Winterbourne Wind Farm

Thank you for allowing me to write an objection to the Winterbourne Wind Farm EIS on behalf of Glen Collin Cattle Company.
Glen Collin Cattle Company is a beef cattle grazing and trading company operating in the Walcha district. The company trades up to four thousand cattle annually and all cattle are transported onto and out of the operation by road transport.
During the peak construction of the Winterbourne Wind Farm there will be 288 semi and BDouble trucks per day congesting both the New England and Oxley highways. Both these highways are the roads that Glen Collin Cattle Company uses to transport cattle, this congestion will lead to delays causing both animal welfare and financial issues for the Company.
I understand that this submission is to comment on the Winterbourne Wind Farm EIS, but this project is one of many destined for the Walcha district . The cumulative impact of the numerous project needs to be taken into account. At last count there are eight projects with estimates of 495 wind turbines just for the Walcha district. The congestion of the road network will be ongoing for many years creating major disruption and financial loss to our business and many others.
One of the districts main trucking companies has intimated it will move its base away from Walcha if these projects go ahead, as the traffic congestion will be far too much of a financial impost for them to absorb. This will have a direct increase in transport costs for Glen Collin Cattle Company.
James Young

To whom it may concern,

My name is Sophie Fletcher, and I am writing to communicate my support for the Winterbourne
Wind Farm (proposal ID SSD-10471).

We are fifth generation farmers here in Walcha and through caring for this land are doing everything in our power to continue our family’s legacy and ensure we are mitigating the effects of global warming to hopefully one day reduce the impacts of extreme weather events for our children, grandchildren and great grandchildren. This project will also ensure quality succession planning for future generations who will care for our land.

The development of this project will generate cash flow and jobs in our community which will have a positive impact on our community's future and will ensure Walcha will continue to thrive, grow, increase services and be a place we can continue to live, run our businesses and raise our family for decades to come.

With the closing down of large scale coal fired generators this year, looking to an infinite power source (wind) is the only logical step forward, this project is a priority to ensure the country continues to have electricity.

Regards

Sophie Fletcher

At long last climate change action is seriously underway in Australia. The largest and fastest way to reduce emissions is transformation of our electricity system from a few large centralised fossil fuel stations into DER - distributed energy resources -involving large numbers of small to medium renewable generators. This project is an example of the latter and while genuine environmental and other concerns should be taken on board, it must not be derailed by fossil fuel or associated political interests or by NIMBY concerns. I have considerable experience across all forms of energy, as Strategy Manager for CSIRO Energy over 20 years ago, responsible for the initial Energy Transformed Flagship R,D&D program. In retirement I have been an early adopter of solar panels, batteries and electric vehicle, along with energy efficiency initiatives. I hope it is not too late, having despaired at the political and vested interest opposition, while being active at national community level through Renew and its local chapter Renew Illawarra, and also in local government climate change planning. Illawarra is another major renewable zone (REZ) and at the suburb level is leading the way with "Electrify 2515". I and colleagues support efforts towards the New England and other REZs. We also run a "think tank" of ex-CSIRO, University and Bluescope Steel engineers and technologists that shares information and advocacy with other community groups and activists from Tasmania to Far North Queensland.

Project Benefits
With decreasing dependence within the state on coal and gas these major projects, are extremely important in the change of energy supply, 600 Mwatts can offset one of Liddell turbines.
As a wind farm host of up to 3 turbines, the supplement, of income will give the ability. To make my farm a much more sustainable enterprise, to withstand the greater climate variability. That leads to greater input cost, and more commodity fluctuations. As a host we also bear the greater disruption, to our business, whilst the project is being built, this is a small price to pay. Being right in the middle of the wind farm, I believe I’ll have a great disruption to my business, but this is a small price to pay. For the benefits to the planet
The actual footprint of towers is small and not a great impact on the area of land taken up, I find the towers actual, quite aesthetic.
Community benefits scheme is one of the most generous schemes in NSW setting the bar for other projects. This enables many community projects to be funded through out the life of the wind farm. Many Small communities such as Walcha have had a shrinkage in community investments over the last 40 years, this will allow for many types of projects to be funded such as building or scholar ships and training to be part of the mix.
Short term employment will increase a boost for local business, during Construction, creating more wealth and community vibrancy and diversity. Longer Term 15-20 full time employers, will add greatly to the town and surrounding areas, adding to greater stability to schools and business, over a longer term. Growth to building and constructions.
Rapidly changing climate, extreme weather variability are our greatest challenges and threats to agriculture into the future, we have always had droughts and floods but nothing like the last 10 years fires and flooding in this district are get worse. We must as a greater population, move as quickly down the renewable path as possible, for our next generations future. Project of this scale need to go ahead as quickly as possible, to turn around the burning of fossil fuels.
If this project does is not allowed to proceed, after such a comprehensive study supporting this wind farm has been completed. My fear is that the renewables for the rest of this state may as well pack up and leave.
· My belief is that renewables such as wind can coexist in the tablelands landscape, without altering socking rates or farming practices, allowing me to run a much more sustainable, and well run farm.

