved in 2018 but they are requiring approval for the modification that will raise the height to 250m.

Here are some pertinent points they have changed
- raised the height of the turbines from 165m to 250m (which we think should make it a new development not a modified one).
- re-sited some turbines outside the previously approved development corridor
- increased the footprint of the development
- increased the impact on native vegetation by 1249ha
- increased the clearing around each turbine with bigger hardstand etc,

- increased the amount of land clearing for roads, cabling and transmission lines/towers,

-increased the number of concrete batching plants

-ignored the impact on the nearby Coolah Tops National Park's visual amenity with the excuse that visitors walking through the park will be mostly screened by trees and that the lookout faces a different direction (obviously people can't actually turn their heads).

-increased the amount of native flora to be removed, including 427ha of the Critically Endangered Ecological Community Box Gum Woodland and habitat of the at-risk Regent Honeyeater.

- vegetation removal includes habitat for seven NSW listed species - two plant, one mammal, one bird.

- at high risk from the development are the Barking Owl, Large Bent-winged Bat, Powerful Owl, Swift Parrot, White Throated Needletail (as well as Regent Honeyeater mentioned above)
- at medium risk from the development are the Black Chinned Honeyeater, Corben's Long Eared Bat, Dusky Woodswallow, Painted Honeyeater, Superb Parrot, Wedge tailed eagle, Little Eagle, Eastern Cave Bat, Yellow Bellied Sheathtail Bat, Large Eared Pied Bat.
- ignored the impact to light aviation activities (only mentioning standard commercial flight paths), and aerial fire fighting (which was used in the area in 2017's Sir Ivan Fire and the concerns raised by National Parks about visibility in fire situations and aerial fire fighting at night).
- don't want turbine lighting because it will be a nuisance to neighbours (but potentially deadly to aviators) and may affect the Dark Sky Park we are about 80km from.
- increased visual impact with higher turbines, impacting more non-associated residences
- increased traffic of around 300+ vehicle movements per day (one way), so 600+ on local roads
- ignored the cumulative effect that may occur with the combined wind farms of 370 turbines 250m tall placed on ridges all around the township of Coolah (5-6km from both projects) on wildlife, visual amenity, noise, EMI, property values which will also impact the villages of Uarbry, etc
And it is Cumulative Effect. It is Cumulative. It breaks up CLOUD you see. We Depend on Cloud you see. They create Drought. Wind Farms. Yes. No More Wind Farms!! NONE

I object to the proposed modification on the following grounds.
The increased visual impact due to the proposed increase in height of turbines, increase in number of turbines visible to the dwellings located on my land as outlined in the Comparative Dwelling assessment. Screen planting is not a suitable solution to this issue, my residence in particular.
I have concerns relating to the operational noise of the windfarm, how this will be monitored. and the process involved if there are any breaches by the windfarm operators or complaints made by neighbours.
Concerns over water supply to the windfarm, how much is required and the impact this would have on existing users of this resource.
Concerns over ongoing impacts to flora, fauna through the loss of established habitat and bird/bat strike.

I am in opposition to the proposal to increase the wind turbine heights due to a number of reasons including:
1. The increased visual impact on the landscape and all those that live in the area as well as visitors.
2. Negative impact on native wildlife
3. The impact from the concrete structures required in building the turbines and also concern about what happens when they reach the end of their working life
4. The inefficiencies of land based wind turbines compared with off shore turbines

I object to Tilt's modification application. In particular I object to the increased height. An 85m increase in height is huge and will affect a much greater number of non-associated dwelling and neighbours. In our case we have gone from seeing around 20 turbines to seeing 150! How can this be allowed without a completely new development application? This is NOT a small modification!?

These increases will further impact natural vegetation and animals negatively due to the increase in footprint of the development, and all associated clearings for roads/transmission lines etc. These impacts on flora and fauna include critically endangered box gum woodland which is also home to the at risk honey eater. Also will impact the habitats for at least seven NSW listed species, 2 plants, 1 mammal and one bird. They have also ignored the impact on surrounding areas such as Coolah Tops National Park with the new proposed heights.

They have also ignored the impact to light aviation activities and aerial fire fighting in regards to visibility and safety. These turbines should be lit for aviation safety. However there are drawbacks that the light could negatively impact neighbours, those who appreciate the night sky and the Dark Sky Park about 80km away.

The modified project will also mean a increase in traffic 300+ vehicles per day (one way) = 600+ on local roads, which will subsequentially lead to an increase in noise levels and impact everyone who lives there. And Tilt have also ignored the cumulative effect of 370 turbines (250m tall each) placed surrounding Coolah on wildlife, visual amenity, EMI, property values -which will also impact other towns.

