Port Waratah Coal Services - Terminal 4

I strongly object to the coal loader. There are cumulative health impacts to the local community, of which I am a member, that have NOT been taken into account by this submission or by the Port Authority generally in there overall planning for the site. There are also serious negative environmental impacts particularly for bird life. Please consider the local community,. The terrible health and social impacts of this cxoal loader need to be taken seriously. I am sick of experiencing terrible odours and breathing difficulties whichg can be attibuted to that industrial area.

I live about 200m from the train line and seee and hear coal trains rattle past day and night. They are already loud and frequent and when they pass i have to shut the door so that I can hear the TV! By creating this coal terminal an extra 41 coal trains rattling past my door every day will make it alsmost a constant stream. It concerns me that the loads are uncovered as this is both a health and envionmental issu.

There is ample proof that anthropogenic climate change is real. Coal is not the answer to providing energy for the future.

The proposed fourth coal terminal presents serious risks to the delicate environment on Kooragang Island, by moblising toxic nutrients. An increase in the number of ships in the port obviously increases the risk of another serious oil spill which could critically damage the fragile estuarine ecosystem of Kooragang Island. This area is of critical, international importance to numerous threatend species and migratory birds

I strongly object to the expansion of the coal coal mining and therefore the T4 terminal which intends to export enormous am0ounts of coal overseas. This project is seen as beneficial to Australia however the Australian people have not been advised about the impact upon their health from the enormous amount of coal dust and dust from other sources transporting the coal such as increase in road transport by heavy vehiclesand the dust their breaks etc emit into the atmosphere. Newcastle has been marketed as a good clean environment to live in with lovely beaches etc. Housing prices rose and the community benefited from the cleaning up of the city due to the departure of BHP. Newcastle residents are already experiencing similar conditions to the BHP days. Our environment is poluted as evidenced by our houses being covered in dark sticky grime which does not wash off with a hose. This comes from more than just coal dust however the related train and road transport has this effect. The economic benefit for the residents of Newcastle is minimal. The employment created is minimal as much of the equipment is automated and those transport workers often are not Newcastle residents. I would like the government to advertise what are the benefits to the city before a proposal such as this progresses further. All I know is that mining in the Hunter Valley is destroying communities negatively impacting up road and rail use and is a serious health hazard

I write to urge decision makers to reject the proposal for a fourth coal loader for Newcastle.

A fourth coal loader will increase and exacerbate the myriad problems associated with the coal chain (mining and exports) in our Hunter Region.

I object to this proposal on several grounds.

The first being the health considerations that have been raised by health experts (http://www.theherald.com.au/news/local/news/environment/specialists-warn-of-coal-terminal-health-risk/2536017.aspx). The dust related health/respiratory problems have long been an issue of serious concern for Hunter residents (http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2010/s2867659.htm). The 41 more coal trains from the Upper Hunter, through Maitland and Newcastle will bring these concerns to more than an unacceptable level and one which is beyond mitigation.
Furthermore, it should be noted that there are documented mental health impacts of coal-mining and the destruction of amenity and environment (http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10398560701701288). With these serious physical and mental health impacts in mind, it needs to be understood that for people in the Hunter the feeling is that the industry comes before the people. From the Upper Hunter down to the Port not a day goes by that isn't dominated by this industry. Whether it is being held up at train lines for 15 minutes for a coal train to pass and thereby being made late for work, study or school or whether it is the incessant drone of machinery, trains and ships in Carrington, Mayfield West or Muswellbrook.

There are several more points I wish to touch on.

The coal exported would provide the capacity to feed at least 15 more power stations around the world emitting 288 million tonnes of carbon pollution each year and fueling climate change. This would blow the world's carbon budget. If we are serious about climate change, huge infrastructural projects such as this one cannot possibly commence at this period in time. What will be left for the people of the Hunter in years to come when we make the inevitable transition to renewables too late? This is not how you build communities resilient to the rapid changes required for climate change adaptation and mitigation.

The ecological impacts of this proposal are unacceptable. Internationally significant wetlands at Kooragang Island and the migratory birds who rely on this habitat will be exposed to unacceptable threats and risks. This would also impact on our tourism industry.

A fourth coal loader puts us on a narrow path of reliance on one industry to the detriment of tourism, fishing and agricultural industries. It will lock our region into decades more of coal exports and carbon pollution.

Enough. It's unsustainable, creates few jobs and will be to the detriment of our community's health, env8ironment and economy.

Objection to Terminal 4 Proposed for Kooragang Island Hunter River MP10_0215

Parks and Playgrounds Movement wishes to lodge its strong objection to the proposal to build a further coal loading facility on Kooragang Island in the Hunter River at Newcastle. The proposal has been correctly declared a Controlled Action under the Commonwealth EPBC Act

Strategically there is more than ample coal loading capacity at the Port of Newcastle and any further increase of capacity will harm the ability to plan the future of the industrial area at Kooragang.

