Port Waratah Coal Services - Terminal 4

I object to the T4 proposal on a number of grounds. Ranging from the global issue of Climate Change to the vital local issues of community and environmental health.
There is clear scientific advice that we must reign in our CO2 emissions, expanding coal exports is totally contrary to achieving this. Indeed, if our major importers take serious action to limit their emissions the construction of this terminal makes no economic sense.
Particle emissions are already a major health issue, particularly from the coal trains. Increasing coal train movements will seriously impact on the health of those living near the train lines. Additionally, stockpile particle emissions will impact on the dense communities around the terminal.
The Hunter Estuary supports nationally and internationally listed threatened bird species, the Hunter Wetlands National Park is a neighbour. Protection of these lands and the bird habitat will be hugely compromised should this terminal proceed.
I understand that there is no intent to build this terminal in the immediate future. Obtaining permission at this time is simply opportunistic. Permission should be postponed until the project might actually be constructed so that the pertinent issues at that time, which may be very different from now, are fully considered,
Yours,
Rosie White

I object to this project and believe that the community health, environmental and socioeconomic impacts will have far outweigh any short term benefits it is claimed it will deliver. These include:

Global warming: The burning of an additional 70Mt of coal a year will add 174.2Mt of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. This is equal to 30% of Australia's total annual GHG emissions. The science clearly shows that around 80% of the fossil fuel reserves current in the ground have to stay there to give us a chance of avoiding 2 degrees of warming.

The Hunter Estuary supports 112 species of waterbirds and nationally and internationally listed threatened species, including the Australasian bittern (Botaurus poiciloptilus), listed as endangered under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).

Deep and Swan Ponds: The Project will wipe out 80% of Deep Pond, which supports at least 11 species of migratory recorded and above the threshold of 0.1 per cent of the Australian flyway population for three migratory shorebird species, and will develop part of Swan Pond which supports three species in numbers that exceed the threshold of 0.1 per cent of the Australian flyway population.

Misuse of public conservation lands: Swan Pond is public land, owned and managed by the National Parks Service under Part 11 of the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Act. It is part of a highly successful long-term restoration project, the Kooragang Wetland Rehabilitation Project (KWRP) and has been the site of significant hours of volunteer labour by the local bird watching club.

Air quality: Newcastle and the Hunter Valley communities are impacted by dust from the mining, transport and stockpiling of coal. An additional 70Mt of coal exported will mean about an additional 7000 trips of 80 wagon trains between the Hunter mines and the port and back again per year, the capacity to export coal from an additional 8 to 10 mega mines and four new 1.5km coal stockpiles will substantially add to PM10 emissions in Newcastle and the Hunter Valley.

Air quality modelling flaws: PWCS's air quality modelling continues to use 2010 as a base year. NSW Health has suggested that PWCS should have included "a justification for assuming the PM10 levels in 2010 would be a realistic baseline for modelling future particulate levels or alternatively use, as a baseline, average levels over a longer period of time". This recommendation is ignored in the PPR.

Particle pollution from rail transport: The PPR does not address air quality issues from rail transport returning to the Upper Hunter Valley. PWCS continues to focus on air quality impacts within 20m of the rail corridor, but there are almost 30,000 people living within 500m of the rail corridor and 23,000 students attend 16 schools in that vicinity. The submission to the EA by NSW Health noted that the contribution of coal dust from coal trains beyond 20m from the rail corridor needs to be carefully considered, but this recommendation is ignored.

Justification for the project: There is no justification for the project. PWCS does not commit to building T4 and only suggests an indicative build date of 2015 with operation maybe in 2017. During a major downturn in global coal demand, Newcastle's approved coal export port capacity of 211Mt seems optimistic. Last year only 141Mt of coal was exported meaning 60Mt or 42 per cent of capacity was uninstalled.

Employment: The 120 Mt facility proposed in the EA identified no additional employment would result from its operation. The revised T4 project of 70Mt million of the RT/PPR is identified as employing 80 additional people. How is this possible? This dubious additional employment is not explained.

