Community & Business
4 June, 2026
Tenterfield Council defers battery decision
Battery decision deferred
Tenterfield is in no hurry to approve a large battery storage facility on Old Racecourse Road. The five-container size operation is on the ropes as councillors consider they are inadequately informed by the developer.
“There is no benefit to Tenterfield Shire”, Deputy Mayor Greg Sauer said during the debate.
The matter was brought up in council in February but a decision was deferred to seek information on lithium battery fire duration, control methods, toxin presence, dispersal rates of smoke, noise suppression, and alternate locations. The chamber was particularly unimpressed in February that they were told if the battery facility were to ignite, just dumping water on it would be fine.
In fact, in case of a fire, it is probable that firefighters encapsulator agents (like F-500) that penetrate the battery casing, cool the core, and stop the chemical reaction. Or the fire may be left to burn out on its own.
The application was initially lodged in September last year and placed for public notice. There were five submissions, but two were duplicated.
Council staff, who recommended approving the application, prepared a thorough report for chambers including a response from the developer which was not sufficient to get it over the line.
Cr Bonner, Cr Bancroft and Cr Murphy, and Cr Peters spoke against the motion.
Cr Peter Murphy outlined 26 points that were emailed to councillors right before the meeting by residents and moved that the matter be deferred so that council had more time to address the issues.
Deputy Mayor Sauer spoke eloquently against approval saying that “I stood for council back in 2016 on the platform of putting the community first and this is one item that squarely meets that commitment. I am doing everything to put the community first.”
Cr Sauer pointed out that the shire staff did a more thorough report than the applicant.
“I feel that there are numerous non disclosures or incorrect disclosures even (from) even their own experts they put up to support their application last time.”
“As far as being a ‘renewable’ project, it is not. There is no benefit to the Tenterfield Shire residents. This is simply an opportunistic venture where their company has decided there’s money to be made. They’re going to buy energy from the grid, store it in batteries, and sell it back into the grid when their profit margins are met; there is zero benefit to the community.”
The core of the debate centred predominantly on the spread of possible contaminants to the shire in the case of fire, the true cost of the development, and its proximity to homes. A point was also made that the same company had applications in with other local governments that had yet to be approved for the past four years. Many in the room wanted to investigate why that was the case.
Mayor Bronwyn Petrie heartily concurred, and went over the list of 26 items still of concern.
Cr Murphy reminded his colleagues that they couldn’t just forgo approving the application unless they had legal grounds to do so and argued for deferment.
Acting GM Matthew Francisco asked councillors to explain the reasons for deferment “so we don’t keep going around in circles.”
The application will return to chambers in due course.
Read More: Tenterfield
