Port Waratah Coal Services - Terminal 4

Dear Premier O'Farrell, Mr Owen, Mr Baumann and Planning Minister Hazzard

I do not support another new coal terminal in Newcastle. This terminal should not proceed.T4 would:

Double the coal dust: 25,000 children attend school within 500m of the coal corridor. T4 would mean at least 50 more uncovered coal trains each day;

Result in 15 new coal mines in the Hunter Valley and Liverpool plains, destroying farmland and forests and polluting valuable water resources; and

Destroy important wetlands on Kooragang island and replace them with uncovered coal stockpiles.

Please do everything you can to protect community health and the environment.

I would appreciate acknowledgement of my concern.

Dear Premier O'Farrell, Mr Owen, Mr Baumann and Planning Minister Hazzard

I do not support another new coal terminal in Newcastle. Please do everything you can to protect community health and the environment. This terminal should not proceed.

I would appreciate acknowledgement of my concern.

Sincerely,

My household recently received a copy of the PWCS T4 EA Summary. While my family are largely supportive of the project we are not happy with one aspect, that being the visual effect of the conveyor system over the South arm of the Hunter river adjacent to the Tourle street bridge as depicted on page 11 of the summary. (see attachment) Please note that this picture is similar to figure 15.4 T4 Project EA Volume 1 Chapter 15.pdf.

Compared to the aesthetic lines of the newly constructed Tourle street bridge the conveyor system, as proposed, will be an eyesore. Its boxed structure mounted on skinny stilts will do nothing to complement the pleasing lines of the newly constructed concrete bridge adjacent.

If the conveyor has to be placed adjacent to the bridge then it has to be camouflaged somehow so that it does not distract from the aesthetics of the bridge and the river. A box structure on stilts is totally unacceptable and will only distract from the natural beauty of the Hunter river at that point. We don't want something that will look like an industrial graveyard crossing our beautiful river.

A solution might be to eliminate the stilts by raising the height of the concrete piers and enclose, at least the sides, of the conveyor belt with some sort of curved or decorative, perhaps concrete, cowling to camouflage the boxed structure. No doubt the actual conveyor would have to be fully enclosed to eliminate coal dust escaping.

Ian McDonald
Carrington

I am appalled that the NSW government and the Federal Government are supporting this expansion of the coal export industry. Our grandchildren will actually be fighting to get enough to eat in Australia by the end of this century if this reckless expansion of the fossil fuel industry continues. I cannot imagine how you guys can sleep at night. You know the science and yet a few jobs and getting elected and feathering the nests of your corporate mates are all that is important. Wake up to yourselves. If you want to read more detail of my published research on this, do a google search for refereed journal articles since 1994.

submission against T4 attached

NCC"s submission focuses on the air quality impacts of the proposed terminal. We submit that the study has not adequately estimated the potential increase in fine particle pollution, nor the corresponding health impacts. We recommend additional investigations. Details in the attached file.

Please find attached a submission letter

To
Port Coal Waratah Services and all those with decision-making power on the Fourth Coal Terminal Project in Newcastle,

The following outlines my objections to yet another coal loader:

Did you know the Hunter has a rich Natural History with our wetlands being second of importance in Australia- only after Kakadu? (According to a brochure from Kakadu itself)

Already our European settlement has seen the disintegration of some of Australia's rich natural heritage here in the Hunter, followed thankfully recently, by a number of people working hard to successfully begin to rehabilitate some of these areas. Another coal loader puts in danger a number of irreplaceable natural resources as set out below:

* At least 11 species of migratory birds recognised by international treaties rely on the habitat at "Deep Pond" and its proximity to the Hunter estuary Ramsar site. Most of Deep Pond, the only freshwater refuge in the Hunter estuary, would be lost to this project.
* This project would damage internationally important wetlands on Kooragang Island that provide critical habitat for protected migratory bird species and nationally threatened species including the Green and Golden Bell Frog and the Australasian Bittern.
* An area within the site is currently owned by National Parks, and provides irreplaceable habitat for migratory shore birds. The proposal will mean loss of habitat and disruption to an ecologically significant proportion of a population of four migratory shorebird species listed under international conservation conventions.
* The Environmental Assessment fails to meet the requirements set out by both the State and Federal agencies, and the proposal represents an unacceptable risk to the Australasian Bittern.
* The Fourth Coal Terminal would facilitate many more large coal mines (the equivalent of at least 15 'mega-pits') in the Hunter and Liverpool Plains which threaten food and water security by destroying prime agricultural land, irreversibly damaging ground water systems and polluting waterways.


