Hume North Battery Energy Storage System

9081

New South Wales 2641

09/12/2025

Object

Website

I am writing to formally object to the proposed development of the Hume North Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) at 32 Trout Farm Road, Albury. While I support the transition to renewable energy and acknowledge the important role that storage infrastructure plays in that transition, the location of this project is inappropriate and presents unacceptable risks to the surrounding community, environment, and local economy. My concerns are outlined below. 1. Proximity to a Major Tourist Area The proposed site is located in the vicinity of one of Albury–Wodonga’s key recreational and tourist destinations. The area surrounding the Murray River—including the trout farm precinct, parklands, walking routes, and water-based attractions—draws both locals and visitors. A utility-scale industrial installation of this type will have unavoidable visual, noise, and traffic impacts, all of which undermine the character and amenity that attract visitors to the region. Tourism is a vital economic contributor for the local area, and any development that negatively affects visitor experience risks a measurable economic loss. The proposed BESS does not align with the strategic intent for this precinct and is inconsistent with community expectations for the future of this important recreational zone. 2. Risks to the Town’s Drinking Water Supply The site’s proximity to the Murray River—and therefore to the town’s drinking water supply—is one of the most serious concerns. Modern lithium-based battery storage systems can pose risks including: Thermal runaway and fire events, Release of toxic gases or contaminants during fire suppression, Potential leakage of hazardous chemicals into surrounding soil or waterways. A fire or containment failure at a BESS facility located near a major drinking water catchment represents a low-probability but extremely high-consequence event. The potential contamination of the Murray River would have immediate and far-reaching impacts on human health, community safety, local agriculture, and ecosystems downstream. This river is one of Australia’s major arterial waterways, and even a single incident could have effects extending well beyond Albury. Given that safer, more isolated, non-environmentally sensitive locations are available elsewhere in the region, placing this infrastructure so close to the town’s water source is unjustifiable. 3. Incompatibility With Surrounding Land Uses The proposal would introduce a heavy industrial-style facility into an area characterised by tourism, recreation, semi-rural living, and natural riverine environments. Such a land-use conflict is inconsistent with good planning practice. Concerns include: Noise pollution from cooling systems and maintenance operations, Increased heavy-vehicle traffic during construction and servicing, Night-lighting and visual impacts that detract from the landscape character, Reduction in amenity for residents and visitors alike. The long-term presence of an industrial-scale installation is fundamentally incompatible with the existing values and uses of this area. 4. Insufficient Consideration of Environmental & Emergency Risks BESS facilities around the world have experienced fire events, some of which have required extended exclusion zones and hazardous-materials responses. Placing such a facility adjacent to the Murray River amplifies the consequences of any emergency. Key issues include: Lack of clarity regarding fire-fighting strategy and water contamination controls, Uncertainty around the impact of run-off or fire-suppressant chemicals entering nearby waterways, Limitations on evacuation routes in a popular recreational corridor, Insufficient buffer distances from sensitive riverine ecosystems. A risk-minimising approach would avoid situating the facility in such an environmentally sensitive and high-value location. Conclusion For the reasons outlined above—particularly the unacceptable risk posed to the Murray River water supply and the detrimental impact on one of the region’s key recreational and tourism areas—I strongly request that the proposed Hume North Battery Energy Storage System at 32 Trout Farm Road, Albury be refused. I ask that the planning authority require the proponent to identify an alternative site that does not place community, environmental, and economic assets at risk.

