End-of-life options – refurbishing, repowering or decommissioning
End of life for renewables does not always mean decommissioning. Rather, when a project comes to end of life (large-scale solar 20-25 years, onshore wind 30-40 years, big battery storage 20+ years, pumped hydro 50-60 years), there are three options
- Refurbishment to extend life
- Repowering (replacement with new elements) usually giving the same lifetime again as original
- Decommissioning
Refurbishing on wind farms can include replacing blades, rotor components and turbines to improve efficiency. On solar farms old panels can be replaced with more efficient ones and upgraded inverters, and refurbishing battery storage can involve installing newer more efficient batteries.
Repowering can be applied to wind farms by replacing existing turbines with fewer larger more efficient models, solar farms can have panels, frames and inverters all replaced with more efficient and powerful models, and battery storage technology is also always improving allowing repowering with new battery packs and higher performing technology to handle higher storage and generation output.
Refurbishment and repoweringallows for existing connections to the power grid to be reused.
Decommissioning typically involves the removal of all above-ground infrastructure at wind, solar and battery storage sites.
Decommissioning plans
The following is an extract from the Queensland Renewable Energy Developer and Investor Toolkit.
Decommissioning plans are a requirement of renewable energy developments, however the approaches vary depending on the technology. Solar – A Decommissioning Plan for solar farms is typically required when lodging a Development Application. This should be developed in consultation with the host landholder(s). Wind – For wind projects, an End of Operation Decommissioning Plan (EODMP) is only required six months prior to the cessation of a wind farm’s operation, however leading practice proposes this should occur earlier in the life of the operation. The EODMP sections in the Planning Guidance State Code 23: Wind Farm Development states it should be informed by consultation with relevant stakeholders including landowners and will outline all actions required to:
- deconstruct and remove off-site all above ground structures and infrastructure (including turbines, substations, and above ground cabling).
- manage impacts on the transport network arising from removal of materials from the site.
- dismantle turbine bases to a depth of 1m below surface level and cover with top soil.
- lightly rip and reseed with native vegetation all hardstand areas (after being cleared of stone and geotextile material).
- decontaminate any affected areas in accordance with requirements of the EP Act.
The Planning Guidance goes on to state that all of the above aspects of the EODMP can be varied through the Landholder Agreement (e.g., if the landholder would prefer to retain certain project elements, such as parts of access tracks, left in situ to support the ongoing use of the property). The 2025 review of the Windfarm Code requires applicants d to provide a Decommissioning Security Report. This report needs to provide evidence of the proposed financial security (bonds, financial guarantees or similar) that will ensure timely compliance of decommissioning at end of construction and at end of operations – at no cost to landowners or the government. A condition of approval will require the implementation of the proposed financial securities to underpin end of construction and end of operations decommissioning.
Recycling
Solar panels are 100% recyclable, however Australia currently recycles only around 17% of rooftop solar panels. Industry initiatives are actively working to raise this rate, and state and Federal governments have recently agreed to progress work towards a national product stewardship scheme for solar panels, ensuring they are managed from start to end of life.
Pan Pacific Recycling in Brisbane, Queensland’s first solar panel recycling plant, started operation in 2024 and currently processes 30,000 panels a year. Though the plant aims to scale up to processing 240,000 panels a year, it is still only a small portion of the discarded solar panels – only 20% in Queensland in 2025.
Solar Recovery Corporation has facilities in Biloela and Townsville and are currently accepting EOL solar panels. This local model will be expanded to SE Qld, NSW and Vic and will be capable of a 99% material recovery.
Wind turbines are comprised (by mass) of 80-90% steel and iron. We currently have the technology and ability to recycle these steel/iron components, as well as electrical components. However, the composite materials, such as fibreglass and resins, used in blades present a greater challenge for recycling.
