Marketing and engagement for renewable energy developers
Consent is won in the public record: what a landholder finds when they search the project name, what a councillor hears before a meeting, and what the assessment team reads in the submissions.
Where the money moves.
A project's approval pathway is a years long public argument, and all of it is written down. State significant development assessment, an environmental impact statement on exhibition, submissions counted and quoted back in the assessment report, an EPBC referral where the ecology demands it, access rights inside a renewable energy zone, a place in the connection queue. None of that is a brand exercise. The engagement record is a risk register, and a project that reaches determination with a clean one is a project a financier can price with confidence.
Search the project name from a farm kitchen and see what a neighbour sees. If the answer is an old PDF, a shire council agenda item and an objection page, the vacuum has been filled for you. Answer engines sharpen it again, because a chatbot asked whether the wind farm is good for the district will summarise whatever is indexed, including the loudest page on the internet. The project needs a permanent, plainly written home that answers the real questions: setbacks, noise, traffic during construction, what happens to the road, and what happens at decommissioning.
Digital does not replace the kitchen table. It makes the kitchen table cheaper. Your field team answers the same questions in every shed and hall, then answers them again on the phone that night. Answer them once, properly, on the site, in a letterbox drop, in a short video from the project manager who will actually be on that road during construction, and the field visits move on to the conversations that need a person in the room. The community newsletter and the local paper still carry more weight than any national channel.
Engagement is measurable without pretending it is a marketing funnel. Question logs by theme and locality, enquiry volume before and after a mailout, attendance at open days, the sentiment running through submissions, complaints recorded against the best practice commitments the industry has signed up to. That reporting is useful twice. It tells you where to send the team next month, and it forms part of the evidence you hand the assessment agency about how the community was engaged.
What we run.
Project site and question register
A permanent home for the project, written plainly and kept current through each assessment stage. Setbacks, noise, traffic, roads, rehabilitation and decommissioning, each answered on its own page so a neighbour and a councillor find the same answer.
Landholder and neighbour material
Letterbox drops, newsletters and direct mail built around the actual boundary, plus the printed material the acquisition team carries. Written for a farmer at a kitchen table and timed around harvest and shearing rather than a marketing calendar.
Search and answer engine presence
The project name is the highest intent term you will ever own. We make the official source the page that ranks and the page an answer engine quotes, and keep it fresher than anything else written about the project.
Open day and field team assets
Display boards, site maps, visualisations from the viewpoints people actually care about, and short video from the people who will run construction. The same assets brief the field team so every conversation across the district gives one answer.
Council and media relations
Briefings for the shire, the local paper and regional radio, timed to assessment milestones rather than to news gaps. Announcements worth making, made while a councillor still has time to read them before the meeting.
Questions we get asked.
The project name, with the developer named clearly on it. Neighbours, councillors and journalists search the project, not the corporate entity, and the project carries its own commitments. Keep the corporate site for the portfolio and investor material, then link the two so ownership is never something anyone has to dig for.
Answering the question amplifies nothing. Arguing with the group does. We publish the substantive answer where a searching neighbour will find it, in the developer's own words, and leave the group's page to make its own case. The people you need are usually undecided and simply want to know what happens to their road.
Yes, and the constraint is factual accuracy rather than silence. Everything published during exhibition should match the documents on the register exactly, carry a date, and point people to how a submission is made. We work inside your probity and legal review, and nothing goes out that has not cleared it.
Early is the point. The engagement record that supports consent is built across the assessment years, not assembled at determination. Starting after objections have organised means arguing from behind, which is where consent timelines slip. Before financial close is when that record is cheapest to build and most useful to the approvals team.
Also in energy and utilities
Talk to us.
9 services under one team, run against the numbers your business already reports on.
Contact the Ignis Team
Send through your details and we will audit your business before we reply.