The project has no social licence.
The developers have neither earned nor bought social licence.
The developers consultation has been severely deficient to non existent. A survey with a sample size of 17 for a project such as this is appaling.
The EIS is an expensive joke. It has failed to address so many areas such as water, gravel, traffic impact and biodiversity.

Stony Creek Beef Pty Ltd opposes the Winterbourne Wind Farm EIS on four main points.
1. Transport –
a. the proponent has understated the required repairs needed to the transport route that will require traffic delays.
b. the proponent’s movement of oversized components will require the obstruction of normal traffic flow over an extended period.
The obstruction to traffic flow is detrimental to the welfare of the livestock we need to transport to do our business. We transport our cattle from the South-Eastern side of Walcha to processors in Scone and Singleton any additional road works required by the proponent along this route will hold the transport of our cattle up. From Walcha township to Scone and Singleton the freight companies that cart our cattle will share the road with the incredible number of trucks the proponent requires to construct their wind farm. Given the number of pinch points along the whole route of our transport needs, our cattle could be held up on trucks at multiple points for an unnecessary length of time. This is not only grossly unfair to our animals but will more than likely be very costly for our business. Stressed animals see businesses like ours receive less money on processing and livestock transporters will need to recoup their additional fuel, wages and wear and tear – this cost will be passed onto us. Should the proponent be given construction permission then, livestock transporters should be given right of way and producers should be compensated for any financial losses sustained through the transportation of their livestock during the construction period, by the proponent.

2. Resources - the extraordinary number and amount of resources required to form foundations for each tower, roads, buildings and support structures for the Winterbourne Wind Farm will mean that there will be little to none of these resources available for local businesses during the construction phase. Our very real fear is that there will be no aggregate available at all, even into the future as it has been quite a rare resource in our area until the recent opening of Brooklyn Quarry. Their annual quota is well exceeded by the proponent’s requirements and once quotas are complete and/or the quarry runs out there is nothing left for locals. We certainly can’t afford to compete financially against the proponent. Water and waste removal are also of great concern. The recent drought and our town’s water restrictions are very fresh in our minds. Water is an absolutely precious resource and the proponent’s proposal to use local surface and ground water may reduce aquifers such that it impacts many outside the project area for years into the future. The EIS does not go into in-depth detail on its waste management plans which is of great concern.

3. Bio-security – with so many resources, people and transportation vehicles travelling into prime agricultural land the threat of introduced weeds, insects and viruses is quite frightening in its likelihood. We already spend thousands each year trying to stay on top of introduced weed species and drenching and vaccinating our livestock to protect them. We don’t want to spend a cent more on something new. The proponent should be made responsible in perpetuity for any financial cost incurred by its introduction of any pest (weed, disease, insect or animal).

4. Fire – along with a lack of water the threat of fire is also fresh in our minds. The rugged and densely vegetated nature of the National Parks and State Forests that make up over a third of our LGA make fire fighting very difficult. Aerial fire fighting was used extensively in our LGA during the 2019/20 fires. The height of the proposed Winterbourne Wind Farm towers and their location so close to World Heritage listed National Park reduces the capability of aerial fire fighting if a fire should break out either in or near the National Park. The potential for a bush fire to spread throughout our LGA affecting all community members, livestock and native habitats is extreme and we should not be put under any greater risk than we already are. Fire starting at turbine and blade level and then spreading, is also a risk to our LGA that we should not be subjected to.

