Hunter Transmission Project

This totally unnecessary, ruinous plan is Economic Suicide by Design.
It doesn’t just fail to help the economy—it will destroy jobs, cripple industry, bankrupt households, and fuel energy poverty across regional and urban Australia.

To Whom It May Concern,

I am writing to formally object to the Hunter Transmission Project as outlined in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). While I understand the importance of energy infrastructure, I have serious concerns about the project's potential impacts on the environment, local communities, and cultural heritage.
• The proposed transmission corridor traverses ecologically sensitive areas, including native bushland and wildlife habitats. The clearing required for construction and maintenance poses a significant threat to biodiversity, particularly to threatened species. The long-term ecological disruption outweighs the short-term infrastructure benefits.
• The project risks fragmenting rural communities and diminishing property values. Landowners along the proposed route have expressed distress over the lack of meaningful consultation and the potential loss of amenity, privacy, and agricultural viability. The visual and noise impacts of transmission towers are also deeply concerning.
• There is insufficient detail in the EIS regarding the protection of Indigenous cultural heritage. The transmission line may intersect areas of significance to First Nations communities, and I urge EnergyCo to engage in deeper consultation and cultural mapping before proceeding.

I believe the EIS fails to adequately explore alternative routes or underground transmission options that could mitigate environmental and social harm. Greater transparency and genuine community engagement are essential before any approvals are granted.

For these reasons, I strongly object to the Hunter Transmission Project in its current form. I urge the Department of Planning and Environment to reject the proposal until these concerns are properly addressed.

Sincerely,
Concerned Millfield community member

This plan is a National Security Nightmare!
By handing critical infrastructure control to foreign-controlled supply chains and collapsing energy independence, this project fulfills China's Energy dream - weakens and sabotages Australia as a vassal state.

This Regulator enabling plan is rotten to the core!
AEMO’s ISP is an intellectually bankrupt swindle —debunked, compromised, and dangerous.
It’s not fit for purpose, and its blind adoption of unreliable renewables is policy malpractice.

I hereby object to this project

I object to all things pertaining to renewable energy.

All renewable energy infrastructure is absolute destruction on our communities.

Bulldozing breeding grounds for endangered species like Littlejohn's Tree Frog and precious biodiversity for unnecessary CCP controlled infrastructure exposes the grotesque hypocrisy of these "green" carpetbaggers.
It’s eco-vandalism with a sabotaging agenda.

Put this junk in the backyards of the confused woke city fools who voted for this garbage. NOT rural in communities

Using China’s Slave Labour Supply Chain components for this unnecessary and unethical plan is shamefully unethical and wrong.

Dodgy ENERGY CO’s deeply unethical procurement rooted in exploitative foreign labour, makes every tower a symbol of human misery and corruption.

In relation to the significant increase in traffic that will be travelling along Freeman’s Drive and the Cooranbong township, and the reported 300 workers using the local community. I am concerned about a number of issues. 1. The roads are already in less than acceptable condition with potholes and badly repaired potholes that reappear everytime there is rain. This will only get worse with this many vehicles travelling along the same route everyday. There is a section of road on Freeman’s Drive to the north of where the 90 zone begins heading out of Cooranbong where the water pools considerably on both sides of the road and many potholes develop making it very dangerous for traffic when heavy rain occurs as you have to drive in the middle of the road to avoid these hazards. This section of road will become more dangerous with increased traffic and needs to be dealt with. 2. The intersection at Avondale rd is already a major safety hazard with school and Watagan Park traffic. With the increase in traffic for such a long period of time while this project is going this intersection will more so be at risk of serious injury to children crossing or local vehicle occupants without long awaited traffic control. Martinsville rd intersection will also become a hazard if traffic controls not established. 3. Our property and house front onto Freeman’s drive only a short distance from where these workers will be coming and going each day, I am concerned about the significant increase in noise at these times (reported to be around 6-7am and 4-6pm). Having up to 300 utes, trucks etc going by on a bumpy road at these times will potentially be a large disruption to our lives particularly in the morning, not to mention the visual disturbance of that many extra vehicles going by at these times. I would like to request compensation/ mitigation in the form of appropriate hedging to our property boundary running along Freeman’s Drive to help dampen the noise and hide the visual/ privacy impact from this significant increase in traffic at these times, considering the project will be going for at least 2.5 years. Feel free to contact me for further info/ discussion.

