Essay by Eric Worrall
When Net Zero obsessed Aussie Federal and State Governments announced large scale electricity grid extensions to service renewable energy installations, they forgot to talk to the land owners.
Last Friday I attended a meeting at Widgee Bushman’s Bar for people concerned about the green grid extensions. Some prominent politicians spoke at the event. Federal Senator Malcolm Roberts, and Federal Member of Parliament Colin Boyce spoke up about their concerns over the way land owners are being treated.
The pushback against Aussie green electricity grid extensions is largely getting the silent treatment from mainstream media. With a few honourable exceptions, the concerns of rural people who are worried about having their land value and amenity ruined with compulsory acquisitions to service the profits of big green is largely being ignored.
But as you can see from the size of the rally in the small country town of Widgee, this is an issue rural people care about.
The carpark for the Widgee Bushman’s Bar was full to bursting, the parking attendants were down to their last two spaces when I arrived.
Talking to Nolene from Kilkivan Action Group, the biggest issue with the power line extension project to date has been a perception of very poor or incomplete communication. People are worried about the impact on their land, and there are also fears of communities being divided by sharp negotiating practices.
There is also a concern that some information is difficult to access, despite claims to the contrary. For example, Powerlink have assured residents power lines comply to standard AS7000, but to obtain a copy of AS7000, residents have to pay $313.30 to SAI Global.
The following is part of an email provided to me by the Kilkivan Action Group;
Dear Kilkivan Action Group members,
Thank you for your follow-up query regarding electric and magnetic fields (EMF) related to the Borumba Pumped Hydro Project transmission connections.
Audible noise from transmission lines primarily occurs in inclement weather. Water drops that collect on the energised surface of the transmission line wires (called conductors) and associated transmission line hardware produce corona discharges based on the electrical stress on the surface which is defined by the surface voltage gradient (SVG). The design scenarios for transmission lines producing audible noise considers the following situations:
- Fair weather – dry conditions where the recommended application of SVG of 16 kV/cm or less means the line generally operates below corona inception levels (see the attached extract from AS7000).
- Inclement weather – high humidity, fog and light rain – causes droplet formation on the conductor when current loading on the line is low and the heat in the conductor is not enough to evaporate the drops off the conductor surface. Water droplets alter the circular shape of the conductor and it is no longer circular. The higher the SVG is, the higher the bursts of corona that occur at droplet locations. AS7000 provides guidance on SVG so an appropriate benchmark can be applied to optimise conductor size (cost) Vs. likely audible noise.
- Inclement weather – heavy rain – Saturated conductors that won’t evaporate quickly due to the rate of rainfall and droplet formation. Rain conditions generally set the audible noise design limits, but these are offset by the fact that background noise levels are also high from the rain activity itself.
…
So far Powerlink has not provided a free copy of the full AS7000 standard to at least some groups potentially impacted by the proposed power lines. $313.30 might not seem like a big deal, but if every group has to pay $313.30 for this controlled document which contains key answers about the safety impacts of the new power lines, and pay additional fees for paper chasing other controlled documents, it doesn’t take long until substantial money has to be paid, just to obtain information which in my opinion should be freely available to affected land owners.
Powerlink offered in the email above to provide a domain expert to discuss the standard with the Kilkivan Action Group, but this is not the same as having a copy of the actual document.
Given this level of apparent difficulty obtaining key information, and the perception of poor communication, it is no wonder affected land owners feel they have unanswered concerns about the potential health impacts, fire risks and impacts on property values and the health of animals on their farms, and that their concerns are not being adequately addressed.
There are also allegations the power companies may have been astroturfing – putting together unrepresentative “consultation” groups and claiming they had community agreement on the basis of talking to these hand picked groups. Obviously this might just be that they failed to reach significant groups of people with their in my opinion inadequate consultation efforts.
Biosecurity during construction and maintenance is also an issue the people I spoke to raised. Australia has serious problems with controlling some weeds and pests, to the extent farmers operate rigorous biosecurity practices to protect their properties. According to the rural people I spoke to, there are already shortages of key bio-control chemicals, so the impact of all this construction and access by people who might not be fully cognisant of required biosecurity procedures is also a major source of concern.
The impact on roads was also raised. A few weeks ago I published a video showing the desperate state of the poorly maintained roads in this part of Australia. Imagine the state they will be in after heavy construction trucks have used them to provide supplies for a major power grid extension.
The AEMO advises energy companies to obtain “social license” for their projects. I think given the level of distress currently being experienced by the rural people I spoke to, and the alleged communication blunders, it is fair to say they power companies are a long way from obtaining this vital “social license” with many potentially affected rural land owners.
Update (EW): h/t Katy – Click here to listen to an ABC interview with Katy from Kilkivan Action Group. The interview starts at 42 minutes into the recording, in which Katy expresses concern about the risk to protected native species, and asks why the power lines can’t be buried and run alongside roads, to minimise disruption to locals and fire risk.
I think these community groups should get together and say no AS7000 no power line.
“green” electricity grid
All Standards should be free. It’s a simple enough task to have a website with pdf files.
Agree100% but in my very limited experience in standards documentation, they are incomprehensible to the average person
meant to be that way- like what all priesthoods produce
Deliberate obfuscation.
That’s a nice sentiment, but how do you make that happen? Organizations that maintain the standards have costs, and those costs have to be offset. In the US, the code/standard revision cycle is 3 years. It’s not like these standards are best sellers. And that’s considering that a lot of the people who sit on standards committees are volunteers.