Take the turbines to where you want the power (eg coast). why impact us when we get no benefits just problems and negative impacts.

1. Cumulative Impacts – there is no data or analysis of cumulative impacts of the Modified Project submission. This is poignant given there is no reference in the submission to the declared Central West Orana Renewable Energy Zone (CWO REZ), and the associated generator and transmission network projects in the region. It is my understanding that of the 26 proposed projects in the CWO REZ, there are 10 located within the Warrumbungle Shire Council, being within the region of Coolah and Dunedoo. The increase in turbine size and change in overhead transmission lines within the project footprint I believe will have a significant contribution to cumulative impacts within the REZ. Yet the submission does not have any acknowledgement of, or demonstrates evidence decision making planning processes on this issue.
2. SIA revision – there was no revised SIA in the modification submission. Is there data sourced in consultation from local government and community stakeholders on the social commentary arising from the Modification changes and associated REZ planning of a cluster of projects in the region? If not, then I request such data be collated, analysed and considered as part of the planning process to enable community and all stakeholders have a more accurate understanding of the expected social impacts. This is especially important given the CWO REZ is the first REZ in NSW, and across the nation, and yet the Social Impact Assessment has not been revised.
3. Workers accommodation – it is unclear where the construction labour force will be residing. Existing accommodation in the district is limited, and I was unable to identify if or where workers accommodation was proposed in the modified project submission.
4. Access to water for construction – access to on-farm dams or bore water, or Coolah township water is not secure. The priority for these water sources is for town water security (for the Coolah town bore) and agricultural operations, as per licencing by Water NSW. Water licences for bores and wells held by landholders in or near the LRWF footprint project area are licenced for ‘stock and domestic’, not for other purposes. It is unclear as to where, and how, water is to be sourced for construction. The requirement for water will be increased with the larger turbine size as per larger foundations, and there are concerns the drawdown of water from groundwater sources will compromise water security for towns and agricultural operations.
5. Access to aggregate for construction – it is unclear as to where aggregate is to be sourced for construction. There are limited aggregate quarries in the local region. As per water, the requirement for aggregate will likely increase with the proposed larger foundations required for the taller turbines.
6. Waste generation – there is no information available in the modification as to waste disposal. It is my understanding waste is to be transported offsite, but to where? Will the proponent fund upgrades to waste facilities run by local government to enable appropriate disposal of waste.
7. Shadow Flicker – the analysis is based on a desktop software study but not with locally recorded data. Such raw data should be collated and the shadow flicker analysis be revised accordingly to give residents in nearby dwellings a more current and potentially more accurate understanding of the shadow flicker intensity.
8. Roads –
a. notifications for the route for haulage of materials to the project site from source (eg. Port) has been advertised in papers that are not widely circulated in the Coolah, Cassilis and Dunedoo communities. I request that notifications also be placed in the local community papers of each of these towns (Coolah District Diary, Merriwa District Diary and Dunedoo District Diary).
b. I also found the terminology for monitoring and remediation of roads to be ambiguous. The reference of road inspections being ‘generally weekly’ and follow up remedial works to be ‘prompt’ are ambiguous terms, and do not provide a clear service level that would be expected by all road users and local government authorities. This is especially so given the heavy vehicle use of the roads, and the frequency of light vehicle movements closer to the project area.
9. Visual Impact Assessment – despite the submission stating the proposed modifications did ‘not result in increased level of visual impact from any of the assessed dwellings’, the community perception is otherwise (reference – personal communications and outcomes from the Coolah community meeting held 6 October). This is causing fragmentation in the Coolah community, particularly social impacts. There are also doubts emerging amongst the community about the validation of the photomontages provided in the submission, and I believe needs to be addressed. As there is no revised SIA in the submission, and in particular cumulative impacts assessment, and the project is now within a cluster of projects proposed under the CWO REZ, I request that the VIA be revised together with the SIA in the context of the REZ cluster of proposed projects. This links in with my suggested revised SIA as in (2) above.

Please see attached document.

