Solar and battery project sent to state planning authority by far away objectors gets all-clear

A large-scale solar and battery project that was sent to the state planning arbiter by more than 80 written objections to its development has been cleared to go ahead in central western New South Wales.

The NSW Independent Planning Commission (IPC) said on Monday that it has approved Edify Energy’s Burroway Solar Farm, a 100 megawatt (MW) PV array with a 100 MW / 400 megawatt-hour (MWh) battery, proposed around 18 km north of Narromine.

In a Statement of Reasons for Decision, the Commission says it found the application to be consistent with NSW government policies – the project sits within the Central-West Orana Renewable Energy Zone (REZ) – and its approval to be in the public interest.

As Renew Economy has reported, the Burroway solar farm sailed through the federal government’s environmental approval process in less than two months, but was referred to the IPC after its state development application attracted 83 public submissions, 81 of them objecting to the plans.

Concerns raised in the submissions ranged from a lack of trust in renewable energy generation, to damage to the environment, animal cruelty, risk of fire and destruction of farming land. A number of objections also referred to concerns about “land poisoning” caused by the panels and battery.

As the IPC confirms in its statement of reasons, none of the objecting submissions came from individuals living within 5 km of the proposed project, while 93 per cent of them came from more than 100 km away.

The IPC says its two-member panel of Andrew Mills (chair) and Sarah Dinning “met with key stakeholders, conducted a site inspection and locality tour, and received 12 written submissions.”

Of the 12 IPC submissions, just one was from someone living within 25 km of the project, while six came from more than 100 km away and three from interstate.

The Commission also scheduled a local public meeting to discuss the issues raised in the submissions, but was forced to canel it after it received no registrations from the community to participate.

Nevertheless, the commission says it “appreciates the time and effort” that was put into submissions and has given careful consideration to all submissions that raised concerns about “project-specific matters.”

To this end, the IPC says three key matters – fire risk, worker accommodation, and decommissioning and rehabilitation of the site – have all been adequately addressed by the developer and in conditions of consent.

On potential loss of agricultural land – a concern raised by close to half of the submissions – the panel says the project’s temporary impacts on agriculture in the region were negligible, and that there were “no discernible obstacles to the site be used for agrisolar purposes.”

If you would like to join more than 29,000 others and get the latest clean energy news delivered straight to your inbox, for free, please click here to subscribe to our free daily newsletter.