Katherine Anne Mackaway and Darren John Mackaway (Directors - Stony Creek Beef Pty Ltd)

My name is Colin Carter. I reside with my wife Margaret on 'Europambela" 21 Europambela Road, Walcha NSW.
I welcome the opportunity to comment on the Winterbourne Wind Farm proposal to which I object.
The following comments are some my objections to the proposed development.
TRAFFIC CONGESTION TO THE PROPOSED SITE.
A narrow 2 lane country road is the only access to the development. From the developers own forecast numbers, there will be a minimum movement of 375/400 vehicles per day , including 120 B double semis. Whilst not addressed separately in this submission, vehicles to carry water for concrete batching and dust minimisation has not been adequately dealt with by the developer. So in the absence of any satisfactory resolution to this issue, I submit that it is reasonable to assume an additional vehicle movement (water trucks) of 160 per day. ie total movements of 535/560. This is based on the following calculations .
Water requirements per turbine - 1.8ml. - 72 trucks carrying 25,000l of water for each turbine = 220ml total water needs. That equates to 8500 truck loads required or 163 movements per day.
This means that taking an average from the above numbers of say 550 movements per day over a 12 hour working day, equates to 45 movements per hour. In effect this will mean a vehicle (including B doubles and water trucks) will pass any given point at just over 1 minute intervals without a break over the whole day for 2 plus years. That assumes of course that the developers traffic is controlled to travel at just over a minute apart. Any local traffic wishing to enter this constant stream of vehicles will find it very difficult to do so. Add to that adjacent farm stock movements along this public road to/from shearing sheds,stock yards for crutching and drenching etc will make the whole project unviable.
I don't see a solution to this issue other than to reject the whole proposal or drastically reduce its size.
TECHNOLOGY
I don't have a crystal ball (but nor does anyone else), but I have no doubt that this type of development will be obsolete in 5/10 years as more efficient forms of renewable energy come on stream - wave power - etc.
This community should not be burdened with the white elephant it will become and left to clean up the obsolete towers.

We must support this project to transition towards renewable energy as quickly as possible. Its benefits include clean power for over 375 000 homes and huge investment in the New England area. The future obvious success of this project will contribute to investment and success of further renewable energy initiatives.

See attached submission.

We are Peter and Anna Young and we operate GCM Partnership on our families 3rd generation beef and sheep property in Walcha NSW. We object to the Winterbourne Wind Farm and have significant concerns about the project and the erroneous EIS document.
Firstly, we operate in prime agricultural land that is considered some of the best grazing land in NSW. This windfarm poses significant risks to our regions biodiversity. The development is bordering UNESCO national park/World Heritage Godwana Rain Forests, where species such as eagles and koalas have been identified. The wind turbines themselves, but also the run off from development pose significant risks to these populations with sites causing 207Ha of habitat loss but also the indirect run off costs not being fully acknowledged. No amount of money the developer throw at it justifies this loss. The run off is also likely to further upset our biodiversity with BPA from annual shedding from the turbines not being addressed in the EIS. Not only are we concerned for our waterways with run off but also it is not clear where the water for construction will come from – the developer states in the EIS that is 6ML for concrete and 150 megalitres however this is erroneous and is more likely 17.8ML based on simple arithmetic. Where is this water going to come from and can our town, national parks and other waterways actually sustain this? We don’t believe they can.
We are also concerned about the impacts of traffic congestion on our business. We have one main road for all of our stock carting and larger farming supplies and it is said that during construction that there will be up to 288 additional trucks per day during the 11-month peak period (and up to 3 years in total possibly). What will this mean to delays for our stock carting and other business essentials. If we can’t readily move animals our businesses would not be viable going forward. The roads are already struggling to be maintained and are not made for this much additional traffic. None of this is adequately addressed by the developer.
Finally, (although the concerns do go on) another primary concern is the impacts the wind farm development will have on neighbouring and local agricultural land. The visual impacts of 119 turbines at 230m high, which is larger and higher than any other in Australia, is very likely to lead to land de-valuation. If land becomes de-valued businesses will not be viable which will impact the supply of important food for Australia. The EIS doesn’t address this, asking neighbours to sign on with conditions and confidentiality clauses – this is not OK. The neighbourhood benefit fund no longer exists from the developer. They should be compensated, as should the wider community for the impacts this is going to have as above.
This development is in the wrong place and it is the wrong size and we object to it going ahead.