Economics: PWCS's claimed economic benefits to the region are based on a type of economic modelling the Australian Bureau of Statistics calls "biased" and the Productivity Commission says is regularly "abused", usually to overstate the economic importance of specific projects. The original economic assessment of the T4 project suggests its annual operating costs will only be between $45-50 million a year. Since that assessment was made, the size of the project has "almost halved", so the amount of money it will "inject" into the economy has presumably declined considerably. For the terminal to achieve its economic potential, a lot more coal has to be dug up and exported. This means that a lot more bush and agricultural land needs to be turned into coal mines. A lot more coal trains need to pass through Newcastle's suburbs. At the site of the proposal, a significant wetland would have to be destroyed. And, of course, the extra coal being burned would contribute to climate change. None of these costs are considered in the economic assessment commissioned by PWCS.

It has been quite evident to the people working in the Hunter & Newcastle region that the manufacturing and construction industry in our area has suffering in recent yrs. I believe that this project would stimulate the local economy and help businesses experience some improvement, especially those related to the project, or even those in the local area.
I am an advocate for the protection of the environment also and believe that strong guidelines and restrictions would be implemented to ensure no damage would result from this project.

i support the project

I have lived in the Newcastle area all my life (child of the 50's). Over many years I have worked for organisations which dealt with PWCS. I always found PWCS to be transparent in regard to environment, health and safety issues and I fully support the Terminal 4 expansion project. It will provide job security for many and help to improve the current economic issues of our Region and Country in general.

I am a landholder in which PWCS is buying biodiversity offset land from in the Brundee area.
It is my strong belief that going forward PWCS is better positioned to look after the land and the endangered species on it than I am capable of with my limited knowledge and resources.

I fully support PWCS submission for the development of a fourth coal terminal (T4) in Newcastle.
I believe it will only strengthen the town of Newcastle, as it will provide more employment in the area, economic growth and security for future generations.

Reliable Conveyor Belt Pty Ltd is a contracting company which has had an association with PWCS for many years.

At all times we have found PWCS to be an organisation that works to the highest safety and environmental standards. We have always found PWCS to have an open book policy in being prepared to share safety, health and environmental information with industries and the community alike. We believe PWCS is held in high regard in the Region due in the main to their consistent approach in working to the highest environmental standards.

We firmly believe that the Terminal 4 expansion will be a significant benefit to the local community and associated industries whilst providing job security for a large number of people within the Newcastle and Hunter Region.

As a citizen of the local region for 60 years and owning 2 properties in Newcastle, I fully support the PWCS Terminal 4 project.

For many years I worked for a company at Kooragang Island and at all times I found PWCS to be excellent communicators with the community and surrounding industries, they were committed to the highest environment, safety and community standards. For a number of years I was a member of the Newcastle City Council's Environment Protection and Pollution Advisory Committee (EPAPAC). Members on the committee were from Council, community groups and industries. A member of the committee was a representative from PWCS. At all times the PWCS representative was willing to share and openly discuss environmental results and events occurring at PWCS with the committee.

In addition, PWCS plays an important part in the local economy, providing significant support to many community organisations in the Newcastle/Hunter Region.
Terminal 4 will provide further employment security for the Region which is incredibly important given our current difficult economy, whilst maintaining the highest environmental standards which is evident from their past operations.

I object to the construction and operation of a coal export terminal at Kooragang Island comprising of rail infrastructure and coal receivable, stockyard, conveyor system, wharves, berths and ancillary facilities. I oppose the project due to the high community health, environmental and socioeconomic costs it will have which will far outweigh any short term benefits it is claimed it will deliver. These include:

1. Air quality: Newcastle and the Hunter Valley residents have been experiencing a drop in air quality from coal dust. This causes respiratory problems and increases breathing problems for those with asthma. Everyone should have access to clean air to breath. The coal dust is generated by mining, transport and stockpiling of coal. An additional 70Mt of coal exported will mean about an additional 7000 trips of 80 wagon trains between the Hunter mines and the port and back again per year, the capacity to export coal from an additional 8 to 10 mega mines and four new 1.5km coal stockpiles will substantially add to PM10 emissions in Newcastle and the Hunter Valley. Furthermore, there are air quality modelling flaws in the proposal: PWCS's air quality modelling continues to use 2010 as a base year. NSW Health has suggested that PWCS should have included "a justification for assuming the PM10 levels in 2010 would be a realistic baseline for modelling future particulate levels or alternatively use, as a baseline, average levels over a longer period of time". This recommendation is ignored in the PPR.

