Major wind farm withdrawn after more planning delays, downsizing, name changes and fierce opposition

Renewable energy company Ark Energy – a subsidiary of north Asia industrial giant Korea Zinc – says it has withdrawn its proposed but heavily contested Wooroora Station wind farm after repeated delays in the federal government planning process, and after indications that it was unlikely to get approval.

The 294 MW project, formerly known as the Chalumbin wind project, had been downsized and redesigned at least twice in a bid to reduce environmental impacts and respond to local concerns, which were mostly focused on its adjacency to a  World-Heritage-listed rainforest west of Cairns.

It was originally envisaged to support up to 200 turbines, but this was whittled back to 95 and then 86 turbines, and finally reduced to 42 wind turbines and a capacity of 294 MW, and confined to a single former cattle grazing property near Ravenshoe in the Atherton Tablelands.

Ark Energy says the property has been degraded and already hosts an electricity substation and high voltage powerlines, but opposition from some local groups, amplified by conservative media and right wing think tanks, focused on its proximity (one km) to national parks that form part of the Wet Tropics of Queensland World Heritage Area.

The company says despite approvals from the state government, the project has been sitting in the federal government’s EPBC process for three years, and a ruling delayed on five occasions.

The most recent extension issued on April 9, had pushed the decision date out to June 2024, but Ark Energy says it had also received indications that it would not be approved.

According to project lead Damian Vermey, Ark Energy had worked hard to put forward a proposal with minimum environmental impacts and industry-leading commitments, however had received information from DCCEEW indicating that it would not be approved, and it had decided to withdraw the referral.

“A huge effort has been made to minimise the proposal’s environmental impacts and offer real potential for environmental net gains, but we have to accept the Department may have a different view,” Ark Energy’s project lead Damien Vermey said in a statement

“We appreciate this outcome is also very disappointing for all those supporters who were looking forward to the project, including the Traditional Owners, community members and local businesses.

“We remain proud of the work done to reduce the proposal’s environmental impacts and the industry-leading commitments it included to achieve conservation benefits and net positive outcomes for the area’s ecology.

“We sincerely thank the many stakeholders we have worked with on this proposal over the past few years, including environment organisations that pushed us to find better solutions, and all those who have shown support for the project.”

It is the second time in six months that Ark Energy has withdrawn from a hotly disputed wind project. In October last year it abandoned plans to build the Western Plans wind farm, a 50 MW facility in the north-west of Tasmania, near Stanley, and focus instead of larger scale projects.

Ark Energy is the development company for Korea Zinc and its Queensland-based Sun Metals refinery, which has been a leader in decarbonising its operations and built one of the first large scale solar farms in the state which helps power its refinery.

Ark Energy has around 11 projects around the country, including a 30 per cent share in the country’s large wind project, the 923 MW MacIntyre facility in Queensland (Pictured above).

Last year, Ark Energy expressed frustration at the actions of opponents to the Queensland wind project.

“Some opponents took advantage of the former name to spread misinformation and make unsubstantiated claims about what kind of habitat and species are in the project area and therefore the environmental impacts of the development,” Ark Energy’s head of projects in Queensland Anthony Russo said at the time.

“The reality is the project is NOT within the World Heritage area and it is important that the project is represented accurately and the public have the facts.”

The withdrawal was celebrated by supporters of one of the groups opposing the project. “Fantastic news,” wrote one, although they were concerned that the withdrawal meant that the project development could be resubmitted at a later date. “This may not be the end of it,” they wrote.