Bayswater Power Station - Turbine Upgrade

Environmental Justice Australia will be providing a full submission in
the very near future. In lieu of providing a full submission, me make
some preliminary comments:

- Bayswater power station emits significant amounts of sulfur dioxide
and oxides of nitrogen (SO2 and NOx) pollution. This air pollution has
known adverse health impacts on the communities who live in and around
the power station. The NSW particle characterisation study
demonstrates the air pollution from the Hunter and Central Coast power
stations travels in significant amounts to Sydney, where it
contributes to poorer air quality.
- upgrading the turbines at Bayswater Power Station will prolong the
life of the power station. This will also prolong the length of time
that communities in the Hunter region, and throughout Sydney, will be
exposed to the SO2 and NOx pollution from the power station. It is
imperative, then, that this opportunity is used to installed Selective
Catalytic Reduction (SCR) and Flue Gas Desulfurisation (FGD) to
significantly reduce SO2 and NOx emissions which will protect human
and environmental health.
- Both Vales Point and Liddell power stations were required by NSW EPA
to undertake research into the best ways to control NOx pollution.
Both reports stated that SCR was best practise to most effectively and
substantially remove NOx pollution from the atmosphere.
- the shut-down period during the turbine upgrade is the ideal
opportunity to install SCR and FDG.

We will provide a full submission as soon as practicable.

that AGL should be required to fit best-practice pollution controls for
SO2 and NOx

We cannot afford to be renovating coal power stations. It's time to make
the transition to renewable energy.

AGL should be required to fit best-practice pollution controls for SO2
and NOx.

The planning commission should hold a public meeting to ensure that
residents of the valley and stakeholders can hear about the impacts of
this project.

I object

1. The Bayswater upgrade fails to include pollution control for high
levels of sulphur dioxide (SO2 ), nitrous oxides (NOx ) and fine
particle emissions (PM2.5 )

2. Bayswater is the single largest emitter of these pollutants in the
Hunter Region

3. Health guidelines for these pollutants are regularly exceeded in
Hunter

4. The project must be required to install world best practice
pollution controls to improve Hunter air quality

5. Community groups in the Hunter were not consulted or made aware
that this project was on exhibition

Thanks
Cathy Burgess

This is outrageous

The Bayswater upgrade fails to include pollution control for high levels
of sulphur dioxide (SO2 ), nitrous oxides (NOx ) and fine particle
emissions (PM2.5 )
⦁ Bayswater is the single largest emitter of these pollutants
in the Hunter Region
⦁ Health guidelines for these pollutants are regularly exceeded
in Hunter
⦁ The project must be required to install world best practice
pollution controls to improve Hunter air quality
⦁ Community groups in the Hunter were not consulted or made
aware that this project was on exhibitionThe Bayswater upgrade fails
to include pollution control for high levels of sulphur

I do not agree with this update, especially the lack of environmental
protection. I have allergic rhinitis and lived in Muswellbrook for
over 20 years, and had constant problems. Since leaving muswellbrook
these problems have largely disappeared.

- The project must be required to install world best practice
pollution controls to improve Hunter air quality. this includes issues
of fine particle emissions.
- I am also concerned about the lack of timely consultation with
groups and the community.

I am objecting to this current upgrade proposal because, despite
Bayswater being the single largest emitter of sulphur dioxide, nitrous
oxides and fine particulate matter (PM 2.5), there is no provision for
pollution control of them.
Health guideline levels of such emissions are frequently exceeded in
the Hunter. Any upgrade must mandate best practice air pollution
controls if Hunter air quality and residents' health is to improve.
And I do not understand why Hunter community groups were not advised
or consulted about this. That does nothing to assure communities that
their health is of any interest to the government.

Key objections to project:

1. The Bayswater upgrade fails to include pollution control for high
levels of sulphur dioxide (SO2 ), nitrous oxides (NOx ) and fine
particle emissions (PM2.5 )

2. Bayswater is the single largest emitter of these pollutants in the
Hunter Region

3. Health guidelines for these pollutants are regularly exceeded in
Hunter

4. The project must be required to install world best practice
pollution controls to improve Hunter air quality

5. Community groups in the Hunter were not consulted or made aware
that this project was on exhibition

The National Pollution Index lists the pollution produced in each local
government area. It makes clear that Bayswater and Liddel power
stations put very large amounts of NOx, SO2, PM2.5 particles and
numerous other toxic pollutants into the atmosphere. This plant
(Bayswater) should be required to scrub these pollutants from the flue
gases, standard practice in many countries. Bayswater power station
would not be able to operate in the USA. Health standards are
regularly breeched and we deserve better.

Bayswater Power Station Turbine Efficiency Upgrade should not be approved
without a requirement to upgrade the pollution controls for sulphur
dioxide, nitrous oxides and fine particle pollution.

