"Go away" - Farming community rejects batteries
Shady Creek farmers have spoken loud and clear - battery storage facilities don't belong in their neighbourhood. The emotional pleas of property owners were simple - "go away."
by Yvette Brand
Shady Creek farmers have spoken loud and clear - battery storage facilities don't belong in their neighbourhood.
The emotional pleas of property owners were simple - "go away."
Gathered for a meeting of proximal neighbours to the proposed Darnum Battery Energy Storage System (BESS), the wider Shady Creek community stood firm, desperate to protect prime agricultural land.
The Tuesday night meeting was hosted by Samsung C&T Renewable Energy Australia (SREA) in relation to its proposed BESS development at 875 Darnum-Shady Creek Rd. But also on the table is a facility being developed by ZEN Energy in Yarragon-Shady Creek Rd.
With two facilities proposed within kilometres of each other, the protests blended into one fight and one message - "not here."
Fighting back tears, Alema Seebeck called on SREA to "do the right thing" and relocate the development.
"Every person with a tractor out there will lobby hard to stop you coming here. It is not fair.
"The disgusting thing is that you don't even have to listen to us because the government will just tick it off.
"You have got to be crazy. This is our prime agricultural land. How can you sleep at night knowing this whole community is against it.
"Do you see the young children in this room today, do you see this is their livelihood? There are generations of people sitting in this room today whose livelihoods are going to be ruined," she said.
Gill Oscar said the surrounding area produced 63 million litres of milk a year from 50 farmers in the area and it was unfair to impose the development on a farming area.
"How can you run a farm if you are worried about the impact on your animals?
"What does it mean if a prime farming area can't farm anymore? What happens to the food of our nation?
"VicGrid has acknowledged West Gippsland is not suitable for the renewable energy zone," she said.
Anthea Day told developers they had to understand the properties were the farmers' offices.
She said it was unrealistic to only do noise testing in people's homes because surrounding landowners were out on their properties everyday working.
"It's not just our houses that are impacted by noise. Our offices are our properties," she said.
Contamination of waterways also was highlighted as a major concern and SREA was asked if it could guaranteed there would be no contamination in run-off from the site.
"If our bore water gets contaminated, we will have nothing - 30 to 40 years of farming gone. You don't understand, this is farm land, this is our livelihoods," an adjoining neighbour said.
Another resident pleaded with SREA to consider the mental health of property owners. "We are used to the peace and quiet. I love the peace, I don't even have a radio on and now there could be a constant hum," she said.
Many residents, including direct boundary neighbours to the proposed development, said consultation had been poor and little information had been provided.
Neighbour James Faithful said the majority of the community did not want the project and it needed to go elsewhere. "If we all say no, why isn't that enough for Samsung?"
Unwelt Environmental and Social Consultants principal consultant Michelle Croker said they had heard residents "loud and clear" at the meeting.
She said the responses would form part of the overall project assessment.
"We are not saying we are walking away because no-one wants it - this is part of the process," she said.
