Question 1

Aren't opponents just NIMBYs who don't want any development?

Accepted Answer

This campaign has no objection to a data centre. Data centres operate all over the world powered by the grid, battery storage, and renewables. Our concern is the method of power generation — a gas-fired power station that serves only the data centre, locks in fossil fuel infrastructure for decades, and offers no benefit to the community.

We want good jobs and genuine innovation in the Southern Highlands. This proposal doesn't deliver either.

Question 2

Will this plant help lower our local power bills or support the local grid?

Accepted Answer

No. This is a common misconception, and it is an engineering impossibility under current conditions. The developer used the region's weak grid capacity as their justification to build this gas plant, stating that on-site engines are mandatory 'due to a lack of grid electricity... for many years'.

The surrounding precinct relies on local 33kV distribution lines, which cannot handle a large-scale power injection from a facility of this size. Exporting power back to the community — even using the developer's proposed 80MW Battery Energy Storage System — would require massive, multi-million-dollar transmission infrastructure upgrades that are neither approved nor planned. This is not a public utility. Every megawatt generated is locked behind closed doors for private data workloads, while the local community is left with the emissions, the industrial infrastructure, and long-term carbon lock-in.

Question 3

It's not really a gas plant — it's just generators in a building. You won't even see it.

Accepted Answer

The proposal uses reciprocating gas engines inside industrial buildings, so it won't look like a traditional open-air refinery. But warehouse cladding doesn't change what it burns, what it emits, or how it will dominate the landscape.

The planning documents for the stage currently before the Land and Environment Court show exhaust stacks reaching a total height of 23.5 metres from the ground — standing 15.5 metres clear above the building's roof ridge line on open rural land. That is just the smaller 16 MW phase. The developer's full State Significant Development scoping report describes 19 massive industrial generation halls delivering 673.2 MW. The infrastructure is listed on the NSW Planning Portal as the Southern Highlands Data Campus Power Station.

Question 4

It will power the community — even 70,000 homes.

Accepted Answer

The gas plant will not power a single home, a single local business, or the broader electricity grid. Cloud Carrier used a “70,000 homes equivalent” figure in a submission, but their own website is explicit: the campus is designed for “full independence from the electricity grid.”

That figure describes what the plant could theoretically generate — not what it will do. Every megawatt goes directly to the data centre. This is private infrastructure, for private use. The community carries the health, environmental and planning impacts. It receives nothing in return.

Question 5

It will bring jobs and economic growth to the region.

Accepted Answer

Construction requires specialist contractors, not a local workforce, and those jobs end when the build does. Hyperscale data centres and gas generation facilities are almost entirely automated once operational — a site this scale typically runs on a small team of maintenance technicians and remote IT management based elsewhere.

Wingecarribee Shire Council made this point directly in its submission to the NSW Parliamentary Inquiry into Data Centres, noting data centres have “relatively low operational employment intensity compared to land consumption.”

The Southern Highlands Innovation Park has finite employment land. Once it's committed to an automated facility, it's gone — land that could otherwise attract advanced manufacturing, agribusiness, or research industries that create lasting local jobs.

Question 6

Gas is just a transition fuel — it won't be here forever.

Accepted Answer

Infrastructure built today locks in its own future. A gas-fired power station of this scale — with pipelines, engines, storage systems and grid connections — is a multi-decade investment. The developer has mentioned a future transition to hydrogen, but has provided no timeline, no commitment, and no credible evidence of feasibility.

Climate Council modelling estimates this plant would emit over 2 million tonnes of CO₂ per year — roughly tripling the current carbon footprint of the entire Wingecarribee Shire. Wingecarribee Shire Council's own submission to the Parliamentary Inquiry explicitly warned that planning frameworks must prevent data centre power proposals causing “long-term carbon lock-in.”

Question 7

The planning process will protect us — there's nothing to worry about.

Accepted Answer

This proposal has already pushed through with minimal scrutiny. Earlier, smaller components were approved before the full scale of the plan became clear. When the Department of Planning issued the Secretary's Environmental Assessment Requirements, required agency consultations — including with the EPA — were not completed, because the proponent threatened legal action to fast-track the process.

The community's best protection is active participation: submissions, legal objection, and sustained public pressure. That's exactly what this campaign is building.

Question 8

Isn't Council doing something about this?

Accepted Answer

Wingecarribee Shire Council is the respondent in the current Land and Environment Court proceedings, actively opposing the DA through the legal process. At the on-site conciliation on 22 May, three councillors attended in person — an important show of support.

There are legitimate questions about whether Council has gone far enough — including why a motion to formally oppose the larger State Significant Development did not pass. But the claim that Council is doing nothing is not accurate. The legal process and the political debate are two separate things, and both matter.

Question 9

What about water? Won't the data centre use huge amounts?

Accepted Answer

Water is a real question and a fair one. Modern data centres can use significant amounts of water for cooling, particularly in hot conditions.

We don't yet have a confirmed water-use figure for this specific proposal. That information is expected when the full Environmental Impact Statement for the 703 MW State Significant Development is publicly exhibited.

We'll examine those figures carefully when they're released, in the context of the Southern Highlands' rainfall, catchment, and existing demand. For now, we're focused on the issue that is already on the table: the gas-fired power station.

Question 10

Why don't they just use renewables and batteries?

Accepted Answer

It's a good question. Data centres can be powered by grid electricity, on-site solar, and battery storage, and many around the world already are.