9086

Redacted

09/12/2025

Object

Website

risk fire and contamination of water ways recycling

9091

Redacted

09/12/2025

Object

Website

This Hume North BESS battery will only bring the bankruptcy of Australia one step closer. The cost of the transition to renewables is estimated to be between $7 trillion to $9 trillion dollars according to Net Zero Australia. “The transition is modelled to require between $7 and $9 trillion of capital commitments by 2060. Most of those funds will come from business, and some from households.” Source: Page 12: “We are predicted to commit up to $9 trillion on the transition in the next 37 years.” & Funding the transition p62. https://www.netzeroaustralia.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Net-Zero-Australia-Mobilisation-How-to-make-net-zero-happen-updated-19-Sep-23.pdf No other country in the world is transitioning to wind and solar only without a substantial base load supply. This type of ideology transition has never been tried anywhere across the globe before and now it has become apparent that without base load inertia (currently produced by coal fired power generation) must be replaced by synchronous condensors or syncons. The number and final cost of these syncons will exceed $4.7 billion dollars. Based on the syncon unit cost assumptions provided by each TNSP, the total cumulative cost exceeds $4.7 billion. That’s if Australia can get them manufactured in time: One country (Australia) requiring 19 syncons over a 2-year period will materially stress global production capacity. This raises a matter around how realistic it is that Australia will be able to command this large a slice of the global market, and if it can, what the price premium will be. Source: https://theenergy.co/article/australias-giant-syncon-bet This is an additional expense that will force up electricity prices further, bankrupting business, driving industry offshore, adding to inflation and the cost of everything manufactured or used in Australia. As Australia only emits around 1% of carbon dioxide it will make absolutely no difference to the global temperature: Dr. Alan Finkel, Australia’s Chief Scientist from 2016 to 2020, made these remarks during a Senate Estimates hearing on June 1, 2017. When Senator Ian Macdonald asked about the impact of reducing global carbon emissions by 1.3% (roughly Australia’s share), Finkel responded that the impact would be “virtually nothing.” By approving this BESS you are openly advocating a scam that will not make any difference whatsoever to the climate. It will make Australia’s energy security more reliant on the very hostile Chinese government who oversees the supply of around 90% of Australia’s renewable products. What happens in 20 years time when China decides not to replace these batteries, solar panels or windmills that are scarring the environment or the cost of their replacement is unbelievably high? Australia’s energy security is being placed at risk with the whole grid network being reliant on intermittent weather. Also the risk of faulty software updates or international hackers holding the grid to ransom, totally shutting it down. If the monitoring software is modified to allow overcharging then a battery fire will occur. According to the International Energy Agency the more renewables a country has the more expensive electricity becomes: see the attachment This BESS will cause further electricity price rises, add to the cost of living, it will only add to the food poverty that’s being experienced by up to one third of Australian households. I have the same concerns about the projects potential impact that local residents near the site have raised on the scenic environment, local wildlife, and the risks associated with bushfires and thermal runaway events - a phenomenon where lithium batteries overheat uncontrollably. "The thing that really worries me, which should worry everybody, is the thermal runaway events," Anthony Gye, a neighbour to the project, said. "There's a high chance that this thing will catch fire at some stage. When the fire happened at the [Victorian Big Battery in Geelong], it had about 130 firemen and 50 vehicles, and they were there for four days. How's this village going to handle that? "Also, it is located above the Lake Hume and the Murray River, so if something happens, it could flow down into that." The whole Australia wide roll out of renewables is being rushed. Queensland conservationist and eco-warrior Steven Nowakowski and Rainforest Reserves Australia, want to awaken Australia to the potential impact of a poorly planned rollout of renewables on wild places and rural land. Their bombshell assessment of what’s required to reach net zero in Australia: * 25,000 more wind towers * 45,000 km of more roads * 250,000,000 solar panels * Costing $1.33 Trillion dollars Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmJIG2HBhyE The battery proposed is now twice the original size and the $450,000 offer to the cash strapped Albury council is nothing short of a bribe. This $450,000 offered will only be added to your electricity bills, who do they think was going to pay for these “big bucks”? It’s an absolutely insane idea to place a BESS so lose to a major waterway. The location is in a valley only a stones throw above the Murray River that supplies water to Australia’s largest food growing region. If you approve this you are risking the contamination of 2000km of Australia’s largest river. I fish near the Hume weir wall that’s close to the proposed BESS. My family and the whole community drink water from the river. Albury Wodonga and ALL the communities downriver right down to Adelaide rely on the Murray River for drinking water. It would be catastrophic if a lithium battery fire polluted the river. Decommissioning of lithium batteries also is a major risk to the environment. The Missouri lithium recycling plant boasted the world’s best fire protection technology with sensors that could detect a fire before the flames appeared. It burned to the ground recently polluting the local environment, waterways and houses. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-4uhZaYktQ Local concerns about the endangered squirrel glider habitat being destroyed have been ignored by this proposed BESS. "With the exception of the squirrel glider, no other threatened flora or fauna species were detected in the field survey carried out for the project," the EIS states.” Source below: Border Mail Nov 22nd 2024: (when the proposal was HALF the size) What a total bunch of hypocrites the so called “environmentalists” are, destroying the planet to save it. This proposal is not good for the environment, not good for the economy, will add to the cost of living and not good for our energy security. Do not approve it. Thank you.

renewables % versus price_0.pdf (PDF, 398.71 KB)

9096

Redacted

09/12/2025

Object

Website

Submission is uploaded.

