News

Pru Goward Speech to NSW Legislative Assembly - Hansard, June 19, 2007.

Ms PRU GOWARD (Goulburn) [5.48 p.m.]:

Two Saturdays ago I went to the beautiful village of Taralga on a village visit to meet constituents unable to travel the distance to my Bowral electorate office. Taralga was established in the 1830s and many of its existing buildings were constructed from local stones and rocks that are still to be found in the volcanic soils for miles around. With a village population of around 300, many of the residents can trace their ancestry back to the establishment of Taralga as a rural centre. Living in a small village, however beautiful, can have its drawbacks, of course. Everyone knows everyone else, and everything about them. Most of the time that is fine, and the closeness provides a great support network. But on Saturday I learnt what can happen to these relationships when outside influences are brought to bear.

In January last year the Government announced approval for the establishment of a wind farm of approximately l00 megawatts at Taralga. The result of this approval has been like an explosion in the middle of the village. Locals have scattered to various sides of the main street, shored up their positions, and now peer warily from behind their barricades. Such is the diverse response in the community caused by this proposal. Those who opposed the turbines took the issue to the Land and Environment Court, citing the risk to a number of endangered species and the damage to their landscape, as well as noise pollution. They raised about $100,000 to challenge the Minister's decision to approve the turbines. They lost.

The judge's decision to increase the number of permitted turbines may well discourage other community groups wishing to oppose future wind farms elsewhere.

Jane Starr is a new resident in the area who has taken on the running of her parents' property. Jane came to see me on Saturday, arriving in her truck with an enormous bail of hay on the back. She has only been in Taralga for a matter of months but the point she wanted to make was how the proposed wind farm had driven a wedge through the middle of the community. Despite her short time in the village this had still made an impact on her. Jane believes, and I absolutely agree, that any proposal that has the potential to split a close-knit community into at least two camps should be handled very carefully by the State Government. People have told me that Minister Sartor breezed into Taralga late one Friday after visiting Braidwood. He sauntered into the pub, had a bit of a chat and left. To my knowledge, that is the sum total of his consultation with the people of Taralga, but if that is not so I am very happy to have that corrected.

The detractors do not object to sustainable energy but they are concerned about the negative visual and noise impacts on the village as well as the effect on land values and wildlife. The supporters believe it will bring work to the village and will benefit local retailers. Others, who do not live in Taralga, believe it will contribute to greenhouse gas abatement. There are, of course, other pros and cons, but in whichever camp you sit the fact remains that this has driven a wedge through relationships that have been the backbone of this community for many years—as I understand it does to any community in Australia dealing with a wind farm proposal.

The argument has been brewing since August 2004 when a public meeting was convened at the local sports club by RES Southern Cross to advise of a wind farm proposal. This was a bolt from the blue for most residents but it was clear that the host property owners had known of the project for several years. This was perhaps the first wedge. In December of that same year an open day and public meeting was held in the memorial hall, facilitated by the council and attended by approximately 300 people. In February 2005 the company engaged a consultant, who I am told targeted selected local organisations to attend a meeting where they were asked to put forward a virtual wish list of projects for possible company sponsorship if the wind farm was to get approval. Another wedge perhaps.

Many of those present, however, responded to this bargaining approach by saying that it was totally out of order until, and if, the project was approved. Unlike with the preparation for the Crookwell II wind farm, no staff of the Department of Planning were present at any of these meetings although they did attend tours of the proposed wind farm site with the developer. At the request of the opponents of the wind farm, staff from the department returned to the village, where they were shown the negative effect on neighbouring properties and landscape and the effect on the views from various vantage points around Taralga. The Government, meanwhile, has sat back and done nothing.

This is not a debate about the rights and wrongs of wind farms but about how a government, mindful that this is a contentious issue, deals with community discontent and disharmony. In country areas, where memories can be long and small community size makes community harmony a very personal issue for every single resident, there is an important role for Government in ensuring that developments like wind farms do not unduly strain that social fabric. This Government has manifestly failed to even understand this, let alone do anything about it. And it would not be difficult, or even costly, to do so.