Wind turbine manufacturer and developer Vestas (currently developing projects in southern Queensland including Millmerran) report that its turbines are currently 85% recyclable, but achieving 100% recycling requires a solution for the blades which are primarily made from epoxy resin and glass fibre. To address this, Vestas is part of a research initiative alongside Olin, the Danish Technological Institute and Aarhus University. The project’s goal is to create a viable circularity (recycling) pathway for thermoset composites (the materials in turbine blades).
Recycling components of renewable energy.
- Wind turbines 90%+ recyclable
- Solar panels 100% recyclable
- Battery storage up to 95% recyclable
Latest news from Vestas reveals breakthrough in research and development on blade circularity that will end wind turbine blades going to landfill!
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, which is Australia’s national science agency, revealed that 95% of materials in lithium-ion batteries used in renewable energy applications can be recovered through advanced recycling. In 2021 throughout Australia, approximately 10% of lithium batteries were recycled; however, this number is growing with new systems being set to boost recycling rates.
Responsibilities for retirement of renewables – Landholder agreements
Landholder agreements with development companies should include information on how long decommissioning will take, whether underground components will be removed and whether any parts will remain after decommissioning and how the land will be rehabilitated including treatment of topsoil. Landholders can also have recycling options form part of the contract. These agreements should be in place from the beginning and consultation with a lawyer should occur prior to signing a contract. It is common practice for developers to cover the costs of independent legal advice.
Financial assurance
State Government legislation in Queensland states that wind and solar project owners must provide financial assurance for projects to cover the decommissioning costs lists in the decommissioning plan. The 2025 review of the Windfarm Code requires applicants to provide a Decommissioning Security Report. This report needs to provide evidence of the proposed financial security (bonds, financial guarantees or similar) that will ensure timely compliance of decommissioning at the end of construction and at the end of operations- at no cost to landowners or the government. A condition of approval will require the implementation of the proposed financial securities to underpin end of construction and end of operations decommissioning.
When a renewable energy developer comes knocking, the conversation can move fast. Landholders may be handed dense contracts, asked to sign confidentiality agreements before they’ve had time to think, and left feeling unsure about what they can ask, share, or refuse. This page explains what’s actually in a renewable energy lease, what your rights are around confidentiality, and what good outcomes look like — for hosts, for neighbours, and for the broader community.
The lease: a long-term commitment that runs with the land
Renewable energy leases are not short-term arrangements. Wind and solar agreements typically run for 25 to 40 years, which means they bind not just the landholder who signs, but future owners of the property and future generations of the family. Before signing anything, it’s worth understanding what a good agreement looks like — and where the risks sit.
Payments and indexation: Hosting payments vary significantly between projects, proponents, and sites, and are commercially negotiated. This is precisely why getting independent legal and financial advice before signing matters — you cannot verify whether what’s on the table is fair without knowing what others have been offered. Payments should be clearly indexed to inflation or CPI so their value doesn’t erode over the life of the project.
Council rates and land tax: Leasing land for a renewable energy project may trigger questions about council rates or land tax. In practice, any potential rate increase applies only to the area actually under lease (which for wind farms is a very small area around each turbine base, not the whole property), and it is standard practice for proponents to cover any incremental rate increases arising from the energy infrastructure. This should be explicitly written into the agreement — not left as an informal understanding.
Biosecurity: The agreement should include clear, mandatory biosecurity protocols covering vehicle wash-downs, weed management during construction and operation, and protocols for workers accessing the property. These protections are especially important for properties with certified organic production or livestock operations adjacent to proposed infrastructure.
Decommissioning — who pays and when: One of the most significant long-term risks for landholders is what happens when a project reaches end of life. Turbines and solar arrays do not disappear on their own. Queensland’s planning codes for wind and solar farms (State Codes 23 and 26) require proponents to provide financial bonds or guarantees to cover decommissioning costs even if the project changes ownership. DDEC advocates that these bonds and insurance arrangements should be mandatory and should cover both the end of construction activities and the full decommissioning of operations — so that landholders are never left carrying the cost if a company defaults or goes bankrupt. The agreement should also specify what decommissioning actually includes: removal of above-ground infrastructure, removal of sub-surface concrete, rehabilitation of disturbed footprint, and restoration of topsoil.