I am concerned about the impact on biodiversity from the proposed Port Waratah Coal Services Terminal 4 particularly the Green and Golden Bell Frog foraging and breeding habitat. We cannot replace it once it's gone and I want my children to continue to experience this beautiful animal in it's natural 'local' habitat. There is no justifiable reason in bringing an already endangered species to extinction, we must, value, protect and maintain biodiversity for a healthy and sustainable Hunter Region. Trans-location and artificial breeding ponds do not work for green and golden bell frogs.

Because we all need to live and breathe, not just the filthy rich.

I am resident of Mayfield West and am quite concerned about this development T4 I will try and be brief and voice my concerns in point form
1-.Air Quality
- The Environmental Assessment of T4 downplays impacts on air quality stating: "TheT4 project is not expected to result in any criterion exceeds on any additional days of the year" This either points to a complete lie or some sort of mistake. Already we are subject to layers of coal dust on our house cars and gardens as a almost daily event.
. It is hard to believe that increased uncovered coal stockpiles will not increase the amount of Dust
The EA only considers the impact of increased coal train movements on residencies within 20m of the rail line .This does not take into consideration dust from the coal stockpiles
I also understand that Air Quality measurements does not include small particles,Which are really the most harmful to health.
Points to consider with Air quality control and monitoring.
A- Coal dust certainly travels well beyond 29 meters of the train.
B- When talking about the coal dust are we considering the cumulative effect of this project and what already exists,
C- Will there be independent monitoring and monitoring of small particles.
D-Locally, the fourth coal terminal project 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 Heath issues associated with dust and the cost to governments and individuals of these health effect in terms of money and quality of life
2-Cumulative Effects of other plans for the Newcastle harbour .
I think this is very important to consider this in light of planned container terminals expansion of Orica and the increased noise and traffic this will bring , Already in Mayfield
West we the noise of Comsteel and Trucks along Industrial Drive using compression brakes Day and night..
3- Is this in the long term interests of the hunter region or just in the short term interests of a few .
It appears to me that we should be looking beyond and possibly wait for studies presently under way that the government is undertaking looking a long term plan for the area thanking you for your considerations

I believe another coal terminal will only have negative effects on our health, the environment and the planet.
I strongly object to new coal terminal for the following reasons.

Locally, the fourth coal terminal project 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 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.
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.
The coal exported would provide the capacity to feed at least 15 more large power stations around the world emitting 288 million tones of carbon pollution each year and fuelling climate change.
This project would damage internationally important wetlands 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 the National Parks service, 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.
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.
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.
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

The eastern fringe of Newcastle is already plagued by noise and environmental pollution. 3 coal terminals are not operating at capacity so there is no need for a fourth. I am a resident of a suburb directly affected by the coal transport by rail to the port. During all hours of the day and night the noise of trains shunting is continuous and disruptive. I clean a black film of dust from all the surfaces in my house every week. There are ongoing concerns from health experts that this dust contributes to childhood asthma and exacerbates respiratory diseases. These problems the residents experience in this area as a result of coal transport through our suburb will get worse with expansion of the project.
Perhaps PWCS could use the money earmarked for this project to actually make a valuable contribution to the impoverished region that has brought them so much wealth.

We have been living in Mayfield since August last year and the first community Information Sheet came in May 2012. It talks of community consultation but does not provide any links to be able to have any input. The 400 phonecalls made to locals is not reflective of the impact this 4th coal loader may have on the local environment. The low level of concerns posed by people may well be reflective of their reluctance to be involved in a phone questionaire, or may be reflective of the assured tone of the PWCS newletters which stressess their commitment to 'best practice'. Either way these figures are not substantiated. The response to the Environmental Assessment points out several times that it has not been completed to a satisfactory level, and the argument posed (by Umwelt consulting for Port Waratah Coal Services) is that these issues were addressed in the T3 proposal. Anyone of any intelligence who is not on the PWCS payroll would wonder why increasing the size of the (national parks) land used and the volume of coal shipped has no environmental effect at all. The environmental assessment reads as a sad joke. It needs to be redone by a truly independant body, without any declared or undeclared payment from PWCS. The key concerns for me as a local resident are the impact on the Ramsar wetlands, the effect of coal dust on the local environment and the local human population, and the increase in rail movements. Whilst there may only be one train on the line at one time, the effect of noise is cumulative. Also, if the lines are busier, there is more shunting, which is the clang and grind of the trains as they are essentially stuck in gridlock. Living over 800m away from the lines, it can still be enough to wake you in the dead of the night, and I'm a heavy sleeper. If the frequency increases so too will the loud clangs. This project has been given the green light without enough critical investigation as to it's impacts and as such I am thoroughly opposed to it.