We need to transition to renewable energy generation as rapidly as possible. The large combined renewable energy project, Winterbourne, will form part of this transition. It is vital to support this project and not allow it to be delayed or interrupted when there is no alternative but to transition urgently to renewables if we want to avoid climate disasters.
Apart from the necessity of saving the global climate from collapse, this project, as part of the New England REZ will provide jobs and inject funds into the region, providing skills and employment into the future as we transition to renewables.
There is no time to waste. Our current trajectory will mean that NSW cannot reach its emissions reduction target, and every effort must be made to support and accelerate the development of such large scale mixed renewable energy projects.

I cannot understand why the governments are allowing these multinational companies to destroy the environment to put up these industrial monstrosities to so call save the planet , how hypocritical when there are train loads of coal day after day coming out of the Hunter Valley and being sold overseas, leave our forests and farm land alone and put these useless turbines near the cities and see how the people there like it.

Please consider saving the beauty and the environment. Save the birds...please do not proceed with this..This is a grab for money only and nothing to do with saving the planet

I support the Winterbourne Wind project at Walcha. The project will be beneficial for our community and also for the future of our community. I can appreciate there are fears within the community at this point in time,as to what impact the project will have. However the positive benefits to our local community, not to mention our state outweigh the arguments posed in opposition.
The opposition to the Winterbourne windfarm has sought to spread unease and anxiety amongst the community abut the windfarm. They have created a great disunity which they blame on the development when they themselves have been the source. Their arguments are weak and in some cases childish, sourced from other similar opposition parties. Windfarm syndrome has not been characterised medically and is denied by the medical fraternity. Infrasound does not cause reproductive, sleep, nor any other disturbances. The traffic issue will not be any greater than that which the town has experienced at other peak times. Local retail and hospitality businesses will not suffer - they will only benefit from extra trade. Water will not be sourced from the local town supply , unless council require it for some reason. Prime grazing land will not be compromised, the turbines are anticipated to be placed on the high, unprofitable, rocky ridge lines. And stock can graze under them anyway. Decommissioning is to be finalised, but is creates much less of an environmental impact than coal mines which are the alternative.
Children do not fear the changes, but embrace renewables and environmental protection .
Finally our community stands only to benefit financially in a way that will secure our farming future in a sustainable fashion.

To Whom it may concern,
My Name is Ross Fletcher and I'm a 5th generation farmer from Walcha.
I strongly support the development of the Winterboune wind project in its entirety for the benefit of our town, our region and beyond to whoever and where ever the electricity is used. We as a town/district are geographically blessed to be situated where we have the potential to develop multiple sources of renewable energy so supply to dispatchable power to the market to meet its requirements after the closing of Liddell power station and Erraring power station in 2025.

There is absolutely no doubt there are people and organisations opposed to the development of Winterbourne wind farm which is absolutely fine to not like something or wish it away to somewhere else and make it someone else's problem.

The Walcha district and its businesses are set to financially gain from these developments for decades to come, This steady flow of income over the next decades will ensure sustainable maintenance, development and improvements of family farms, ensuring quality succession planning and future drought proofing of these businesses. This is amplified locally in the town businesses as there is more money flowing through the town.
In conclusion I strongly recommend the approval of the Winterbourne wind farm to ensure the survival and growth to the Walcha and surrounding districts as well as ensuring the supply of electricity to the market whilst reducing future emissions.
Sincerely Ross Fletcher

Having read the developers EIS submission, I am astonished that the governemnt and relevant authorities have allowed this project get to the stage that it has. A project of this scale, with far reaching consequences and massive implications for an extremely strong community and crucial global primary production hub, must surely demand at the very least, a sound and well-considered EIS and one that is accurate and considering all stakeholders both human and environmental. This EIS has so many glaring errors and appears to be simply a copy-paste job by an extremely junior member of the developers team. The errors and misjudgements made by the developer have left a vibrant community splitting at the seams, have the potential to adversely impact some of the world's most productive farming land as well as spoiling some of NSW most pristine and beautiful national parks, which are crucial for the biodiversity needed to fight climate change.