Cloud Carrier's own materials acknowledge that grid electricity was the preferred option, but say grid capacity won't be available 'for many years.' Their response is to build private gas generation now, not to wait for grid connection or invest in additional renewables and storage.

The NSW Net Zero Commission has set out a clear alternative path. In its submission to the parliamentary Inquiry into data centres, it proposed that data centres should be required to fund new renewable energy generation matching their demand, rather than draw from existing supply or rely on fossil fuels.

That's the model we'd expect to see for new data centre infrastructure in 2026.

Question 11

What's happening right now with this proposal?

Accepted Answer

The proposal is moving through two separate planning processes at the same time.

The larger 703 MW project is being assessed by the NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure as a State Significant Development (SSD-102795459). The Environmental Impact Statement has not yet been publicly exhibited. Once it is, there will be a formal opportunity to make submissions.

A smaller 16 MW phase (DA 26/0352) is currently before the NSW Land and Environment Court after Council did not determine it within the statutory timeframe. This is the matter that was the subject of the on-site conciliation on 22 May 2026.

The two pathways are linked but legally separate. Decisions on the smaller phase will shape the credibility and momentum of the larger one.

Question 12

What happens if it gets approved?

Accepted Answer

If the full 703 MW proposal is approved, the Southern Highlands becomes home to one of the largest gas plants ever built in Australia, locked in for decades.

That has consequences beyond this site. Decisions made now set the precedent for how data centres are powered across NSW, and how planning decisions weigh community impact against private commercial interest. A precedent set in Moss Vale will be cited in proposals in other Highlands towns, and in other regions.

This is one of the reasons the campaign is pushing for the issue to be considered properly, with the full Environmental Impact Statement publicly exhibited and assessed in the open. The right answer might not be no to every data centre. But it is no to this particular method of powering them.

Question 13

Aren't data centres important for Australia's economy and AI future?

Accepted Answer

Yes. Data centres are essential infrastructure for a digital economy, and Australia hosts more than 270 of them already. This campaign isn't opposed to data centres in principle.

The question is how, where, and under what rules they get built. Right now, none of that is properly settled.

The NSW Legislative Council is running a parliamentary inquiry into data centres, with a final report due in September 2026. The NSW Net Zero Commission has proposed that data centres should be required to fund new renewable energy generation matching their demand. The Clean Energy Finance Corporation has modelled the energy and price impacts. Greenpeace and others have called for a moratorium on new approvals until binding standards are in place.

These are sensible, mainstream policy arguments. Data centre infrastructure built today will be with us for decades. There is a strong case for pausing major approvals until the rules are clear: how they're powered, where they should be located, how community and environmental impacts are weighed, and what they owe the regions they're built in.

We support that argument. Get the framework right first. Then approve the projects that meet it.

Federal Minister for Climate Change and Energy Chris Bowen has said the best outcome is for every new data centre to 'bring its own renewable energy.' That's the kind of standard a proper framework would set. It's not the standard this proposal meets.

Question 14

How long will this take to resolve?

Accepted Answer

There isn't a single deadline. The proposal is moving through two parallel processes, each on its own timeline.

The smaller 16 MW phase is in the Land and Environment Court following an on-site conciliation on 22 May 2026. The Court will set the next steps in the coming months.

The larger 703 MW State Significant Development is earlier in its process. The Environmental Impact Statement has not yet been publicly exhibited. Once it is, there will be a formal submissions period. After that, the assessment process and any determination by the Minister or Independent Planning Commission would normally take many more months.

The NSW Legislative Council's Inquiry into data centres is also relevant. Its final report is due 30 September 2026 and is expected to make recommendations that could change how proposals like this one are assessed.

The campaign will continue until the proposal is either withdrawn, refused, or significantly redesigned.

Question 15

Is this just a Greens campaign?

Accepted Answer

No. This campaign includes teachers, farmers, retirees, business owners, parents, and long-term residents from across the Southern Highlands, with a wide range of political views between them. Some are Greens members. Some are not.

What unites us is where we live, and what we don't want industrialised on their doorstep.

Councillor Heather Champion and the Southern Highlands Greens have supported this campaign from the beginning, including by providing funding to print and letterbox pamphlets to affected neighbourhoods and contributing significant volunteer time. We're grateful for that. It doesn't make this a Greens campaign. It makes the Greens good community members.

Everyone is welcome here, no matter who they vote for :)

Question 16

How close is it to my home, school, or business?

Accepted Answer

The proposed site at 30 Douglas Road, Moss Vale sits roughly in the middle of three Highlands communities.

New Berrima: 3.4 km west. Moss Vale town centre: 4 km south. Burradoo: 3.6 km east. Berrima village: 4.3 km northwest. Bowral town centre: 5.9 km northeast. Mittagong town centre: 10.1 km northeast. Exeter: 11.9 km southwest.

The nearest homes are around 500 metres from the proposed plant, according to the developer's own air quality assessment.

The site doesn't sit on the edge of one town. It sits almost in the middle of three. Wherever you live in the Highlands, this proposal is closer than most people realise.

By the numbers.

Ask us
anything.

Start here.

Still have questions?

Stay informed

By the numbers.

Ask usanything.

Start here.

“Aren't opponents just NIMBYs who don't want any development?”

Will this plant help lower our local power bills or support the local grid?

“It's not really a gas plant — it's just generators in a building. You won't even see it.”

“It will power the community — even 70,000 homes.”

“It will bring jobs and economic growth to the region.”

“Gas is just a transition fuel — it won't be here forever.”

“The planning process will protect us — there's nothing to worry about.”

“Isn't Council doing something about this?”