Thanks for the opportunity to make a submission on this historic and controversial project SSD 6696-Mod 1- Liverpool Range Wind Farm (Tilt). A personal objection to the project, this submission is intended to aim at every ill conceived aspect of the so called modification.
The Coolah Tops National Park
The National Park is considered the Coolah regions greatest tourist asset , leaving many in our community despairing at Tilts proposal to build 250metre high behemoths near the approaches to the Park. The turbines proposed within visual range of the Pinnacle lookout are an outrageous proposition. The loss to our town of significant tourist revenue through a protracted park closure due to storm damage has been large and still being felt in accommodation settings and retail and hospitality sectors. The building of Turbines nearby to the park all but ensures the further demise of the tourist industry through the negative visual impacts.
Our Roads
The EIS hasn't quantified the ground disturbance impacts on roads being upgraded for access, therefore the impacts on native vegetation and cultural heritage haven't been assessed for this project. This is a "wait and see approach" that ignores existing items of heritage and the potential for significant damage to occure. Local roads proposed for widening or upgrading include Pandora Pass, Pandora Road, Warrung State Forest road, Rotherwood Road, Turee Vale Road and Bounty Creek Road. Fair dinkum, did you even look at our local heritage info contained in Councils' LEPs or heritage studies?
Pandora Pass: Cunningham monument/Cairn marking the camp site location on his historic expedition to the Liverpool plain.
Waring State Forest Road: A similar Cairn and marker noting the proximity to the 40th parrallel, on the roadside.
Turee Vale Road: Turee Vale Cemetery. Located near the property Benwerrin, Turee Vale Cemetery has the heritage listed graves of the pioneering families of the district. In 2021 Coolah and District Historical Society placed a plaque with a list of the internees.
Bounty Creek Road: This road passes the historic site West of Rotherwood homestead with the private grave sites of Anne Jane McGowan, died 1849, and of Paul Martin, died 100 yrs later in 1949. Steps will have to be taken to ensure these sites aren't impacted by ground disturbance.
Impact on land values
Are your able to give our Communities' assurance that land values won't drop? Can you show us where other communities haven't suffered loss of property value where located near visual and audible range of the Turbines.
What are the benefits to our Town?
As the voluntary planning agreement is derived on a per Turbine basis, not Megawatts of power produced, With a reduced number of turbines proposed under the modification this is a reduction of benefit from the approved project, this is disheartening to say the least, where is the fairness to our communities when you openly seek to diminish any possible benefit we may receive. You should be building us a town battery connected to your energy hub, and be available to be drawn on overnight by the towns residents at significantly reduced tariffs.
I support the concept of renewable energy, and would like to see everyone benefit while minimising the impacts on aesthetics, health and quality of life for Coolah and it's neighbouring communities'

I object to the Liverpool Range Wind Farm MODIFICATION based on the following concerns:

- Number and Size of Turbines in close proximity to small village
Proximity of a substantial number of 250m turbines close to the village of Coolah. This modified project, combined with the Valley of the Winds Wind Farm could potentially see hundreds of turbines close to the Coolah village. While individual developers have conducted community consultation, there has been no provision by State Government of a combined project/REZ "picture" or “visualisation” or “noise prediction” of what these will collectively look like for Coolah in the future.

- Cumulative Impacts
What will be the combined impacts? Visual, Economic, Social, Aircraft access (agricultural and Fire Fighting), Environmental and Agricultural? The scale of this modified project will be too much (in conjunction with the VoW) for the small community of Coolah. While not every resident will show concern over the changing landscape - there will be many that will. The postcard vista of the Coolah valley will be significantly changed and not just in the mere distance, they will be located on the surrounding ridges of the town. How many is too many for a small village or town?

- No Provision for Reduced Energy Costs
Communities who find themselves surrounded by these large scale renewable energy projects should in the first instance receive drastically reduced energy prices. Yes, there are Community Enhancement Funds and Benefit Sharing Schemes but for having these turbines (and solar panels and high voltage power lines....) to help power the state - deliver lower energy prices at the very least.

Surely there should be more benefits to impose such a development, other than just the Community Benefit Scheme?

- Increase in Employment
The Modification to the project promises to deliver around 800 jobs during construction and around 47 ongoing operational jobs. I see this to be a challenge. Our unemployment rate is at an all time low, local businesses are battling to find employees now, where are these employees going to come from? If they do come locally, that will be one employee lost to a local business that is already struggling to find and keep workers, and for local business to compete with the hourly $ rate of these type of projects is near impossible. “If” new employees are then attracted to local businesses, where are they going to live? The housing and accommodation market locally, particularly rental is already very difficult to enter. This may seem trivial, but during construction (and potentially overlap of construction of more than one project), how do these small communities keep up? What measures are in place to help communities survive the “boom” and not lose families after construction? How do communities mitigate the housing, accommodation, education and health access challenges that already exist now, when the population has a big spike for a short amount of time?

- High Risk of “Boom and Bust” for the community
Rural towns and regional cities currently have a major workforce shortage. The labour required to build this project (and others) will undoubtedly be brought in and sourced externally (potentially offshore too?), this is likely to provide a short-term “construction phase business boom”, that poses the risk of a “bust” post construction for many small businesses and communities. Considerations need to be given to the ability to provide essential services to the community and the workers during this phase too eg. Health and hospital services etc Rural and regional communities are already challenged by under-resourced hospitals and health worker shortages.