Are you also aware and care that here in Newcastle we have the only Degree in Natural History Illustration available in Australia and only one of four in the world? Wouldn't it be a tragedy that the city that is able and committed to providing this, also houses a project that allows the destruction of the above precious, irreplaceable, resources?
I realise that the making large amounts of money, as soon as possible, drive a lot of our decisions in this current society, but if coal is such a needed resource then we can afford to: hold on to it longer, make better decisions that take into account these important issues and dole it out slowly. If it is in such high demand the buyers will come back you know.
Another important resource it will affect is the human one, our health is important and while others who make money on the project may choose to live outside its impact, we of this area will be exposed to the following:
* T4 would see 41 more coal trains through Newcastle and Maitland every day, increasing dust related health problems such as asthma and other respiratory ailments.
* Pollution from coal affects all major body organ systems and contributes to the leading causes of morbidity and mortality.
* The proposal also carries the risk of mobilising toxic contaminants on Kooragang Island, the former BHP Steelworks site, and in the South Arm of the Hunter River, and too little is known about the risks to ensure the communities of Newcastle will be protected from toxic accidents, seepage and accidents. There is no plan to fully remediate the sites.


Meanwhile there are the environmental issues of feeding this particular form of energy supply, these include:
* The coal exported would provide the capacity to feed at least 15 more large power stations around the world emitting 288 million tonnes of carbon pollution each year and fuelling global climate change.
* After construction, the coal terminal will provide no additional employment. Rather, it is likely to result in the loss of other economic activities in the port, such as tourism, fishing and other shipping

I hope that these points are put into the decision-making grid and given the weight of importance they deserve. Some things cannot simply be `re-generated' after the fact. In some cultures decisions were traditionally made drawing on the wisdom of the previous 7 generations and thinking of the impact on the 7 generations into the future. I propose that all decisions from small to large use this idea and particularly one such as this. I beg you to do the same.

Yours sincerely,

Bronwyn Greive

Please see attached pdf file

NPA wishes to make a submission to thePort Waratah Coal Services Terminal 4 inquiry, objecting to the rezoning of lands that were earmarked for addition to the Hunter Wetlands National Park, objecting to the threat that development poses to the Ramsar site and objecting to the loss of significant habitat for migratory waders. We note that this development clashes with several important international agreements to which the Australian Government is a signatory and we provide the following attachment in support of our objection. Note that this material supports that made by the HBOC, a group with intimate local knowledge of the site in question.

Submission in attached document.

See attached submission.

These are points lacking in the EIS and I would like to see addressed

* Minimal emission designed coal wagons (covered coal wagons)
* All (7) stockpiles for coal to be in contained facilities
* All conveyers, feeders and transfer stations to ships to be covered. Even I know the proposed use of water spraying to limit dust is outdated, inefficient, energy intensive and due to location of T4, environmentally dangerous.
* Cumulative impacts of this project in conjunction with the current operations and of future planned projects for Newcastle Port
* All air monitoring stations constructed and operational before construction takes place.
* Health impact study on cumulative effects from coal mines to port, it is not just what happens on the site, it about the cumulative effects this site will create

And I want to see some proactive actions taken by the proponents that will be in the best long-term interests of Newcastle residents,
* The facility design to be state of the art - reducing and offsetting its energy consumption and production via solar installations on suitable buildings (amongst other things)
* Transport options, Cormant Rd must be linked to the inter city by-pass. This link must be constructed prior to the commencement of T4.
* Guaranteed no risk to further soil contamination and leaching into surrounding wetlands and the Hunter River. We already know the site is contaminated and is in a flood plain
* No threats to acquire sections of the National Park or impacts on the Ramsar Wetlands and endangered wildlife and flora. Let's see the plans for restoration and compensatory habitat and the bank account which will finance work into the future
* Infrastructure and noise levels - including cumulative and incremental, time specific impacts due to increase in ambient noise levels (remembering we're talking about a 24/7 operation) including train and ship movements (which will nearly double once T4 is operational) so that impacts remain BELOW what is considered acceptable.
* Impacts beyond the construction footprint for T4 HAVE to be considered - it's not good enough to state that PWCS don't have to consider things "beyond the operations control of PWCS" when it's their project that is generating those problems. Think about CO2 emissions.
* Economic justification for the project has go beyond the typical spin doctoring and double speak of their EIS. Latest reports to both State and Federal governments have stated on numerous occasions that the only people who are really benefiting from the present mining boom are those connected to the mining sector.
* PWCS state that their T4 Project will add approximately $10 billion to the Hunter economy. I want to see a breakdown of how much of that $10 billion will actually benefit Newcastle LGA and how much the project will cost the Newcastle LGA community to accommodate the construction of the facility.

There is little time left for the community to express what they expect to see from the expansion of coal loading facilities at Newcastle. I don't like the fact that the community has been treated like a doormat for the mining industry.
If the Government is really serious about community consultation, then give the community fair time to respond to the T4 proposal.