2. Particle pollution from rail transport: The PPR does not address air quality issues from rail transport returning to the Upper Hunter Valley. PWCS continues to focus on air quality impacts within 20m of the rail corridor, but there are almost 30,000 people living within 500m of the rail corridor and 23,000 students attend 16 schools in that vicinity. The submission to the EA by NSW Health noted that the contribution of coal dust from coal trains beyond 20m from the rail corridor needs to be carefully considered, but this recommendation is ignored.

3. Justification for the project: There is no justification for the project. PWCS does not commit to building T4 and only suggests an indicative build date of 2015 with operation maybe in 2017. During a major downturn in global coal demand, Newcastle's approved coal export port capacity of 211Mt seems optimistic. Last year only 141Mt of coal was exported meaning 60Mt or 42 per cent of capacity was uninstalled.

4. Global warming: The International Energy Agency predicts that to limit global warming to under 2 degrees Celsius, global coal demand must peak in 2016, at least a year before PWCS indicates T4's will begin operation. The burning of an additional 70Mt of coal a year by this proposed port will add 174.2Mt of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. This is equal to 30% of Australia's total annual GHG emissions.

5. The Hunter Estuary supports 112 species of waterbirds and nationally and internationally listed threatened species, including the Australasian bittern (Botaurus poiciloptilus), listed as endangered under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). The proposed terminal puts these species of waterbirds in danger of having their numbers further reduced.

6. Deep and Swan Ponds: The Project will wipe out 80% of Deep Pond, which supports at least 11 species of migratory recorded and above the threshold of 0.1 per cent of the Australian flyway population for three migratory shorebird species, and will develop part of Swan Pond which supports three species in numbers that exceed the threshold of 0.1 per cent of the Australian flyway population.

7. Misuse of public conservation lands: Swan Pond is public land, owned and managed by the National Parks Service under Part 11 of the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Act. It is part of a highly successful long-term restoration project, the Kooragang Wetland Rehabilitation Project (KWRP) and has been the site of significant hours of volunteer labour by the local bird watching club.

8. Employment: The 120 Mt facility proposed in the EA identified no additional employment would result from its operation. The revised T4 project of 70Mt million of the RT/PPR is identified as employing 80 additional people. How is this possible? This dubious additional employment is not explained.

9. Economics: The economic benefits estimated by PWC are dubious as they are based on a type of economic modelling the Australian Bureau of Statistics calls "biased" and the Productivity Commission says is regularly "abused", usually to overstate the economic importance of specific projects. Additionally, the size of the project has "almost halved" rendering the original forecast of $45-50 million in operating costs outdated and over-inflated. The amount of money the proposed terminal will now "inject" into the economy has presumably declined considerably. For the terminal to achieve its economic potential based on original estimates, a lot more coal has to be dug up and exported. This means that a lot more bush and agricultural land needs to be turned into coal mines. A lot more coal trains need to pass through Newcastle's suburbs. A lot more dust will be scattered on neighbouring suburbs to be inhaled by local residents. At the site of the proposal, a significant wetland would have to be destroyed. And, of course, the extra coal being burned would contribute to climate change. None of these costs are considered in the economic assessment commissioned by PWCS.

I support Terminal 4

I support

I support

I support this initiative to maintain employment in the Hunter region and continued revenue for the government. I believe PWCS has been a good corporate citizen sponsoring and supporting many organisations around Newcastle. They have a very good environmental record and continue to work with the community to address any concerns raised. If this terminal is not approved then Australia will see revenue and job opportunities flow to other countries where the government supports such activities.