A condition of approval should require the installation of flue gas
desulphurisation or selective catalytic reduction technology.

The health of people in Upper Hunter needs to be protected from high
levels of toxic emissions from Bayswater Power Station.

As an environmentalist as well as a past health worker in the Hunter, I
am quite appalled that the Bayswater upgrade for the power station did
not include pollution controls for high levels of all the contaminants
that are emitted from this power station.

These include sulphur dioxide, nitrous oxides and 2.5 fine particle
emissions which are injurious to health of all animals, including
human.

We have known that the Bayswater power station is the single biggest
emitter of these toxic substances in the Hunter - indeed the NSW Dept
of Health has mentioned it many times in their submissions.

Many in our community are surprised that the health guidelines are
regularly exceeded - it seems the various government departments have
one standard for Metropolitan pollution, and another for our regions?

I believe that there is no excuse not to have world's best practice
pollution controls to improve Hunter air quality.

I do know that community groups and ordinary community members were
not canvassed in advance on this issue - I do not think that is the
standard that our Hunter community is insisting on for the actions of
this government.

To whom it may concern.

I am writing to object to the Bayswater Power plant proposal.

The power station is highly polluting.

A great deal of SO2 and NOx are produced by the power station, along
with other dangerous pollutants.

AGL must be required to fit best-practice pollution controls for SO2
and NOx, and other pollutants that scrubbers can remove from the air.

The planning commission should also hold a public meeting to ensure
that residents of the valley and stakeholders can hear about the
impacts of this project and provide input.

Best regards,

Jamie Hanson

I object to the development.

AGL should be required to fit best-practice pollution controls for SO2
and NOx which they currently do not have.

The planning commission should hold a public meeting to ensure that
residents of the valley and stakeholders can hear about the impacts of
this project and provide input.

I strongly object to the Bayswater Power Station Ugrade for the following
reasons

1. The Bayswater upgrade fails to include pollution control for high
levels of sulphur dioxide (SO2 ), nitrous oxides (NOx ) and fine
particle emissions (PM2.5 ).

2. Bayswater is the single largest emitter of these pollutants in the
Hunter Region.

3. Health guidelines for these pollutants are regularly exceeded in
Hunter.

4. The project must be required to install world best practice
pollution controls to improve Hunter air quality.

5. Community groups in the Hunter were not consulted or made aware
that this project was on exhibition.
Yours faithfully,
Robert McLaughlin
Bulga NSW 2330

I strongly object to the Bayswater Power Station Ugrade for the following
reasons:

1. The Bayswater upgrade fails to include pollution control for high
levels of sulphur dioxide (SO2 ), nitrous oxides (NOx ) and fine
particle emissions (PM2.5 ).

2. Bayswater is the single largest emitter of these pollutants in the
Hunter Region.

3. Health guidelines for these pollutants are regularly exceeded in
Hunter.

4. The project must be required to install world best practice
pollution controls to improve Hunter air quality.

5. Community groups in the Hunter were not consulted or made aware
that this project was on exhibition.
Yours faithfully,
Robert McLaughlin
Bulga NSW 2330

I strongly object to this proposed project for the following reasons:

Bayswater is the single largest emitter of these pollutants in the
Hunter Region.

The Bayswater upgrade fails to include pollution control for high
levels of sulphur dioxide (SO2 ), nitrous oxides (NOx ) and fine
particle emissions (PM2.5 ).


Health guidelines for these pollutants are regularly exceeded in
Hunter.

The project must be required to install world best practice pollution
controls to improve Hunter air quality.

Community groups in the Hunter were not consulted or made aware that
this project was on exhibition.

I object to this development for the following 2 reasons. 1) The planning
commission should hold a public meeting to ensure that the valley
residents and all relevant stakeholders can hear about this project
and be able to provide informed and honest feedback. 2) The AGL should
be requires to fit best practice pollution controls for NOx and SO2.

Without these two provisos being met the project cannot in good
conscious go ahead.

To whom it may concern

I object to the development. As part of any upgrade of the Bayswater
power station AGL must be required to improve its air pollution
controls.

Currently Bayswater is the single larges source of PM2.5 in the Hunter
Valley a pollutant that has significant health impacts such as asthma,
strokes and pre-term births. As such, AGL should fit best-practice
pollution controls for SO2 and NOx, Currently, Bayswater would be
uncompliant with air pollution laws in countries such as the USA, the
EU, China and India. It is unacceptable that the population of NSW and
particularly the Hunter Valley is exposed to air pollution that would
be outlawed in other countries.

The Planning Commission as part of this upgrade process should also
hold a public meeting to ensure that residents of the Hunter Valley
and stakeholders can hear about the impacts of this project and
provide input.

Kind regards
Nicky Ison