Community Sponsorships & Donations
Voluntary local sponsorships, grants, and donations provided before a formal community benefit fund is established.
The Social Licence Register acknowledges the Anaiwan, Kamilaroi (also spelled Gamilaraay or Gomeroi), Banbai and Dunghutti peoples as the Traditional Custodians of the lands covered by the New England Renewable Energy Zone. We pay our respects to Elders past and present, and recognise their continuing connection to land, waters and community. The EnergyCo NE REZ Generation and Storage Consultation Paper (August 2025) also acknowledges Biripi, Dainggatti, Nganyaywana, Ngarabal and Gumbainggir peoples across the broader zone footprint.
The New England Renewable Energy Zone spans the New England and North West region of NSW, around Armidale, Tamworth, Uralla and Walcha. This register currently profiles ten projects — all with a full entry on the public record — drawn from a wider pipeline of renewable projects across the zone.
The projects span wind, solar, storage and the zone-level transmission build. This page shows the scale of activity on record so far; it grows as more projects lodge documents and reach consent.
What each council would deal with if every project in their area goes ahead. Most New England host councils do not yet have a project with a signed community benefit agreement in the public record — so far only Thunderbolt Wind Farm does, split between Uralla and Tamworth. Where a figure hasn't been confirmed against a source document, the card says so rather than guessing.
How to read this. Footprint means the project is physically built in this council area. Shared footprint means it spans two councils (so far Thunderbolt is the only confirmed New England example). Transport route / road authority means construction traffic passes through the area to reach a project elsewhere — the council carries the road impact but usually gets no benefit payment. New England transport routes haven't been mapped from source documents yet, and each card says where that's still to come.
Projects were approved under different policy settings. This timeline shows why commitments vary and which expectations applied to which projects.
This view highlights five patterns that appear across all four LGAs. They are not the only issues in the data. There are many others. These five show up consistently across the REZ and point to system-level challenges that will need attention as the transition progresses.
The majority of projects do not have a confirmed construction start date. Councils can’t plan housing, roads, childcare or services. TAFEs can’t time training. Communities can’t prepare. This is the single biggest barrier to fair and orderly delivery — and the biggest opportunity for improvement.
Across all four LGAs, housing strain begins before construction peaks, as early works and contractor mobilisation pressure local rentals. Most active projects have published Accommodation and Employment Strategies, and some commit to worker camps, but camps tend to arrive late and few add new, permanent housing. Local rental stock absorbs much of the pressure. Coordinating early impacts, peaks and worker accommodation would deliver the greatest benefit for councils and communities.
Most projects are still pre-construction, so local hiring is yet to happen and there is little outcome data to report. The deeper issue is structural: commitments to apprenticeships, skills and local employment rarely set numerical targets, and almost none require outcome reporting. So even once construction begins, there is no consistent way to see whether training and skills investment converts into real project jobs for local people. Building targets and reporting into conditions now would let councils, TAFE NSW, developers and government track what works.
Annual payments range from zero to several hundred thousand dollars. Formulas differ. Indexation is unclear. Some are lump sums; some are floors; some are unpublished. A consistent approach would give communities clarity and confidence — and lift the floor across the REZ.
Some projects publish operational jobs; others don’t. Local procurement commitments are often broad statements without targets or reporting. Clear, consistent reporting would help councils, communities and local businesses see the real long-term benefit.
The Social Licence Register helps people see where benefits are flowing, where information is thin and where clearer guidance or updated reporting could strengthen outcomes. It supports consistent expectations across REZs and makes it easier to see the good work the renewable sector is delivering for communities.
For councils, this view shows the scale and timing of activity in their area, the commitments on record for each project and how those commitments differ across the zone. It highlights the kinds of issues councils routinely face — workforce peaks, housing pressure, pre-construction spending, childcare gaps, local procurement barriers, service-package visibility and the ‘grandfather gap’ between older and newer consents. Councils can use this information to plan for impacts, coordinate with developers, align training and workforce programs, prepare for accommodation pressure and advocate for clearer conditions or reporting where needed.