Dear Sir
I stronly object to this development, the area in question is a habitat for all types of wildlife, including migrating birds from all over the world, this type of development has to come to a halt

I object to the proposed fourth coal terminal in Newcastle, application number 10_0215

Increased levels of noise pollution, traffic, dust and gas smells in Mayfield's air, and irreversible degradation of the environment and animal habitats surrounding Kooragang Island (and that from which the coal will be mined) will severely impact on my family's health and well being in this residential suburb. It is an intolerable proposition to force this kind of increased industrial activity and the resulting pollution on neighbouring residential suburbs that provide affordable homes to Novocastrian families. My property will be devalued, health impacted, nights bombarded with ever increasing levels of machine noise and the air loaded with increasing levels of dust and toxicity.

This 4th coal terminal is unnecessary as the present expansion of export capacity to 211 mtpa is enough, given that the demand is expected to stabilise by 2015 at around 216 mtpa. An extra 120 mtpa is unjustified.

The Hunter coal chain is already too damaging to the health and amenity and existing livelihoods of all the towns and regions involved in the production and transport of the coal to the port. From Muswellbrook down the coal trains are almost unending already.
We can't cope with an extra 41 trains a day as the 4th Terminal will cause.
A 4th terminal will facilitate the loss of even more farmland and biodiversity and groundwater on the way there and destroy critical habitat for migratory birds in the Hunter estuary itself.

Bad move, bad impacts, no need. Please reject this proposal.

This should NOT go ahead.

It will cause more dust and pollution for our city and the expansion of coal exports continue to contribute to greenhouse gasses. It is time we looked to renewables not rush to cut out as much coal as possible before it is seen by all to be the filthy mess that it is.

We have a tiny area set aside for migratory birds and this threatens their survival.The mighty dollar should not be the only value placed on whether this goes ahead or not. Money is made and disappears. The damage done doesn't. It is there for good.

It isn't even going to bring long term jobs to Newcastle and will just damage the area as a tourist destination.

DON"T APPROVE A FORTH COAL EXPORT TERMINAL!

My family and I live in close proximity to the coal loaders and coal trains and are exposed to daily shunting noises, screeching wheels and coal dust on our house and windows.

For me coal loader risks damaging the health and wellbeing of the Tighes Hill community and reduces the incentive for people to live here long term and open businesses.

The economic benefits of coal exports are short term given that eventually climate change will be a burden on economic growth.

I wholeheartedly object to the further expansion of Newcastle's coal export facilities. Almost fifty years ago, my parents chose to leave the UK to settle in the Hunter region primarily because of its natural beauty and amenity. Over time I have watched much of what they were attracted to be eroded and down-graded for the sake of short-term economic benefit of a minority. I see no economic benefit when the path we are on ends with a toxic hole in the ground and a small group of people counting cash. Reduced air quality, increased traffic & shipping, noise pollution are not of any benefit to myself or my children.

- Locally, the fourth coal terminal project 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 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.
- 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.
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.
- 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.
-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.
- 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.
- 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

This is a submission objecting to the proposed Port waratah coal services Terminal 4 development in Newcastle (10_0215). The T4 proposal must not be approved due to the significant and unacceptable impacts as detailed below.
Impacts on habitat, endangered and threatened species, and migratory birds
Part of this proposed Terminal 4 is on National Park Land. National Parks were established to protect unspoilt landscapes and a diverse number of plants and animals. It indicates that commercial activities are prohibited and human activity is monitored. The foremost purpose is to protect native flora and fauna.
Proposed offsets can not compensate for the loss of habitat of endangered and threatened species.
Local issues affecting the bird life has been highlighted by the Hunter Bird Observers Group in an article to the Newcastle Herald late last month. Their volunteers contribute valuable hours at irregular times to monitor migratory bird activities.

Impacts on air quality
The Newcastle LGA will be seriously impacted by dust and fall out from the uncovered stockpiles of coal waiting to be loaded onto carriers.
The health issues, highlighted by Upper Hunter residents who are currently affected directly by coal mines and passing train movements, will soon return to Newcastle and its surrounds.
Health problems can be measured by long term monitoring and statistical analysis which is not published as yet in NSW. The children and grandchildren of the decision makers and residents of the Hunter will be the most at risk.

Water pollution and dredging impacts

The endangered frog species and bird varieties that visit this area should be protected from the impact of dredging huge amounts of soil and sediment. The fragile eco system cannot survive such a major disruption that this will cause.

Social and economic impacts in Newcastle and Lower Hunter

The once "dirty image" of Newcastle will return, and discourage people from visiting the area and revenue from tourism will decrease. The hospitality industry in the Hunter is in decline and employment opportunities in this sector will continue to reduce. Land values in the area will decrease and the residents who have continued to create the clean image of Newcastle will once again experience the unpleasant side of an unnecessary impost to all.

Impacts due to increased coal mining in NSW

Greenhouse gas will double with the increase in coal exports from the Port of Newcastle.
Residents will experience an increase in noise created by train movements and activities at the Port.