Claire Charles,
36 Crebert Street
Mayfield
Home phone 4967 2495
Mobile 0419 00 3390

My submission is threefold and address traffic,noise and air quality and are attached in that order below.

PORT WARATAH COAL SERVICES TERMINAL 4

TO: NSW Department of Planning
Attn: Ms Rebecca Newman

SUBMISSION OBJECTING TO THE T4 PROJECT


For decades the people of the Hunter Valley have believed that the North-Western boundary of the industrial area on Kooragang Island was defined by the position of the main railway track. The area of land to the north and west of the track was understood to be conservation land of the Hunter Wetlands National Park and Kooragang Island Wetland Rehabilitation Project. This is clearly shown on the large map on the Welcome signs near the entry to Ash Island and on the Ash Island Birding Route Brochure to be seen here: http://www.hboc.org.au/resources/documents/Ash%20Is%20Birding%20Route.pdf

The brochure describes Swan Pond and the adjacent Wader Pond to be "the most important sites on Ash Island for water birds". Swan pond is particularly important as it can at times provide habitat for up to one thousand water birds of more than a dozen species, including species such as the Sharp-tailed Sandpiper which migrate here each summer from north-eastern Siberia and are protected under the Ramsar Agreement. The number of birds and the range of species depend very much on season, recent rainfall here and recent rainfall in other places. It is possible to see no birds one week and a thousand birds a few weeks later.

The initial maps of the project show a 200 metre wide strip of wetland north-west of the railway to be taken off the National Park and added to the Industrial area. The pond in Bittern Corner is a known Green and Gold Bell Frog location. As shown in the Environmental Assessment, there are many other locations on Ash Island suitable for and known to contain Bell Frogs. Later map versions (Feb 2012) show that the Bittern Corner pond has been saved but that most of the bird rich wetland of Swan Pond is to be filled in to allow construction of rail works.

Swan Pond has a unique ecology. It is not replicated anywhere else on Ash Island. It is the ecological jewel in the crown for all of Kooragang Island. There appears to be no operational reason why the proposed T4 Coal Loader needs to destroy this area. There is plenty of land on the eastern side of the railway in the vicinity of Swan Pond for new tracks and flyovers. The size of the proposed coal stockpiles, equivalent to a pile of coal 50m wide, 20m high and 10km long, seems to be far in excess of the needs to fill five coal ships of the largest size. It would seem that the designers of the coal loader want to destroy the ecologically important Swan Pond just to park trains and store coal. Both these functions can be done at other nearby Lower Hunter Valley Sites with like or no conservation value.

My submission strongly urges the Planning Department to require PWCS to redesign the T4 Coal Loader so as to contain it within the Industrial Area bounded by the existing railway track. The boundary of Hunter Wetlands National Park should be restored to the original location.

Jim Smart
East Maitland
6 May 2012

Attachment: A photo of Swan Pond taken last week showing the abundant bird life.

As a group promoting a transition to strong communities able to thrive in a lob carbon future, Transition Newcastle strongly opposes the construction of a fourth coal terminal in Newcastle. We need to focus on finding alternatives to a carbon based economy and protecting our food security rather than expanding the coal industry.
We do not believe that constructing another coal terminal supporting an expansion of mining in the Hunter Valley is a step in the right direction. We need to reduce our reliance on coal and there will never be a "good" time to do this. We believe the sooner we start this transition the better.
Our more details submission is attached.

Please find attached our submission.

The Port Waratah Coal Service T4 proposal should be refused because:
1) the likely impacts of the development on the natural environment of the site are too great, resulting in the loss of important habitat for threatened species and endangered ecological communities and aquatic habitat - the site is not suitable for the development;
2) the likely impacts of the development on the natural environment neighbouring the site are too great, impacting on the Lower Hunter Green Corridor, the Hunter Wetlands National Park and the internationally listed Ramsar wetlands and species protected under international treaties of which Australia is a signatory;
3) the likely health impacts of the development on residents living in the suburbs surrounding the Port are too great, including the health impacts in suburbs along the coal chain as a consequence of this development;
4) the likely economic impacts of the development on the local and regional economy has not been adequately assessed, in particular the impact on the local fishing due to the predicted loss of fish and prawn habitat and the possible groundwater contamination from the development; and,
5) the proposal is not in the public interest, in particular because the development would facilitate an increase in greenhouse gas emissions when it is known that these pollutants increase the risk of catastrophic climate change, with a resulting increase in the frequency and intensity of weather events like the `Pasha Bulka' storm of 2007.
The Port Waratah Coal Service T4 proposal is an inappropriate development.

Please accept the attached submission objecting to this proposed development.
Please acknowledge receipt