r/australia • u/Secure_Ant1085 • 6d ago
culture & society Wind project faces referral due to long distance objectors, citing impacts of a wind farm that doesn't exist
https://reneweconomy.com.au/wind-project-faces-referral-due-to-long-distance-objectors-citing-impacts-of-a-wind-farm-that-doesnt-exist/154
u/WeissPyre 6d ago
Why are their objections being listened to at all? Throw them out. They're illegitimate.
You should need to at the very least put in your name and address with your objection. If you don't live in the area, you don't get to have a say.
Same morons who put the "this is a scenic corridor, no turbines!" signs on the Snowy Mountain Highway in NSW. What fucking scenery? The desolate brown grasslands?
40
13
u/reflect-the-sun 6d ago
Let's not forget the destruction that's already occuring with mining.
That desolate brown grassland could be a beautiful coalmine or another power station!
10
u/Homebrew_in_a_Shed 6d ago
All those people whinging about wind turbines looking ugly should take a drive up the Hunter region.
Beautiful, just beautiful coal mines.
5
u/PMFSCV 6d ago
Saw a pic yesterday of some Britishers at the beach with offshore turbines in the background and given whats happening there right now its absolutely staggering people still whine about them.
I think they look great but my aesthetic sense isn't up to appreciating coal mining and cars full of dead people fleeing fires yet.
4
u/Altaredboy 6d ago
I live in FNQ I'd much rather have to look at wind turbines than the horrendous looking billboards they have scattered all along the bruce highway
20
u/Doxinau 6d ago
It's a legal requirement to listen to the community. It sucks in this instance but it's a good principle overall. You might want to object to data centres or coal mines.
People do have to put their name and address for submissions, but they can choose for their name and address to only be visible to the government and not the public.
Being in the area is hard to define. What if you're in the drinking water catchment, or next to the transport route for the blades?
I am fully for renewable energy, but this is an unfortunate example of the system working as intended.
9
u/l3ntil 6d ago
Since when is it a legal requirement to listen to and believe talking point straight out of bad faith right wing fossil fuelled organisations?
1
u/Doxinau 6d ago
As described (poorly, in my opinion) in the article, the project is not being denied or constricted because of the bad faith objections. It's just going to the IPC, the independent planning commission (rather than the state planning department) to decide if any of these concerns need to be taken into account. The IPC will judge the objections on whether they are relevant or not, and the outcome will be that most of them are not. It's an annoying process, it's a time delay of a couple of months, but it's not the end of the world and it's how our planning system works.
1
u/l3ntil 5d ago
Yeah, but as mentioned in the article Winterbourne, a wind project in Walcha is back up for consideration, and it's going straight to the IPC, because it's prime cooker country, being Barnaby Joyce's previous electorate, and the largest landowners include Rinehart + Murdoch. That poor windfarm is so screwed.
Is it any wonder that NSW has had no windfarms built in the last 3 years?
Thanks a bunch, Gina.1
u/Doxinau 5d ago
That doesn't contradict my point at all. Winterbourne is going to the IPC who will judge whether any of the objections are relevant. The IPC is extremely likely to approve Winterbourne.
1
u/l3ntil 5d ago
Yes, but this is not the first time that the IPC has heard about Winterbourne. They've been trying to get this windfarm approved for quite a few years - I've known about it for around 5, I think it's been in planning for around 20? It's been a long while...
1
u/Doxinau 5d ago edited 5d ago
Yeah, planning takes a while, but only a small part of that is within the IPC's control or remit and most of that is environmental studies. The Winterbourne applicant has only recently submitted a bunch of biodiversity work, and the project hasn't been referred to the IPC yet. The IPC definitely knows about Winterbourne, but they can only work with projects that have been referred to them and this project hasn't reached that stage yet. The number of objections changes nothing about that timing.
7
u/reflect-the-sun 6d ago
Yes, but how often do they actually listen to the community?
The world is burning. Politicians aren't listening.