As a local Newcastle resident, I fully support the T4 project and believe there are significant benefits for my local community. Port Waratah Coal Services is a fantastic community supporter and corporate stalwart that has operated in our local region for over 40 years. They provide opportunities and employment for Novocastrians, as well as providing community support through sponsorship programs and involvement with local charity and volunteer organisations. I believe the T4 project represents a critical link for the Hunter Valley, Gunnedah Basin and the broader NSW mining industry with our well established, long term trading partners in Asia. The T4 project offers the opportunity for jobs in the local region and promises a massive injection of investment in the Newcastle area, as well as the broader NSW and Australian industrial markets. The T4 project has been well engineered, uses best practice engineering applications to manage dust, water, noise, and has taken a proactive approach to environmental management through the extensive offsets proposed by the project. The T4 project also offers the opportunity for a commercial solution, rather than a tax payer funded solution, to the remediation and beneficial use of the current waste dump and hazardous material storage area that is the proposed construction site. Finally the T4 project will promote the export of coal from Newcastle, resulting in a significant amount of government royalties being collected that will be used to assist the education, health and other government services provided in NSW. All of these benefits mean that the T4 project should be approved and constructed. I fully support the T4 project.

I fully support the development of the T4 Terminal

I am writing to lodge my support for PWCS' T4 Project. The project is an exciting development for future infrastructure in NSW which will provide significant economic benefit to the Hunter region, NSW, and Australia. The project will provide almost 3,000 direct and indirect jobs in the region during construction and during operations will provide significant economic benefit to the region. The project design has carefully considered the impact on the environment and PWCS has invested significantly in three biodiversity offsets ( approx 800 ha) which "locks up" important environmental land into the future.

The engineering design is built on best practice solutions for the management of water, energy, noise and dust and given PWCS' history in successfully delivering major projects I have the utmost confidence in PWCS delivering a terminal which meets demand for coal export as well as meeting environmental standards expected from Regulatory bodies and the community.

Construction of the T4 terminal also provides a rare and possibly "once off" opportunity for the private sector to fund the remediation of the proposed T4 site. The site is heaviliy contaminated from previous industry use and without the T4 project, the responsibility for capping and containing contamination on the site rests with NSW Government.

The coal industry has been a significant contributor to the wealth of NSW and Australia and approval of the T4 project is another step in the continuing economic story of a region whose wealth, history and future has and is dependent on successful and responsible coal mining and export of the product.

Lets get behind this proposed development as it provides certainty for the industry and with that it provides a future for development of the region, future direct and indirect employment opportunities and increased wealth of NSW and Australia.

Regards

Terry Tynan

The continued development of infrastructure in Australia is key to our continued prosperity. The Hunter region being the largest coal exporting port in the world is or near best practice. It is vitally important the long term growth is maintained. Reading the EA it is clear that a thorough job has been done to minimise or eliminate an adverse effects. The project will also generate both short term construction jobs and long term wealth for the Newcastle community. Newcastle cannot afford to let employment opportunities like these go to waste

Dear Sir,

I understand PWCS' Preferred Project Report (PPR) for the proposed Terminal 4 is currently on public exhibition. I wish to submit my support for the project for the following reasons:

1. I believe the project will provide significant economic benefit to Newcastle, the Hunter region and NSW by generating local employment and business opportunity during construction of the Terminal and during future operations.
2. PWCS has delivered a significant biodiversity offset package (approx. 850 ha) with land secured at Tomago, Ellalong and Brundee, as well as investing in captive breeding and research programs for the Green and Golden Bell Frog. The committed offset initiatives more than adequately offset the environmental impact on the T4 site as a result of construction of the terminal.
3. I believe that PWCS has designed T4 to contain "state of the art" dust and noise mitigation measures, which is supported by appropriate modelling predicting cumulative levels of dust and noise as a result of T4 to remain within Government guidlines for health and amenity.
4. Construction of T4 provides a significant opportunity for the private sector to fund the capping and containment of contaminants within the proposed T4 site. Without private sector funding such as that from PWCS' T4 project, the accountability for capping and containment of contaminants rests with the NSW State Government.
5. I have a great deal of confidence and trust in PWCS as they have proven to be a responsible developer, operator and active member of the community in Newcastle as history shows. PWCS has been operating and expanding their business in Newcastle for over 30 years contributing greatly to the local economy. The opportunity they provide as a large employer for training and jobs for young people and security for families cannot be understated.
6. The coal industry has historically made a significant contribution to the economic development of the Hunter, NSW and Australia. Approval of the T4 project continues that history and allows us to accommodate future growth in coal export from Newcastle according to resource demand.

Yours faithfully

Heath Pung

Great for the hunter valley economy