The villagers should have a forum to voice their feelings so they are not left with a nasty taste in their mouth and resentment in their gut. Further, negotiation with local people with local knowledge might even produce better outcomes for the proposed wind farm. If the Government is to achieve its renewable energy targets we know it has few choices. It can dot the crowded coastline or it can fill up the interior with these turbines. I am sure the Government would not allow hundreds of wind turbines around Newcastle, Wollongong or Sydney without very close and careful community consultation. The people of country New South Wales, and particularly the people of Taralga, no matter whose side one is on, deserve the same respect.

ABC - Thursday, June 7, 2007. 4:27pm (AEST)

Conroy's Gap wind farm gets go-ahead

AAP 14:45:00 2337 11/09/2006 Angry views traded at wind energy meeting AAP News

14:45:020 11/09/2006

By Denis Peters

CANBERRA, Sept 11 AAP - Federal Environment Minister Ian Campbell said there was anger and hostility at a wind industry meeting today, but believed a national code of practice for wind farms would eventually be found.

Senator Campbell is hosting the meeting of governments, wind energy industry and community groups over the often-controversial decision of where to erect wind turbines.Earlier this year the minister blocked a $220 million wind farm in Victoria's Gippsland region, saying it would be a danger to the rare orange-bellied parrot.

Different states have different criteria for rules on where to place wind farms, and Senator Campbell wants a uniform code.

Some robust views were expressed at the meeting, at Parliament House.

"We've had deeply divided camps in the room and there's been some displays of anger and hostility," Senator Campbell said. "But, overall, I would say, by the end of the day, the wind energy industry have endorsed the need for a national code, the planning institute have endorsed the need for it and the National Trust, Birds Australia and all the local community groups have had a very strong consensus in there.

"The other thing is that having some of the leaders of these communities and local governments and the really angry, affected communities sitting together for a few hours in a room, will, I hope, be part of a healing process, which can be a positive thing for renewable energy."

Senator Campbell said the next step would be to work with the industry and communities to formalise the code. "The industry ... will be working with us," he said. "They're developing their own guidelines, which can become part of the code and that will then have an accreditation process in it. "I think that the states will come on board because the wind energy industry will do my work for me and suggest that it's a very good idea that they come on board."

Australian Wind Energy Association president and Pacific Hydro executive Andrew Richards said it was positive that different stakeholders were brought together, and thanked the government for doing that.

"It is good to have the conversation," he said. "Our industry is very keen to see best-practice guidelines adopted throughout the country for all developments and all developers in our industry. "We see that, potentially, the national code the minister's talking about is a good vehicle to help that get into place."

Mr Richards said his organisation, which has about 100 members, wanted to rein in so-called rogue operators.

"We want to have an accreditation process in place, whether it be under the national code or some other format, that ensures that you either abide by the rules or you don't play the game.

AAP dep/sb/jm/bwl

THE STANDARD - Madeline Healey- June 27, 2006

Big wind comment from Peter McGauran

Goulburn Post 2nd March 2006

Compo offer retracted: Angry residents demand wind farm moratorium

The Age Sat 8/4/2006

Orange‑bellied parrot a red herring'

By ROD MYER

ENERGY REPORTER

THE controversial Bald Hills wind farm could not have been built even if federal Environment Minister Ian Campbell had dropped his concerns about the orange‑bellied parrot.

This is because the federal renewable energy scheme it relied on for financing has effectively run out of capacity.

Steve Buckle, whose Wind Power group is the promoter of Bald Hills, said he had been unable to find power contracts for the $220 million wind farm because the rundown of the mandated renewable energy target (MRET) scheme, which underpins such contracts. "We spent time and energy last year trying to get an agreement ... but we couldn't," Mr Buckle said. The State Government, frustrated that the lack of capacity in the MRET scheme is bringing the renewables industry to a halt, is examining the viability of introducing its own scheme.

Victorian Energy Minister Theo Theophanous said there was "significant support for it in the Government, but we're not going to do it unless it stacks up in economic and emissions

reduction terms". A well designed scheme could make Victoria a centre for renewable development and component export, Mr Theophanous said.

He would not comment on the viability of any particular wind project, but "it's not news to me that a range of wind farms round the state would have difficulty getting up without some further assistance"'.

Victorian Planning Minister Rob Hulls is deciding the fate of the Dollar wind farm adjacent to Bald Hills. If Dollar gets the goahead, Mr Campbell may have to act again to block it or risk appearing hyprocritical. over the parrot issue.

