"A Cruel Blow": Wind Farm Rejection Ends Family’s Renewable Vision

When Queensland’s Crissafulli government changed its mind on approving a $1 billion wind farm in the state’s centre on May 22, some state politicians claimed it was a victory for people power - the community had spoken, and the MPs had listened. 

But for Tracey Richards and her family – on a fifth generation cattle farm about 40km west of Rockhampton –  the announcement came as a crushing blow, and one that may signal the end of their hopes for creating long term sustainability on their land.

The Queensland government initially approved the project in December 2024, but by January the Deputy Premier, Jarod Belije, had enacted a “call-in” notice that allowed the public to make submissions.

Interested parties were given until March 14 to make a submission.

On May 22, the Deputy Premier revealed that he had refused the development application for the development, known as Moonlight Range. 

Over the years, the Richards have been approached by renewable technology companies a few times about having turbines on their land. One of them was Greenleaf Renewables.

“A lot of them are owned by overseas companies, Greenleaf is an Australian company,” Richards told the National Account.

Greenleaf’s proposal involved an 88-turbine project in their neck of the woods, and the Richards would have housed a share of those on their land. The entire project was tipped to cost about $1 billion. 

The company began developing the wind farm project in partnership with the renewable energy arm of Canadian investment giant Brookfield at the end of 2023. The plan was to develop, build, own and operate the wind farm, with turbines set to generate 450 megawatts of clean electricity, powering around 260,000 homes and creating up to 300 jobs during peak construction.

Richards described the government’s about-face on Moonlight Range as “unnecessarily cruel and without logic and reason”.

The Crissafulli LNP government said it had “listened to the community”. However, of the over 500 submissions put forward to the Queensland government about the development, only 142 came from local residents, with 125 of those opposed to the wind farm. 

Richards said among the reasons the site was chosen was “the fact that there are no close homes on neighbouring properties that could be affected”.

She said five of six neighbours had agreed to take part in the clean energy project.

Cattle can graze right up to the base of the turbine, she said, and “this [farming] model ensures that agricultural productivity thrives alongside renewable energy development”. 

The land on which the turbines would have been placed is harsh and has sparse tree coverage, which Richards says makes it difficult to generate income from.

The Queensland Conservation Council has expressed concerns over potential impacts of the 88 turbines to native flora and fauna. Richards says the family worked with Greenleaf for 15 months to address this issue.

“We were particularly excited about the fact that their investment would allow us to put land aside to enhance the natural values and increase biodiversity. Unfortunately, without this investment, this opportunity will be lost.”

Arrangements between Greenleaf and the landholders are private, however it’s understood these arrangements can be lucrative for farmers. 

Richards says the family is not from intergenerational wealth, but working class people who have laboured tirelessly, often juggling multiple jobs.

She had hoped the opportunities with Greenleaf would mean the farm could remain in the family for another five generations.

“We've got children, we've got grandchildren. We want to try and protect the environment as much as we can, even with our grazing. Regardless of differing views on climate change and renewable energy, the world is moving to a low carbon future. If we fail to embrace this change - we risk being left behind.”

In a statement released on Monday, June 2, Greenleaf said it was reviewing feedback provided by the Deputy Premier and would use the information to inform its next steps. However, under the legislation used to cancel the project, a person may not appeal against the minister’s decision on a “call-in” under the Planning Act.

For the Richards, this may have been the last chance to turn their land into a renewable powerhouse. 

“I don't know if emotionally, as well as financially, we could all cope again,” Tracey said.