- Loss of identity
The potential “boom and bust” nature of developments of this size also poses significant impacts to the social and cultural aspects of our community. The unique culture of our community is a source of pride and is integral to community connection and social engagement for community members. I foresee that numerous developments of this size in conjunction with the REZ could potentially cost the community its identity and contribute to a loss of social engagement and a loss of culture and heritage. The very nature of these large-scale developments and the REZ are already activating community division. It is a large price to pay, for once active and engaged communities to be traumatised and further isolated by division. There is an equilibrium, a healthy balance for such developments, and I feel this project exceeds that.

- Consistency and Reliability of Renewable Energy
I fear that the rushed target of a complete transition to 100% renewable Energy will be costly. I think a balanced transition and approach would be more efficient and sensible, allowing sufficient time to further investigate other potential models and solutions, and locations, to transition in a slow and considered way. This would also provide opportunity to identify any unknown impacts or challenges (eg consistent supply during severe weather events) and to further mitigate significant impacts and issues for the REZ areas, communities and the state.

- Reduction of Community Benefit $
Due to the decrease in Turbine numbers (however, noting increase in energy generated), the total Community Benefit $ will be reduced. This original amount agreed upon based on the original number of Turbines, should be honoured or a revision of the calculation to pay based on energy generated, and should not be below the original amount predicted.

- Regent Honeyeater Habitat
While the State Gov is currently supporting landholders to preserve Regent Honeyeater habitat, this modification expands the impacts to the Regent Honeyeater Habitat. I don’t see it necessary for any large-scale energy project to encroach on any endangered specie habitat, endangered means just that, not that common. So surely we can utilise country that isn’t the very small bit of remaining habitat for such flora and fauna.

- Loss of natural landscape and vistas
The value of our natural landscapes is being underestimated I feel. If each community looked to develop and generate their own renewable energy source, the environmental impacts would be reduced to a more acceptable size. Imposing large scale energy projects on small rural villages is not sustainable in my view. The modification put forward includes increased Turbine size of up to 250m, the sheer scale of this project will forever change the landscape. Yes – forever. I don’t support this.

- Coolah Tops National Park
The NPWS are committed to conservation of our state's biodiversity and cultural heritage. The Liverpool Range Windfarm will be the largest Wind Generation project in Australia once built and will flank the hills and ridges as you drive to enter the Coolah Tops National Park. Many turbines will be visible from the park. The roads will be widened substantially and traffic will be greatly increased during construction. Is this not hypocrisy? The biodiversity impacts of this project, and more so the modified project, are unacceptable and go against the very foundation and commitments that the NPWS aim to deliver. I believe there is potential for renewable energy generation on marginalised land, where the biodiversity impacts and social impacts would be drastically reduced.

- Lack of transparency or lack of research conducted into potential Renewable Energy generation solutions for the State
What research was conducted to determine that the Industrial/Large Scale Energy Projects and associated Renewable Energy Zones is the most efficient and best way forward for the future Energy generation in our State? What research was done on Community Owned Renewable Energy Projects – “bottom-up approach” vs “Top-down approach”? If there was research conducted, where are the findings that demonstrate this model to be the best model for the future? Just as I believe it is important for our Country to be self-sustainable into the future, so too should our cities, towns and communities. Not dependent on the national grid or energy being produced hundreds of km’s away.

- Limited resources
I question how efficient these large-scale projects REALLY are compared to the energy they produce. The amount of water needed daily to build this project is phenomenal. How much power and oil do the turbines really need to run? How often do they have to be rebuilt? So many questions that aren’t being clearly answered and measured.

- Community Consultation
Tilt opened an office in Coolah and had it manned by locals, generating 2 positions during the submission stage. However, this essentially made it harder for community to access information and have their questions answered at a time when it mattered most. Why not staff the display with a Tilt employee who would be familiar with the project and be able to guide the community through the modification. If the benefits of the modification are so great, why hide, why not have someone knowledgeable present to promote these benefits and help alleviate any concerns. Actions speak louder than words.

I fully support research and investigation into Community based Energy Generation and Community owned Renewable Energy - by the Community and for the Community and would advocate that all cities, towns and communities start looking at ways to be more active in supplying their own needs and improve sustainability.

Environmental disaster pure and simple

Please see attachment

I object to the wind turbine project on the grounds of : inflicting a visual eyesore on our already beautiful mountains, and negative impact on the Coolah scenic value; injury to and/or death of birds, bat's, insects; the increased clearing of trees and shrubs from the land surrounding the increased height of these turbines... This in itself is environmental vandalism and is not environmentally friendly or sustainable in that local fauna and native vegetation are negatively impacted.
Do better!!
No to the Liverpool Ranges wind farm project

I have provides comments on the Liverpool Range Windfarm Project in the attached document