Specifically, my concerns around this flawed EIS are as follows:
1. Lack of community consultation and transparency
2. Poor site selection with no alternatives even considered
3. Road works - the roads around walcha are simply not able to cope with the amount of traffic being planned by the developer and the energy and cost requirement to upgrade the roads must surely go against the whole idea behind the project in 'reducing' our emissions
4. Water impact - clearly the developer has made errors in their proposed water consumption for the project and there has been no consideration as to where this water would be coming from. Dams and rivers in the area are vital stock and domestic water points and not available to be wasted building unnecessary roads
5. Gravel resource - There has been a flawed calculation of the amount of gravel required, not to mention where they plan on taking the gravel from, meaning the truck movements are inaccurate and and yet another example of the EIS being inaccurate and incomplete
6. Ecosystem destruction - the project is destroying 207Ha of natural habitat, which simply cannot be recreated or renewed
7. Neighbour and community benefits - the developer is purely focusing on the landowners who are potential wind tower beneficiaries and there is no consideration for Neighbour's and those who are adversely affected by the construction and operation of the towers
8. Decommissioning - the decommissioning process has been a sticking point from the beginning of the project and there is still no plan whatsoever for maintenance and decommissioning of these towers, which is critical to such and important agricultural hub.
9. Gross misunderstanding by the developer - as a community minded person, having lived in a number of different places, Walcha is one of the strongest communities in the world and one with a unique fabric that is completely misunderstood by this international company trying to make money at the community's expense. A government that represents the people of the community and the state must understand the errors made in this EIS and put a stop to the project before too much damage is done.

Our aging coal fired power stations need replacing, and I believe that renewable is the only way to go, rather than burning a valuable resource. We all, apart from the few who admirably manage to live off grid, rely on electricity being delivered to our homes and businesses, and this will not continue to happen unless we get on with developing alternate power options.

I object to the project in its current form as it is so divisive to the Walcha Community. Further discussions and changes need to be made to allow for a fairer project.

Properly planned windfarm projects such as Winterbourne can accelerate renewable energy transition to meet state emission reduction targets. The Investment it brings can benefit the community.

We wish to object to the Winterbourne Wind project.
We moved to the New England area six years ago, attracted to its spectacular scenery, four beautiful seasons and rural lifestyle. We did extensive research with federal, state, and local governments, real estate agents, internet research and discussions with locals. We were greatly relieved to hear that no major developments were planned for this scenic area. As “tree-changers” we were very keen to escape the industrialisation of the Newcastle and Hunter areas and settled on a small parcel of land between Uralla and Walcha NSW.

We were then horrified to find out that the New England had been targeted as a renewable energy zone. To blanket this area in thousands of solar panels and wind turbines is going to cause immeasurable harm to many residents and the environment. The view of some may be “we must save the planet” but at what cost? Whilst in favour of renewable energy (sensibly placed), the scale of the Winterbourne Wind project is staggering, and the placement concerns us greatly. Why does the Walcha / Uralla area have to shoulder the massive load of renewables for NSW? There is no fairness here.
Not only will the visual amenity of the New England be ruined with the turbines, but the infrastructure of the electrical power line upgrades required to transport the power generated will also be impacting the visual beauty of this area. The proposed transmission lines from the 2 substations to the proposed Uralla switchyard will pass very close to our current “piece of paradise”, ruining our view and drastically reducing the value of our property. Any transmission lines need to be put underground to maintain the current visual amenity. People who are receiving rental income from these inappropriate developments may be tempted to overlook the negative impacts in return for financial gain, but the rest of the community suffers.
The scale of the maps used in the EIS are inadequate, with many roads names not included, making it difficult to pinpoint locations of turbines and transmission lines.
The amount of water needed for this project is enormous – where is it coming from? The EIS is vague about perhaps using groundwater (this is not an infinite resource as seen during our recent drought) and Walcha Council would not have any to spare if we are heading back into a drought shortly.
We have attended meetings about this development including one last week, whereby the Hon Barnaby Joyce and MP Adam Marshall both spoke about how shockingly bad this EIS is and “surely they can’t be serious (Adam Marshall quote)”. We are a community that have been treated as “dumb country bumpkins (Barnaby Joyce quote)” with no respect from the developer. Anonymous scare mongering has been placed in people mailboxes, The Apsley Advocate has been targeted, neighbourhood friendship strained due to “gag orders” to name a few. The Winterbourne Wind office has been closed for 29 of the 35 days of the exhibition extension, with their phone placed on answering machine, so no contact can be made with them.
Personally, we are close to the proposed transmission lines and have not been contacted at all by the developer – all neighbours are meant to have been consulted. Their level of consultation has been grossly inadequate.
The EIS has been described by the developer as “fluid” which is ludicrous and the errata in it is embarrassing, demonstrating a rushed and ill planned assessment of this development.
Most of the New England area is prime high rainfall agricultural land. We have a finite amount of this precious land type which is a major part of Australia’s food and fibre production particularly in regard to cattle, lamb and wool. To cover vast areas of this landscape in wind turbines defies logic. There is much of Australia that is very marginal or unsuitable for agricultural use and that is virtually unpopulated. This type of land could be used to accommodate larger scale renewable energy projects.