One of the times I would suggest government support.
The government would be quite happy to take over the cost of standards development and publication. They already do it, their standards are called laws and regulations. Of course if they pay the cost, they’ll expect to control the content. We’re far netter off with voluntary consensus standards developed by committees with balanced representation of interests. Standards developers support the process by selling copies of these copyrighted documents. But anyone can review copies for free at various libraries – most engineering schools maintain complete collections. Lately several organizations have also set up systems where standards can be reviewed on line, but not downloaded or printed.
Thank you for your reply. I knew someone was going to suggest “Let the gum’int do it” and I was poised to make your objections.
On the free viewing of codes, I know that the ICC and NFPA have areas on their websites where you can view the codes for free. There are also a couple of aggregator sites that let you view for free, but if you get a subscription, you can print excerpts and do complicated searches.
Sounds like Au is borrowing a leaf from the Ru playbook.
Putin killed off many Ukrainians in rural villages in contested areas then moved in Russian Replacements prior to holding elections to vote on separation from Ukraine.
I don’t think anyone takes the Russian independence referendums seriously.
Maybe the “proxy war” devotees who think the USA wants to obliterate the current Russian regime do …..it might validate their “thinking”?
I can remember elections in the old USSR, and often wonder if the people who didn’t vote for the president are out of the Gulag yet
Don’t these country oiks know that they are supposed to kneel before their elders and betters living in the inner-city? How dare they get in the way of the Teal’s and Green’s profits! Don’t they know their job is just to provide food for the elites and not to question them? Mind you, I rather think many of the elites think that food grows on supermarket shelves.
That is so pre-CoViD.
Everybody knows it spontaneously generates in the Uber Eats car or the Domino’s scooter now
Landowners must push back as hard as they can. They also should ensure well in advance that they have done their research and obtain their own independent advice. Putting together a legal team will also be required. – I can see these land issues ending up in the courts.
Here is AEMO’s Advisory Council on Social Licence. – Read the bio’s. You can draw your own conclusions on what “social license” means in the context of AEMO and the nut-zero fairy tale.
AEMO | Advisory Council on Social Licence
It’s going to get interesting, there is a lot of concern out there. So far at least the main concern is poor communication, and that could be down to incompetence rather than malice. But I’m going to follow this issue closely, I’ve asked rural landowners I met to contact WUWT immediately if there are any developments.
Compulsory Acquisitions for new transmission lines are happening in our region in Central West NSW too. There is such a lack of transparency that it’s hard to know what the truth is. Our lines will be extended from Wollar to out beyond Wellington. Originally we were told that they would cover 180 kilometres at 80 metres wide. Recently there was talk of them extending the lines and a property owner a few kilometres from us is saying that they will be cutting through the middle of their property at a width of 250 metres.
This property owner is concerned about the affects of this infrastructure on their land use and the local wildlife. They hosted researchers on their property who conducted 500 man-hours of studies and identified 19 endangered species in the areas affected by the transmission lines and subsequent wind and solar sites.
Developers will typically state that there are no endangered species on the sites or they will name a few and purchase certificates which absolves them of any responsibility for the loss of these creatures which are predominantly birds and bats. Though Koalas have been identified too.
Our region is just one of five to seven Renewable Energy Zones in NSW, they keep changing the story as they go along. Though much of this infrastructure is being rolled out in many places outside these zones.
Sounds similar to proposed transmission from Bulganna to Melbourne in Victoria. Pure coincidence that my father was raised in Bulganna and my sister lived in Widgee after she was married.
I’m a bit scared to set foot in the People’s Republic of Victoria, I might get arrested for disagreeing with Dan.
“When Net Zero obsessed Aussie Federal and State Governments announced large scale electricity grid extensions to service renewable energy installations, they forgot to talk to the land owners.”
Based on past experience, it’s far more likely that the governments deliberately avoided talking to the landowners.
The utility should have just called it an “extremely long and narrow farm”…
Just to be clear the thinking here appears to be:
Oil pipelines: good
transmission lines carrying coal powered electricity: good
but
transmission lines carrying renewable energy: bad
Oil pipelines: planned and organised with landholders years ago
Transmission lines carrying coal|gas powered electricity: built decades ago
transmission lines carrying renewable electricity: new impact on landholders
gas wells and pipelines in the Pilliga Forest: new impact on landholders
Do you see a pattern?
Izaak, I spent a couple of hours showing drafts of this article to people who attended that action meeting, to make sure I fully understood their concerns. These aren’t angry unreasonable people or climate activists, they are ordinary people who are upset nobody seems to be telling them what is happening. As I tried to make clear, at this stage their position is mostly an appeal for better communication from the power company.
One provides for reliable electricity or energy for all.
The other is only used a fraction of the time, and is a waste and a pointless imposition.!
Oil: Useful energy for transport, heating, and also provides base stock for a tremendous array of essential products.
Transmission lines carrying coal powered electricity: Provides 24/7/365 baseline power to the grid that can be relied upon.
Transmission lines carrying wind and solar: Provides expensive, occasional, erratic, unpredictable, unreliable electricity that raises the cost of grid power and reduces grid reliability so that the wealthy can accumulate ill won additional wealth at taxpayer expense. Requires 100% backup from coal, oil, gas or nuclear power which ready exists and requires no costly, intrusive “new” transmission lines and vast acreage covered by wildlife destroying and toxic waste generating wind and solar facilities on “greenfields” which do not need to be spoiled by worse-than-useless weather dependent industrial electricity generation equipment.
See the difference now?