object to the HTP because it is predatory: it imposes harm on landholders for questionable public benefit. Farmland is being severed, waterways disrupted, shade and microclimate altered. Overhead 500 kV lines are not just unsightly—they pose health, fire, loss of property value issues. The project will limit aerial firefighting; in emergency conditions, aircraft cannot safely operate near high‐voltage lines. The EIS glosses over this risk. Transmission disasters globally illustrate the catastrophic consequences of lightning or conductor failure igniting fires that escalate rapidly. If the electricity grid is genuinely critical, why are no undergrounding or alternative alignments being seriously costed that avoid waterways and farmland, rather than forcing us into ruin?

HTP will obliterate productive farmland, sever waterways, and endanger safety. The EIS claims only 15‑25 properties will be affected, yet damage to soil, water table and downstream impacts affect many more. Overhead 500 kV lines are dangerous fire sources: a snapped insulator or lightning strike can ignite dry fuel. With lines overhead, aerial firefighting becomes risky or impossible under certain safety regulations. Global examples from Australia, California, Greece show that when fires ignite beneath or near powerlines, the result can be uncontrollable. If the government regards this project as essential, why is there no transparent modelling of worst‐case fire scenarios, including aerial suppression failure?

unnecessary clearing of waterways, riparian zones and farmland for an overhead 500 kV line when alternative routes exist. The EIS fails to prove that using existing transmission corridors or undergrounding near sensitive areas is uneconomic. Fire hazard is exacerbated: overhead lines are more exposed to storms, wind damage and lightning. When these lead to faults, the chance of fire increases. Adding to that, aerial firefighting is severely constrained near high voltage infrastructural corridors due to safety distances—meaning by the time ground crews arrive, fire may be out of control. What mechanisms will guarantee rapid aerial response, and who will be liable if that fails due to the location of these lines?

I object to these unreliable projects and all related infrastructure.

This plan has NO Accountability, just Greed.
These unelected bodies and their private partners operate with zero oversight, zero transparency, and zero care for the communities they steamroll—pure parasitism.

I strongly object based on biodiversity and habitat fragmentation. The corridor cuts through remnant bushland, fragmenting habitat for endangered and threatened species. Tall transmission infrastructure may create barriers, edge effects, and increased predation and invasion of weeds. Particularly vulnerable are aerial species (raptors, woodland birds) whose flight routes may be severed or made deadly. If proponent documents claim negligible impact, can they provide up‑to‑date species surveys, flight path intersection risk studies, and commitment to removing or rerouting if mortality incidence exceeds threshold?

Please see attached submission

The project is not strictly necessary in its proposed form. Why build a brand new double circuit overhead 500 kV line when existing 500 kV lines could be upgraded, or additional capacity added to current corridors, avoiding farmland and waterways entirely? The proposal undermines waterway integrity—creeks and watercourses are at risk of erosion, contamination and destruction of habitat. Fire risk is real: conductor failure or arcing in heat will start fires; aerial fire suppression will be restricted, as safety zones around high voltage lines limit aircraft operations. If this project proceeds, who assumes responsibility for any agricultural losses, ecosystem damage, or fire suppression failure resulting from architectural/design choices?

the proposal fails to sufficiently consider harm to waterways along the corridor. Sedimentation and interruption of natural drainage patterns cannot be mitigated fully. Also, the visual impacts and property damage (shade, interference with operations) are long term. Overhead lines are known fire risks; in dry/fuel‐rich terrain, a single conductor fault can spark a disaster. Aerial firefighting is limited by safety clearances and hazard zones, reducing response ability. If this new line is so vital, why are we not requiring the highest fire safety design (e.g. fault detection, automatic shut‑off, undergrounding segments) especially where farmland and waterways are crossed?