We fear town and rural property prices will drop due to the development of these proposals. We have noticed a gradual increase in property prices since moving here, which in part is due to new people moving to the area. We believe that once these industrial landscapes are built, the attraction to move here will be permanently destroyed and our lovely country towns will start to wither and die.
Our roads are in constant need of repair with current levels of traffic. The additional load from blades, engines, gravel, workers, water tanks etc will be significant and our roads will suffer. How will Vestas decide which ones they will fund to maintain and which will be left for the rate payers to maintain via their overworked and under resourced local Councils? The path from the Port of Newcastle up the New England highway then along the windy Oxley Hwy through Walcha will be enormous impacts on traffic congestion for years.

Some areas that we feel require further research and investigation before major projects such as the Winterbourne Wind Project are allowed to proceed are:

• What are the impacts on humans from wind turbine noise, both audible and non-audible? What effect will shadow flicker have on people? Will people experience sleep disturbance as a result of turbine noise or vibration? What impact will there be on the mental health of residents in the area? The media has reported some serious health impacts for those living in the vicinity of wind turbines. Infrasound (non-audible damaging sound) is a reasonably new science and the turbine size proposed (230-250m high) have never been built, let alone researched to see what damage will do done to humans and animals surrounding them. We have met a pharmacist from Yass who had to leave the area due to the damage the infrasound was doing to his health.

• What are the impacts on animals and insects from wind turbine noise and vibration? The ABCs Catalyst program highlighted the importance of communication of insects at different sound wave frequencies. Does the noise made from wind turbines interfere with insect communication? If we lose entire species from areas, what are the flow-on impacts re pollination, pest control, food source etc. on the whole ecosystem?

• What impact will there be on firefighting in areas with wind turbines? It has been stated that arial firefighting will be greatly restricted near turbines. Will this place the people, property and the environment at greater risk during fire seasons? How will this be mitigated? The EIS assumes all will be well and no aerial firebombing happens if there is smoke – surely this is a joke. All areas in and surrounding this proposal will be trouble with reduced aerial firefighting assistance.

• What long term socio-economic benefits are there for the affected communities? Employment seems likely to be mostly FIFO staff during construction, the operation is mostly done remotely once built and maintenance is done by only a couple of people over its lifecycle. Will agricultural jobs be lost as agricultural land is industrialised? Paltry community funding offers very little to compensate for the many serious negative impacts.

• Who removes defunct turbines and other infrastructure if the company meant to be responsible for them disappears in years to come? The EIS mentions 5 years before decommissioning is planned, Vestas will start to put money into a fund – who is going to make sure this happens? The most money is made in the early days of the turbines so there will be no guarantee the company won’t sell or declare bankruptcy to avoid the massive decommissioning costs. The EIS estimations are based on 2021 figures, but scrap metal is a dying market and the blades are an enormous issue to dispose of. We need a decommissioning fund to be fully funded by Vestas before turbines are even built.

We believe large renewable energy projects should be located within very large landholdings on very poor agricultural land where the impact on the environment, surrounding landholders, and townships would be negligible. Consultation with whole communities, not just a biased few, should take place as a first step in a large project. Identifying the New England region as a “renewable energy zone” seems to be at best an error in judgement or at worst a callous sacrificing of communities by Federal & State Governments. The impact on many individuals and communities is likely to be negative at best and catastrophic at worst. Please consider these concerns when making decisions for the New England area.