The public register is free and always will be. Two deeper layers sit on top of it — sold to government, councils and investors, never to developers. Use the toggle (bottom-right of the screen) to see what stays public and what doesn’t.
It benchmarks projects by size and technology across ten categories — community benefit, jobs and training, First Nations participation, housing and accommodation, local procurement, and others. The analytics are sold to government, councils and investors because they support public-interest decision-making. We don’t sell this layer to developers; the register is independent and doesn’t take developer money. Access is controlled through verified email domains.
These are things you can’t see from a single development consent: construction-start windows, grandfathering gaps, unpublished benefit-fund details, housing and accommodation pressure, and local-procurement commitments. These insights are shared with public-interest bodies as part of continuous improvement — highlighting emerging issues, recommended fixes, and early adopters of better practice.
The Social Licence Register acknowledges the Anaiwan, Kamilaroi (also spelled Gamilaraay or Gomeroi), Banbai and Dunghutti peoples as the Traditional Custodians of the lands covered by the New England Renewable Energy Zone. We pay our respects to Elders past and present, and recognise their continuing connection to land, waters and community. The EnergyCo NE REZ Generation and Storage Consultation Paper (August 2025) also acknowledges Biripi, Dainggatti, Nganyaywana, Ngarabal and Gumbainggir peoples across the broader zone footprint.
This page shows what each developer has promised and what has been delivered. Every project in the New England REZ has its own tab with its planning status, the policy settings that apply to it, its revenue contract position (LTESA or CIS), and a table of commitments by category. If something hasn't been delivered, or if public information is missing, a gap tag explains why.
Click a project to view its commitments, framework position and revenue contract status.
Every renewable energy or storage project with a footprint in a New England host council is listed here, so the community can see what is proposed in their area. We fully track the projects that have lodged a planning assessment or are already approved — that is where commitments can still be shaped or checked against delivery. Projects at the earlier investigation stage are listed but not yet tracked; many will not proceed. From about September 2026, when EnergyCo declares the New England access scheme, access rights will show which projects actually connect and build — and this register will follow whether they honour what they promised.
| Project | Developer | Type & size | Host council | Stage | In the register |
|---|
Not listed: long-established operating projects — those generating for more than a year — sit outside the register's scope, which focuses on projects still being shaped, decided, or recently delivered. In the New England zone these include Metz Solar Farm (operating since 2017) and Sapphire Wind Farm (operating since 2018).
Source: project list compiled from EnergyCo's New England REZ generation & storage project register and the NSW Major Projects planning portal (planningportal.nsw.gov.au), reviewed July 2026.
All projects must meet baseline protections built into the planning system: environmental protections, biodiversity offsets, noise, traffic and amenity management, safety and emergency requirements, statutory Aboriginal cultural heritage protection, and protections for landowners and neighbours such as land access, compensation and amenity. These apply to every project and sit outside what this register tracks.
First Nations obligations go well beyond cultural heritage. NSW guidance for renewable projects sets expectations for genuine engagement with Traditional Owners and knowledge holders, drawing on principles of free, prior and informed consent, self-determination and benefit-sharing. Because these expectations have strengthened over time and apply differently depending on when each project was consented, the register tracks First Nations participation as one of its ten categories, it is not treated as a fixed baseline.
All information on this page comes from primary planning documents or public sources. Before updates are published, the section that names a developer, council or agency is shared with them to check the facts. Any corrections are logged with what changed, when and why.
A full explanation of the method is available on the Methodology and How We Verify page.
Sources: NSW DPHI development consents, statements of commitments, VPA appendices; Independent Planning Commission decisions; AEMO Services LTESA award notices; DCCEEW Capacity Investment Scheme tender results; EnergyCo NSW CWO Access Rights announcements; project EIS and SIA documentation. Last updated April 2026.
