Thank you for your attention to this matter.
The attached report was received this afternoon and as I read through it, I just applauded right through.
Neighbours may only learn of these visits by word of mouth or chance observation. They are the second order of ‘non-involved’ or ‘associated’ landholders, in developer parlance, destined to receive lesser amounts or possibly no direct benefit from projects.
Windfarms talk has been all around us at least since 2009; in 2012, first public information local session Liverpool Range WF that I reported on for local paper.
We opted out as we have a relatively small property and could not afford to be the jump off point to the main road of transmission lines – nor have our Biosecurity compromised by open access to planners. Presumably our neighbours have been paid $1,000 per annum for that time. We thought we would test out the wind prospects – with the proposed Liverpool Range Wind Farm situated right around our property boundary, we took the local wind test results as an incentive to invest $63,640 + installation costs in a 10KW wind turbine which was installed on 3/11/2010. The turbine had to be sited near power lines so was not put on a ridge but has a clear wind path directly up the Talbragar Valley. At the time, we experienced the windiest month we can recall in 36 years here.
On 30/11/10 had produced 478 kWh max of 43.62 amps
On 10/12/10 had produced 659 kWh max of 43.62 amps.
At 60c per kWh equals $395.40.
Rewind Energy in extensive advertising promoted the Wind Prospecting Report budget showing $82,800 Income over 6 years, which extrapolates to $1150 per month.
On 15/2/11 had produced 2046 KWH max of 45.26 amps, which equates to approx $400 per month, a long way short of budget showing a monthly average over $1100. This had been the windiest time of the year.
Over 2014, the 60c/kWh credits from the wind turbine were $1066.80 (6Dec– Mar 1778kWh); $313.80 (Mar– June 523kWh); $399.60 (Jun-8Sep 666kWh). Total $1780.20 ave 9 months $197.80 per month; total 2967kWh ave $329.66 per month.
We had an independent assessment on an average day of 5.1 m/s (metres per second velocity.)
These are the consistent figures since installation in 2010 which are far from the claims made by Rewind Energy, which fell into receivership in 2014 leaving everyone abandoned as regards service agreements. A wind shear event which wrecked the turbine allowed us to claim a percentage of our initial cost with insurance.
In 2014/2015 we installed two 10KW solar systems for $39,000 - half the capital expenditure of the wind turbine and erected by two men in a few days on shed roof.
Origin Energy statement 30 August 2016 to 23 November 2016 (86 days) Total Solar Feed-In Credit 5894 kWh @ 60.00 c/kWh $3,536.40CR [Gross Input] and 2095 @ 6.00c/kWh $125.70CR [Nett metering input].
Origin Energy statement Solar Feed-in 24Feb 2017 to 19 March (24 days) 1151kWh @ 6c $69.06.
Origin Energy statement Solar Feed-in 20Mar 2017 to 30May (72 days) 3456 kWh @ 6c $207.36.
These results show us that we totally reject the economics of wind power and believe the government should not approve the Valley of the Winds Project on economic viability.
The Sir Ivan Fire of 2017 was devastating for the entire district – many homes were saved by aerial water/retardant bombing. With the proliferation of wind towers, there would be added fire risk from the towers themselves, and with the risk to aircraft, only very restricted aerial fire fighting would be available for saving property and lives. Detailed submissions have been made regarding this aspect of the EIS. Appendix K, I think.
The siting of batching plants is of primary concern to us with the local roads in poor condition – really only one vehicle wide on most roads. I was told that 55 traffic movements were allowable in one day – on a one way road, that makes 110 per day.
A matter of extreme significance to us is the water requirement of the batching plant. Local creeks and the misnamed Talbragar River are not flowing on the surface in times of low rainfall. Our house bore is down 18 metres and has been at low pumping level at those times leaving us dependent on tank water.
We are currently sinking an additional bore on “Cooinda” Cooinda Road and have had to jump many hoops with NSW Water even though we have held a licence for this water for many years. The bore was renamed and lost in the system – we had to engage a water specialist to investigate our case with Water NSW and it took almost a year for Water NSW to remediate their error.
It is a source of amazement to us that there is no mention of how the batching plants will source their water under licence.
One suggestion was to truck in the water from Burrendong Dam – how many more truck movements would that make on our poorly constructed roads?
The host farmers are now pariahs – double transmission towers going through their neighbours’ Strategic Agricultural Land.
Submission to [email protected]
Agricultural Land Use Planning Policy
Submitted 27 February, 2021
I have attached submissions that I have made about Strategic Land Use – Commissioner Quinlivan has apparently disappeared – no acknowledgement, no follow up, MIA. Just paper talk.
Do city people want to eat in a few years’ time or just sit in front of their air conditioners and pat themselves on the back for using renewables?
Yes, we are cynical out here because we have to carry the heavy stuff while city centric people have all the voting power.
One question that I ask at the Public Information sessions is “how many years does a wind tower have to produce to neutralise its carbon footprint – manufactured overseas (China with fossil fuel), shipped to Australia (fossil fuel); trucked out to the Black Stump (fossil fuel); 40t cement base (Manufacture and using of Ordinary Portland cement used in concrete produces 0.81 tons of CO2 per 1 ton of cement), access roads, (erosion on hillsides), etc. etc.?