The right to say no: Unlike coal seam gas or mining, where resource companies can compel access to land under Queensland law, a landholder can choose whether or not to host a wind or solar project. This is significant. It means landholders have genuine power to negotiate, to set conditions, and to walk away. That leverage exists — and it should be used.
Non-disclosure agreements: what you can and can’t be asked to keep secret
It is common for developers to ask landholders to sign confidentiality agreements during early negotiations — before any formal lease is signed. Some commercial confidentiality is legitimate: developers do have genuine commercial interests in not having competitors know their site strategies. But sweeping “gag clauses” that prevent landholders from sharing contract details with their own advisors or neighbours are a different matter entirely, and have caused real harm to communities across regional Queensland.
What a blanket NDA can do: When a landholder is legally prevented from discussing payment rates, lease terms, or proposed infrastructure locations with neighbours, it creates a situation where individual landholders are isolated and have no way to assess whether what they’re being offered is fair or whether the project will affect people around them. Developers hold all the information; landholders hold none. This is not a fair starting point for a 30-year commercial relationship.
What you should always be able to share: Regardless of what a confidentiality clause says, landholders should insist on carved-out exclusions that allow them to share all contract details with their independent legal counsel and financial advisors, with specialist land valuers, with peak agricultural bodies such as the Queensland Farmers’ Federation or AgForce, and with immediate neighbours where the proposed infrastructure has direct implications for their land or operations. Any confidentiality agreement that prevents you from getting independent advice before signing is one you should walk away from.
What reforms are needed: Queensland currently has no legislation or binding code that limits what an NDA can prevent a landholder from sharing. The Planning (Social Impact and Community Benefit) and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2025 requires public disclosure of finalised Community Benefit Agreements negotiated with local councils, but it does not regulate the private commercial agreements between developers and individual landholders. DDEC advocates for three specific reforms here:
First, a binding code of conduct or legislation that mandates statutory carve-outs in any NDA — meaning no agreement can prevent a landholder from sharing its full contents with their legal, financial, or agricultural advisors.
Second, explicit rights for landholders to share relevant structural, noise, and biosecurity information with immediate neighbours before signing, regardless of corporate confidentiality requirements.
Third, the creation of a state-managed, anonymised lease registry — similar in principle to public sub-surface mining registries — where landholders could see regional averages for payment rates, indexation arrangements, and decommissioning bonds without exposing the specific parties involved. This would systematically dismantle information imbalances without requiring any individual landholder to breach confidentiality.
Benefits for hosts and neighbours
Because landholders hold the power to say yes or no, they also hold significant power to shape what a project looks like and who benefits from it. That leverage doesn’t have to stop at the fence line.
What host landholders can negotiate: Beyond payments, host landholders can and should negotiate the placement of infrastructure to minimise land fragmentation, explicit biosecurity obligations, environmental bonds within contracts (money set aside for unexpected environmental impacts), access to monitoring data including acoustic and groundwater data, and conditions that protect their agricultural operation during both construction and operations.
What neighbours can negotiate — through the host: Near-neighbours don’t have the same legal standing. They cannot say no, and there is currently no state requirement for developers to offer them any compensation or mitigation. However, a host landholder can condition their agreement on specific provisions for neighbours — making neighbour protections a term of the host’s deal. This is one of the most powerful tools available for communities trying to ensure development doesn’t simply benefit the landholder with the contract at the expense of everyone around them.
Voluntary neighbour arrangements that communities have negotiated include direct financial payments scaled to proximity from turbines or arrays, proponent-funded installation of native vegetation buffers on neighbouring boundaries to reduce visual and dust impacts, construction dust and traffic management protocols, road upgrade contributions, and access to real-time environmental monitoring data.
DDEC’s position is that mandatory neighbour benefits and developer-funded independent legal advice for host landholders should be required, not left to voluntary goodwill. At present they are not — which is why host landholders using their negotiating power on behalf of neighbours is so important.