Status disclaimer: Pre-construction projects show "Pre-construction" against delivery, not a fault, just timing. Of the eleven generation projects, nine are consented (mostly pre-construction) and two are under assessment, so the "Delivered" column is thin and the register today is effectively Committed + Gap. CCC minutes coverage uneven. LTESA / CIS / Access Right status reflects publicly reported information as at April 2026, verify before citing publicly. Birriwa VPA quantum not publicly disclosed, flagged in the Community Benefit Fund row rather than estimated. Wellington North VPA not locatable in public documentation, flagged rather than estimated. Spicers Creek Access Right status to be confirmed.
First Nations limitation: All First Nations entries reflect proponent-stated commitments in APPs, SoCs and consent conditions. No content in this register has been verified against Local Aboriginal Land Council or Traditional Owner perspectives. Assessments of delivery quality against CWO First Nations Guidelines (Oct 2023) or the Revised General First Nations Guidelines (May 2025) require primary-source input from First Nations stakeholders that sits outside this register's scope.
The Register reads each project's planning consent, its Voluntary Planning Agreement and any tender obligations, then tracks delivery against the public record and publishes what we find. Each check is binary against a published method, with a right of reply for the developer before anything goes public.
Did the project deliver against a published method? Yes or no. No editorial discretion in the finding.
Time-stamped. Peer-reviewed. Open to audit. Updated only through documented process. Every claim cites a primary planning document.
Every party named in a Register publication sees the section that names them, with sources, before publication. They can challenge facts. None can change the classification.
The Register draws only on primary planning documents and publicly available information. These include:
All projects must meet baseline protections built into the planning system. These apply to every project and sit outside what this register tracks:
First Nations obligations go well beyond cultural heritage. NSW guidance for renewable projects sets expectations for genuine engagement with Traditional Owners and knowledge holders, drawing on principles of free, prior and informed consent, self-determination and benefit-sharing. Because these expectations have strengthened over time and apply differently depending on when each project was consented, the register tracks First Nations participation as one of its ten categories, it is not treated as a fixed baseline.
Anyone can challenge a finding by pointing to a primary source. The Register updates entries when new, verifiable information becomes available.
Councils, communities, developers, funders: we’re building this with you. If you see something that needs correcting, tell us and point us at the source.
This page tracks government money, NSW and federal programmes, plus the network operator's own community investment. The question it answers isn't "how much has been allocated?" but "what has actually reached communities, and when will people see the rest?"
For developer-level commitments (VPAs, consent conditions, voluntary funds), see the Project Register tab.
EnergyCo has confirmed a Community and Employment Benefit Program for the New England REZ, funded by Access Fees paid by projects in the Access Scheme (Aug 2025 NE Generation and Storage Consultation Paper, footnote 5, p. 16). The quantum, governance and council and First Nations carve-outs are not yet published. For comparison, the Central-West Orana equivalent is $128M.
Funded by Access Fees from projects in the Access Scheme; quantum, governance and carve-outs not yet published.
To landowners hosting the 500 / 330 kV transmission backbone, paid in annual instalments over 20 years. Does not cover Connection Assets.
Three consortia shortlisted Nov 2025; preferred operator late 2027, financial close 2028. No IAPP published yet.
National awards announced; specific New England REZ project awards not yet retrieved into the Register.
What's been allocated, who benefits, and when communities will see outcomes
| Level | Type | Programme | Council | Amount | What's been funded & who benefits | When | Status |
|---|
Sources: EnergyCo NE Generation and Storage Consultation Paper (Aug 2025); EnergyCo media release 6 Nov 2025 (network operator shortlist); EnergyCo NE landing page; EnergyCo NE Access Scheme page; AEMO Services LTESA award notices (NE filter to confirm); DCCEEW Capacity Investment Scheme tender results (Tender 4, NE awards to confirm). Amounts tagged "Reported" are from public announcements but not independently verified against disbursement records. "Allocated" means budgeted but delivery status unknown.
