Economic

• Insurance liability may fall on the host or neighbour in the event of a fire/accident/injury related to wind turbines and associated infrastructure; your ability to insure your farm may also be compromised.

​

• Land value and market demand may be affected by turbines and associated infrastructure.

​

• Financial incentives for hosting turbines and transmission lines will be eaten up in stamp duty and taxes.

​

• Costs of dismantling infrastructure and regenerating and rehabilitating land may fall to the host as there is currently no legislation mandating companies to do this.

​​

• Farm productivity and autonomy will decrease, as farmers may not be able to work their land during construction, nor will they be able to move livestock and machinery as they wish, there will be restrictions. Yield loss will also be reduced by the huge amount of land taken up by RE infrastructure, which includes turbine pads, gravel pads, access roads, on-site quarries, batching plants, offices and accommodation. There may also be additional restrictions for anyone hosting transmission lines in terms of machinery operation. 

​​

• The RE company may have no money to pay compensation to hosts if they break the terms of the lease agreement, due to how the company is set up.

​​

• The huge tracts of agricultural land being ripped up for RE will have a negative impact on food and fibre production - impacting the economy locally and nationally.

​​

• People leaving the region will lead to a downturn in local economies.

​​

• We will pay for the transmission lines that will need to be built to transmit the power created by these RE projects as part of our electricity bill during a cost-of-living crisis.  

​

• The government spends a monumental amount on these private renewable projects, in excess of one million dollars (per turbine per year) under the Large Generator Certificate scheme (1).​

​​

• The companies make a further 1.2-1.7 million a year per turbine from the sale of electricity generated by turbines operating at a similar factory capacity (2). Government money would be better spent, and any financial incentives to hosts and communities pales into insignificance to the financial gains of the companies. ​