MRET subsidises renewable energy generators through a levy on power users. But it remains capped at 9500 gigawatts of energy a year by 2010 after an expected increase as part of a federal energy policy review in 2004 did not eventuate.

Pacific Hydro is also likely to abandon $231 million worth of investment at its long‑planned Portland wind farm if the State Government scheme is not introduced. A company spokesman said yesterday the Portland project's fate was "increasingly relying on the State Government".

The Age Friday 7/4/06

Let's have balance

on environment

The stark reality is that renewable energy is not commercially viable, writes Nell Coulson.

It is richly ironic that we have seen several wind farms knocked back on environmental grounds by both the federal and state governments, the latest example being the Bald Hills project,

The preoccupation with environmental impacts of major projects highlights the problems governments have in prioritising environmental and economic issues.

Too many commentators contrast these issues as a zerosum game, with either the environment or the economy winning or losing. But we can have both, and they can be complementary.

Industry policy and environment policy should work hand in hand, particularly in regard to progressing major projects in a timely fashion. With wind farms, we should go back to square one and assess whether the proposed project and this form of power generally is economically viable.

Some assert that wind power is the way of the future. In Victoria, for example, the Government is considering introducing a renewable energy target (RET) and "is looking at what market‑based measures will help us reach our aim of more than doubling the proportion of renewable energy used by Victorians to 10 per cent by 2010".

While the Victorian Employers Chamber of Commerce and Industry recognises that there is a role for renewable energy sources as complementary inputs to Victorian industry, the stark realityis that renewable energy will not provide a commercially viable alternative supply for Victoria over the medium to long term.

The Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics has forecast that renewable energy sources will comprise only 3 per cent of total primary energy consumption by 2030, compared with 44 per cent from brown coal energy.

It is certainly questionable whether one can classify the establishment by governments of mandatory, arbitrary targets as "market‑based measures". Their effect on the market is distortionary, as they favour renewable energy over carbon abatement technology. RET schemes dictate that emission abatement should be undertaken through the adoption of high‑cost renewable technologies.

If the Victorian Government wants to position the state for a carbonconstrained future, such action must be cognisant of Victoria's advantages and economic realities.

Wind power costs $77‑82 per megawatt hour to generate, compared with $40 per MWh for brown coal ‑ and can be counted on only 10 per cent of the time (when the wind _blows). Are Victorian businesses and households required to pay for power at double the cost of what they are paying now?

9th March 2006 : Katrina Hodgkinson lodges motion for debate in NSW Parliament

1166 Ms HODGKINSON to move:

That this House:

Notes that the NSW Government approved the proposed wind farm at Taralga despite receiving
Notes that the Minister for Planning approved the Taralga Wind Farm before approval to connect the facility to the NSW electricity grid had been sought.
Calls on the Minister for Planning to agree to the Federal Environment Minister’s call for a national code for the location of wind farms and that wind farms not be constructed against the wishes of the local community.

(Notice given 8 March 2006)

7th March 2005 - Planning Minister Frank Sartor review of windfarms

Planning Minister Frank Sartor today ordered a review of windfarms in key locations across NSW to ensure there is a balanced approach to development issues.

The announcement follows talks with representatives of Upper Lachlan Shire Council.

Mr Sartor said windfarms are an important means of generating green energy for NSW, but planning approvals should be granted in a strategic and coordinated way.

“Renewable energy sources such as windfarms help curb greenhouse gas emissions and are vital for the future of NSW and the entire planet,“ Mr Sartor said.

“Windfarms assist in securing the State’s power supply and can also deliver significant economic benefits to surrounding areas. “But I am concerned that we strike the right balance in planning for the cumulative impact of these developments.

“Some landowners are also left in limbo when projects gain development consent but are not locked into a start date.

“Upper Lachlan Shire Council in particular has raised a number of valid concerns which I have asked my Department to investigate.”

The review will examine key locations for windfarms and consider:

the ability to accommodate windfarms;
the cumulative impacts of windfarms;
the ability to provide wider community benefits;
a mechanism to ensure approved projects are delivered quickly.

Mr Sartor said the Department of Planning will work closely with local councils and windfarm proponents to make sure local communities obtain reasonable benefits from these developments.