First Nations rights and Country: Renewable energy projects in the Darling Downs are being developed on Country. First Nations communities have rights, interests, and responsibilities in relation to land that go beyond what is captured in standard planning and leasing processes. The First Nations Clean Energy Network has developed ten best practice principles for renewable energy development — covering respectful engagement, cultural heritage protection, economic and social benefit sharing, and land stewardship — that proponents should be implementing from the earliest planning stage. DDEC advocates for meaningful First Nations engagement and benefit-sharing as a non-negotiable element of any project seeking community acceptance in this region.
If you’ve already signed — it’s not too late
Many landholders across the Darling Downs signed early agreements before the current framework existed and before community expectations were as clear. Some of those agreements contain inadequate biosecurity protections, insufficient decommissioning provisions, or no neighbour benefits at all. DDEC advocates for retrospective neighbour benefits for projects already approved and for landholders to have the right to upgrade contract terms over the life of a project as community standards evolve. If you’ve signed an agreement and have concerns about what it contains, independent legal advice is the starting point — and it’s worth getting.
Where to get help
The Queensland Farmers’ Federation’s Renewable Energy Landholder Toolkit is a practical starting point for anyone navigating a leasing process. It includes checklists for each stage of project development and guidance on what to look for in an agreement. Independent organisations also exist specifically to support landholders through this process — you are not alone, and you do not have to navigate this by yourself.
For more on DDEC’s positions on hosting arrangements, confidentiality, and community benefits, see the Renewables Done Right platform and our community booklet, Our Region, Our Energy Future.
References
Queensland Government — Planning Framework
Queensland Department of State Development, Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning (2025). Planning (Social Impact and Community Benefit) and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2025: Statutory Guidelines and Implementation Framework. Queensland Government.
Queensland Department of State Development, Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning (2024). Planning Guideline — State Code 23: Wind Farm Development. Queensland Government. https://www.planning.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0024/98106/planning-guideline-state-code-23-wind-farm-development.pdf
Queensland Department of State Development, Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning (2025). Planning Guideline — State Code 26: Solar Farm Development. Queensland Government. https://www.planning.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/102271/planning-guideline-state-code-26-solar-farm-guideline.pdf
Landholder Guidance
Queensland Farmers’ Federation (2023). Queensland Renewable Energy Landholder Toolkit. https://www.qff.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/QFF-Renewable-Energy-Toolkit-June23_web-1.pdf
Darling Downs Environment Council (2025). Our Region, Our Energy Future. Community booklet. DDEC, Toowoomba. (Available from DDEC.)
Decommissioning and End-of-Life
Clean Energy Council and Queensland Renewable Energy Council (2025). Decommissioning Security Framework for Renewable Energy Projects. Technical Report. https://cleanenergycouncil.org.au/news-resources/decommissioning-security-framework-for-renewable-energy-projects
RE-Alliance (2025). Refurbishment, Repowering or Retirement: What Happens When Renewables Approach End of Life? Toolkit. https://www.re-alliance.org.au/renewables_end_of_life
First Nations Engagement
First Nations Clean Energy Network (n.d.). 10 Best Practice Principles for Renewable Energy Developments. FNCEN. https://www.firstnationscleanenergy.org.au
Community Benefit and Local Impact
Australian Energy Infrastructure Commissioner (2023). Annual Report 2022–23: Review of Community and Landholder Engagement in Renewable Energy Projects. Australian Government. https://www.energyinfrastructurecommissioner.gov.au
RE-Alliance (2025). How Australia’s Shift to Renewable Energy Can Deliver Beneficial Outcomes for Regional Housing. RE-Alliance.
Integrity Systems Company / Meat & Livestock Australia (2025). Renewable Energy Infrastructure on Livestock Properties — Solar Panels and Wind Turbines. Factsheet. https://www.integritysystems.com.au/globalassets/isc/pdf-listing-block/renewable-energy-infrastructure-on-livestock-properties.pdf
Contamination risks
This downloadable PDF has been prepared by Imesha Dissanayake.