The Social Licence Register acknowledges the Anaiwan, Kamilaroi (also spelled Gamilaraay or Gomeroi), Banbai and Dunghutti peoples as the Traditional Custodians of the lands covered by the New England Renewable Energy Zone. We pay our respects to Elders past and present, and recognise their continuing connection to land, waters and community. The EnergyCo NE REZ Generation and Storage Consultation Paper (August 2025) also acknowledges Biripi, Dainggatti, Nganyaywana, Ngarabal and Gumbainggir peoples across the broader zone footprint.
The Register brings together what each project has committed to, what has been delivered and where information is missing or unclear. It shows how expectations differ across the region and how policy settings have shaped those commitments over time.
The aim is simple: make the landscape easier to understand, for councils, communities, developers and government, and support clearer, more consistent expectations across REZs.
These ten categories appear in every renewable project approval. What has changed over time is the level of detail. Older approvals have fewer requirements. Newer approvals include clearer numbers, reporting points and stronger expectations. The Register tracks both and flags any category that is silent in the source documents, with the aim to support advocacy and better outcomes for communities.
Voluntary local sponsorships, grants, and donations provided before a formal community benefit fund is established.
Publicly reported opportunities and benefits for First Nations people and communities.
Local training and apprenticeship opportunities linked to renewable energy projects.
Jobs and contracts awarded to local workers and businesses.
Whether local people get the construction jobs or whether workers are fly-in fly-out.
How worker accommodation affects local housing availability and rental costs.
When construction starts, how long it will last, and peak workforce numbers.
Whether community concerns and feedback are considered by the developer.
How much money flows into the community and how it's spent.
The long-term jobs and local employment opportunities that remain after construction.
Each project on the Register is assessed against all ten categories. If a category is not addressed in the project’s documents, it is marked as Silent so the gap is visible.
Some obligations sit outside these ten categories. Baseline planning protections, such as environmental, heritage, safety and landowner and neighbour protections, apply to every project and are assumed rather than tracked. First Nations obligations go further than cultural heritage: NSW guidance sets engagement expectations drawing on free, prior and informed consent and benefit-sharing, and because these vary by consent date, First Nations participation is tracked as one of the categories above rather than treated as a fixed baseline.
“Communities understand the difference between a project that brings ongoing jobs and one that leaves only a small footprint once construction ends. If renewable energy is going to earn long term trust, it needs to deliver lasting economic benefits, not only short term work.”
Different people use the Register for different reasons. Each group gets the information that helps them make better decisions.
Councils can see every project in one place, check what is coming and understand what it means for their area. This supports planning, submissions and shared advocacy.
Government can see where projects are delivering well and where clearer guidance or updated reporting could help. This supports net-zero goals and helps communities see and feel the benefits.
Developers can see how their commitments compare across the region. The Register shows what has been committed and what has been delivered, with sources attached.
Communities get plain-English explanations of what each project has committed to, with every claim linked back to the original document.
Traditional Owners are the First Peoples of this Country, its original custodians, holding continuing rights, knowledge and responsibilities for the land, waters and cultural heritage where these projects are built. They take part as rights-holders, in genuine partnership and on their own terms.
The Register tracks First Nations participation as one of its ten categories rather than folding it into baseline protections, because the responsibility runs well beyond statutory cultural heritage. Current guidance asks developers to work in ways that are led by Traditional Owners and grounded in self-determination, free, prior and informed consent, and the fair sharing of benefits. Commonwealth funding now reflects this through a dedicated First Nations criterion.
How Traditional Owners choose to engage, and what they choose to make public, is theirs to determine. Many agreements are, by the community’s own decision, held in confidence. Where the Register shows this category as silent, that reflects a consent that pre-dates current guidance, or an arrangement Traditional Owners have chosen to keep private. It is never a judgement that a developer has fallen short, and never a gap held against anyone.
What the Register can point to is the public record: whether current guidance applied at the time of consent, the federal criterion where it applies, and the heritage and native title instruments held on the registers of record. Everything beyond that rightly rests with the Traditional Owners to whom it belongs. See how we verify.
Councils, communities, developers, funders: we’re building this with you. If you see something that needs correcting, tell us and point us at the source.