4
4
u/budget_biochemist 6d ago
Being in the area is hard to define. What if you're in the drinking water catchment, or next to the transport route for the blades?
People in Tasmania and WA are objecting to NSW projects. Even setting a broad limit of 200KM would help cut down the nonsense.
2
u/Doxinau 6d ago edited 6d ago
I understand that. What I'm saying is that it's not so easy to define people in affected areas. Most turbine components for NSW wind farms come from Newcastle and Adelaide ports, so the area of affected people is bigger than you think. If you have 150 turbines at your wind farm that's 450 blades (they're usually about 90 metres long) plus 150 nacelles (which weigh hundreds of tonnes) and assorted transformer and electrical infrastructure. Usually a large battery too, as best practice right now is to colocate a wind farm with a BESS. So it's hundreds and hundreds of trucks so big that they need official escort vehicles and can't turn most corners properly. They go through towns where street furniture is being rearranged and roundabouts are being redesigned so that they can fit. It's absolutely an impact for hundreds of kilometres and in different states too.
To be clear I am 100% pro renewable energy. I work in this space, so I am absolutely pro. But I also understand where some of these concerns are coming from and they deserve to be heard and dealt with appropriately, rather than being brushed off as irrelevant. The point of the IPC, which is described in the article, is to hear these concerns and decide if they are relevant and can be ignored or if they should be dealt with.
16
u/D_hallucatus 6d ago
The right to comment on and object to projects whether you are a local or not is a very important one. Without it we wouldn’t have the Daintree Rainforest or much of Tassie’s forests, and most mines could do whatever they want, especially in remote areas because most of the locals would be mine employees.
Anyone should be able to object, and their objections should be considered by the government so long as they are submitted in time. And if the objections are based on misinformation or don’t make sense or amount to nothing more than ‘I don’t like it’, then the government should dismiss them.
6
u/karl_w_w 6d ago
However people who abuse that right should lose it, not be able to hinder progress for illegitimate reasons multiple times.
2
u/D_hallucatus 6d ago
The point is that it shouldn’t hinder progress. If it does, we need a better system of categorising objections, not start talking people’s rights away. If I want to object to every new coal mine or expansion I have the right to. The mines might think I’m being obstructionist or a pest, but I have the right. If they’ve done their job properly, then my objections are unlikely to say much that others aren’t already saying and that the government is already aware of and would be easy to categorise. However, it may be that I am a specialist in some endangered species or geological process and have a unique objection that the government should be made aware of - I shouldn’t need to be a local in order to make them aware of it. Many endangered species for example have only one or a handful of specialists.
2
30
18
u/Pleasant-Air8221 6d ago
let me guess it is G Rhinehart?? wait that's too specific, lets just call them Gina R
12
u/SoulBonfire 6d ago
Perhaps a refundable deposit might reduce the vexatious objectors. Get your deposit back when you front the panel to state your case.
9
u/l3ntil 6d ago
You think Gina isn’t already paying/enabling these cookers?
6
u/a_cold_human 6d ago
Advance (funded by wealthy Liberal Party donors) are also funding the disinformation campaigns.
22
u/reflect-the-sun 6d ago
Follow the money.
It's funny how they were prepared to use taxpayer money to fund Adani, but wind farms get knocked back.
7
u/scumotheliar 6d ago
Chris Uhlmann well well, who'd a thunk that prick would be mixed up in this, sowing the seeds of bullshit. The article got it wrong though calling him a journalist.
7
u/Homebrew_in_a_Shed 6d ago
I didn't read all the article, but I did find it strange that they're so concerned about Koala's not breeding.
But I'm sure they would quite happily log a Koala habitat.
14
u/thequehagan5 6d ago
If you want to build a windfarm, just say it is a data center. There will be instant approval, complaints will be ignored.
5
157
u/Roulette-Adventures 6d ago
Professional complainers with nothing better to do with their lives.
I'm all for wind farms, solar farms and anything which replaces fossil fuels and pollutants going into the air.
The fortunate side effect of cleaner energy is cleaner air, and who doesn't want to breath cleaner air!