Submission to IPC SL Dec 9th 1-15 pm.pdf (PDF, 685.15 KB)

9101

09/12/2025

Object

Email

Lyndal Gawen IPC submission: Hume North Battery Energy Storage System (SSD-61842974) Dear Prof Menzies and Mr Chilott, Here is a link to my initial NSW Planning Portal submission. The concerns raised here have not been address and need to be added to your deliberations on the appropriateness of approving this project. The precautionary principle needs to be considered. Here is a link to a BESS failure incident database for an understanding of the random nature of thermal runaway events. Testing the precautionary principle is understandably a difficult task. There are no guiding principles that draw together the various standards and regulations that suitably balances the risks of BESS proposals with their anticipated surroundings. Acknowledging the benefits BESS technology brings to renewable energy integration and grid stability, the Australian Energy Council (AEC) commissioned a report (attached) that identifies the risk of the technology and provides guidance material for assessment. The report classifies BESS facilities into ‘types’ based on storage capacity, and determines the risk profile of a facility in a similar way as other high hazardous industries. The assessment method is mapped out in Figure 7 of the document. In developing the report, the writers interviewed participants, and analysed what happened at the Victoria Big Battery fire near Geelong. The BESS modules used at this site were also Tesla Megapacks 2XL and had undergone UL9540A testing. The Murray St BESS has already been approved, it has all the potential of the Trout Farm Rd BESS. At this stage of BESS technology development, I don’t believe either BESS facility passes the precautionary principle with regard to the Murray River and its value to Australia. Should a thermal runaway event occur at a site, Fire and Rescue NSW (FRNSW) will take a position of non-intervention. Their main issue will be to balance the danger to the lives of their firefighters with their legal obligation to protect property and save lives (the policy provided at the above link is currently out for consultation, don’t forget to have your say). Trout Farm Rd itself is the greatest weakness to SSD 61842974. The road was blocked twice in the past 12 months (here and here) due to weather and accident. It would take a serious disaster for FRNSW to start pumping water and chemicals onto a BESS fire. If they make the decision to actively suppress the thermal runaway, serious amounts of water and chemical will be required and the driveway and Trout Farm Rd will funnel water downhill to the river. At least with the Murray St site, the lay of the land will enable the opportunity to prepare before deluge, with the digging of a motte, dam or sump with a big yellow machine. Finally, here is a list of entities who are stakeholders within the 1 km radius of 32 Trout Farm Rd not consulted: • Murray Darling Basin Authority • Victorian Government • Wodonga community • Bellbridge community Wodonga Council received one email. Regards, Lyndal

AEC to national-battery-strategy_Redacted.pdf (PDF, 1.97 MB)

9106

New South Wales 2640

09/12/2025

Object

Website

Submission: Objection to the Hume BESS Project I wish to lodge my objection to the proposed Hume Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) project in its entirety. My concerns reflect the issues raised by AlburyCity and many members of the local community. The project poses unacceptable risks to the region’s drinking water supply, given its proximity to critical water infrastructure. Any industrial development that introduces fire, chemical, or contamination hazards near the Hume Dam catchment is, in my view, inappropriate and unsafe. I am also concerned about the significant visual and landscape impacts of the proposal. The Hume area is valued for its natural, scenic, and recreational qualities, and the introduction of large-scale industrial infrastructure would permanently undermine the character and amenity of the region. This is inconsistent with community aspirations for the area’s long-term use, enjoyment, and environmental protection. Furthermore, the proposal has caused considerable community concern and opposition, reflecting a loss of confidence that the project can be delivered safely or compatibly with local land use and planning objectives. For these reasons, I object to the Hume BESS project and urge the decision-makers to decline approval. Thank you for considering my submission.

9111

08/12/2025

Object

Email

See attached

251208 Tony Gye Submission_Redacted.pdf (PDF, 18.71 MB)

8826

Redacted

08/12/2025

Object

Website

I Robin Elliott am opposed to the possible contamination of public water with the battery located at Lake Hume so close to the Murray River. This has been a ridiculous proposition in the purchase of this showplace block of land. My previous submission, you have, this being my second. Also just a concern, if the Aboriginal community were opposed to this destruction and displacement of land would you consider it My dear friends ashes are on this property... Robin Elliott

20251208_144200_Redacted.pdf (PDF, 6 MB)

8476

New South Wales 2640

07/12/2025

Object

Website

I have already put in a written submission (on NSW SSD website)and had a local meeting with the IPC. This is not the site for a Bess.

7381

Redacted

18/11/2025

Support

Website

No issues. We need more renewable energy in the area