Port Waratah Coal Services - Terminal 4

We dont need another coal loader in Newcastle, with global warming a scientific fact.

I object to this project.

Instead of looking for short term profit Australia should be leading the world in research and application of alternative power sources and not wasting money on degrading the environment by continuing to use and promote out of date and dangerous power sources such as coal.

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

1. GLOBAL WARMING:- As I understand it the ammount of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere by the burning of an additional 70Mt/year will be equal to 30% of Australia's total annual GHG emissions.

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

3. ENVIRONMENT:- Communities in Newcastle and the Hunter Valley are impacted by dust from the mining, transport and stockpiling of coal. The 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 with the non-negligeable increase in environmental degradation on several fronts.

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:

1. 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.
2. 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).
3. 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.

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.

Dear Sir or Madam,

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

1. GHG-Emissions: 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. Pushing towards this outcome is irresponsible as it will contribute to climate change and thus result in future economic and social losses.
2. 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 project puts short-term economic benefit before the legislated conservation aims and in that it is both unlawful and unethical.
3. 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.Thus, the project puts short-term economic benefit before the physical and social health of local communities. This is outrageous in its cynicism and disregard for human well-being.

Please take these wider environmental and sociocultural considerations in view and abandon the plans to build yet another coal terminal. These plans go against our national interests, if these interests are taken to be anything more that economic expansion plans of certain corporations.

Kind regards,
Dmitry Kuznetsov

Australia has become an international laughing stock as it parts company with thei international majority about the urgency to address climate change. Australia must lose its fossil fuel addiction and stop developing new mines and infrastructure.

In addition more coal ports mean more coal dust and pollution, not to me too. Further destruction if the natural. Values of Australia's hard pressed east coast.

Ease stop the proposed development.

Enough is Enough. Just stop.

As a member of the public I just wish to make it known that I do not want another coal terminal in Newcastle's estuary. Rational arguments aside I do not wish for more coal infrastructure ruining the environment.I do not care for an economically justifiable explanation-I prefer clean air and water and a pleasant environment in which to live. Newcastle has become a pleasant place to live since a lot of industry has gone.Lets keep it that way.
Roslyn Poole

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 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 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. 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.
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.

There are no benefits, short or long term for the mining, exporting and burning of an energy derived from dead organisms. It IS a DEAD energy. One that is unacceptable to be used any longer.

Please look into the benefits of zero point energy that is free and available from the space around us. This technology is real but is locked up by the same people that want to keep us enslaved to the petro dollar and a centralised distribution system. All owned by a small number of people who are the only ones that benefit from this dead energy.

Please show the courage to help bring about a change this whole planet needs and deserves. A clean, hydrocarbon free future for our children and our children's children. Unless of course you would prefer to leave them a barren, lifeless planet where they struggle for food, water and breath.

There are only two choices. Be a part of the solution or be part of the problem and be swept aside and forgotten. Your choice but they are the only two you have!!!

Yours Very Sincerely!!!!

Cameron Parker

To: Planning and Assessment Commission

Re: Submission on the T4 Preferred Project Report

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 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 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.
Thank you for the opportunity to bring these remarks to your attention.

Yours sincerely,
Robert E. Rutkowski

2527 Faxon Court
Topeka, Kansas 66605-2086
P/F: 1 785 379-9671
E-mail: [email protected]

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:

1. 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.
2. 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).
3. 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.

If as the company states there is no need for another coal terminal why would we even be considering it when there is the potential of so much more damage to the environment. The idea or the only sensible aim would be to minimise all development to keep our environment as safe as possible. anything other than this is sheer vandalism and complete lack of responsibility. It is only us humans that are capable of protecting our planet!!

We need less carbon intensive projects not more.

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:
1. 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.
2. 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).
3. 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.

I am AGAINST the building of T4 BECAUSE

It's not required
The existing coal loaders are not even running to full capacity. Please learn from the Tasmanian experience where excess environmental destruction took place and unnecessary money spent to put turbines into the Hydro Electric schemes which have never been used.

Dust
I live in a 113 year old terrace near where the old Zara St power station used to be. I accepted the fact that there was black dust that had to be removed from the roof cavity before insulation was installed 2 years ago.
I was very surprised when the pest control inspection this year left black smear marks over ceiling and man hole cover from all the black dust that has accumulated over the insulation in the last 2 years, even without The Power Station to blame. However with black dust constantly accumulating on window frames and on the floor in the house, dust in the roof should be no surprise. I live nowhere near where the coal trains travel, so pity help those who do.
I work in Stockton and some days the sweet sickly smell of air born coal dust fills the air. Some days we smell it in East Newcastle too.
Add the extra dust from T4 and Heaven knows how unpleasant and more unhealthy life will become.

Habitat destruction
I notice that all sorts of activity and track building has been going on in the mangroves east of the existing coal loaders. If T4 is built a large swathe of mangroves will be removed and habitat for birds and animals will be further reduced. The Australian Bittern is an endangered bird in the area and T4 will only add to its demise.

Global warming.
The facts are there. Listen to them. Meditate. Act for long term plant sustainability, for the welfare of land, water, people, plants and animals, NOT for the short term benefit of the Greedy Few

Kate Tuohy-Main
20-11-13

Enough coal dust already! Invest in renewables instead. Consider our environment and the health of the local population, as well as the legacy of environmental destruction we are leaving for future generations!

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:

1. 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.
2. 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).
3. 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.

I oppose the Project in it's entirety. All mining should be stopped until the issue of climate change and global warming are addressed and reversed and then only allowed under the strictest monitored environmental conditions, with very large amounts of money deposited with a global authority to be forfieted if conditions and rehabilitation goals not met.

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 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 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.
Dear Brad Hartcher,

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. (Read Rod Campbell's economic analysis here.)

Yours sincerely,