Restart of Redbank Power Station

There is no social license for burning our native forests. Verdant Energy’s attempt to revive their Redbank biomass energy project is very disappointing. This is a terrible idea that will devastate NSW bushland at the very time we need to be protecting and revegetating it.

NSW already has an abysmal track record of unrestrained habitat clearing. Habitat clearing on freehold land is now the biggest cause of environmental loss in NSW. This proposal will make the problem exponentially worse as Verdant are seeking to burn 850 000 tonnes of habitat and woodchips per year – more than the entire native forest logging industry in NSW produces.

Please consider the following ramifications of the project:

The new proposed fuel source for Redbank power station will create a market to destroy even more habitat.

This project is an unnecessary distraction from real renewable energy solutions. It will not help, but hinder decarbonisation of the energy system.

Burning cleared vegetation is not carbon neutral and the project would create a new source of greenhouse pollution.

The proposal is to use cleared habitat and forest biomass from land that has been stripped for farming, not regrowth, meaning there will not be any future carbon sequestration to theoretically reduce the power plant's emissions.

A massive increase in truck movements to deliver fuel to Redbank is another source of emissions and a far-reaching disturbance.

The proposal seeks to exploit NSW land management rules that are unequivocally failing nature and that are currently under review.

Biomass has negative and unjust health impacts including releasing dangerous air pollution.

I strongly disagree with Verdant’s proposal to burn native forests for energy and do not support this endeavour. I am hoping the application will be rejected especially when the above considerations are taken into account.

NSW already has an abysmal track record of unrestrained habitat clearing. Habitat clearing on freehold land is now the biggest cause of environmental loss in NSW.

The new proposed fuel source for Redbank power station will create a market to destroy even more habitat. This proposal will make the problem exponentially worse as Verdant want to burn 850 000 tonnes of habitat and woodchips per year – more than the entire native forest logging industry in NSW produces.

This project is an unnecessary distraction from real renewable energy solutions. It will not help, but hinder decarbonisation of the energy system. Burning cleared vegetation is not carbon neutral and the project would create a new source of greenhouse pollution.

The proposal is to use cleared habitat and forest biomass from land that has been stripped for farming, not regrowth, meaning there will not be any future carbon sequestration to theoretically reduce the power plant's emissions.

A massive increase in truck movements to deliver fuel to Redbank is another source of emissions and a far-reaching disturbance.

The proposal seeks to exploit NSW land management rules that are unequivocally failing nature and that are currently under review.

Biomass has negative and unjust health impacts including releasing dangerous air pollution.

WHY is this even up for discussion! DO NOT APPROVE THIS PROJECT!!! We cannot afford to be burning habitat. How can this project even be up for discussion! Trees are worth more standing. If DPHI approves this project then it will be perfectly clear that NSW has no consideration for biodiversity whatsoever.

Bushland and forests are intrinsically valuable: they sequester carbon, attract rainfall, provide habitat for wildlife, heritage and cultural values, visual and other amenity.. Their true value is far beyond the market value earned by selling to Verdant to create woodchip for energy production for profit. This short-sighted way of making profits will create devastating environmental destruction. It will result in a new wave of landclearing. There is No social licence. It's not in the public interest. It's not ecologically sustainable and highly polluting. The clean energy claim is nonsense. While our Environment Laws are under review- because they are failing- approvals of controversial projects must not be granted.

We (individuals and Government authorities) should be doing as much as possible to reduce our carbon footprint on land, water and air.
Burning cleared vegetarian takes away the benefits of letting it become a rich source of regenerative soil for such life as worms, which enrich the soil. (That is why I also support mixed generative farming.)
I understand that electricity generation is required, but in addition to wind and solar generation, why not use waste plastic. As I am not a scientist, I have read the following:
"Waste plastic can be turned into fuel oil through DOING pyrolysis plant. It can produce around 50% to 80% pyrolysis oil, 30% carbon black, and around 10% non-condensable syngas recycled to heat pyrolysis furnace. This project can be said to be 100% utilization, no waste."
It seems like a win-win situation, since we have such a problem with plastic waste.
We (individuals, companies and government) should be doing as much as possible to reduce our carbon footprints. Scientists from around the globe tell us that we have almost reached the point of no return for saving our planet for future generations.

I am writing to urge you to reject this proposal by Verdant Energy to revive their Redbank biomass energy project which is to burn a large bush are for electricity. I believe that the NSW Government should show leadership in rejecting this proposal as it has no social license for burning our native forests which are such an important part of our environment. This project will devastate NSW bushland at the very time, due to global warming and wildlife extinctions, that we need to be protecting, revegetating and nurturing it. It would also appear that the new proposed fuel source for Redbank Power Station will create a market to destroy even more habitat. We need to move towards renewable energy solutions so critical to mitigate against the increased warming of the planet. Burning cleared vegetation is not carbon neutral and the project would create a new source of greenhouse pollution. Added to that will be a massive increase in truck movemenets which is another source of emissions and will have a negative impact on the environment. I believe that the proposal seeks to exploit NSW land management rules that unequivocally failing nature and that are currently under review. I urge you to reconsider and reject the proposal.
Christina Smith

Who has the right to clear native forests to make power? What about the animals that need it? Why is there no approval steps? Why are the Environmental Protection Department being ham-strung to stop this type of destruction?

Verdant Energy are attempting to revive their Redbank biomass energy project.
After they stopped burning our state forests, they've now decided to take advantage of a loophole to burn native vegetation cleared on freehold land. We must prevent the waste and destruction of our native woodlands, habitat, fauna and flora. Please stop them proceeding

I object strongly to this project. Burning native bush to produce electricity is a wanton and completely unnecessary destruction of NSW's natural environment and ecosystems that also produces greenhouse gases that will worsen the already catastrophic global warming. It is completely irrelevant that the bush to be destroyed is on freehold land. It is Australia's native flora and fauna wherever it is and whoever owns it and it is ridiculous and dangerous to be destroying it in the 21st century when the world is facing worsening climate change and high levels of loss of biodiversity. The NSW government should not be approving such projects. Promises and policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and halt the loss of biodiversity mean nothing unless governments make decisions that implement such policies. Making them and then ignoring them is nothing short of deceitful and hypocritical. It shows a total disregard for the welfare of current and future generations.

I am opposed to this project for the following reasons:

• Great swathes of NSW bushland will be devastated – at the very time we need to be protecting and revegetating it, as there is already too much unrestrained habitat clearing. Habitat clearing on freehold land is now the biggest cause of environmental loss in NSW. The proposal seeks to exploit NSW land management rules that are unequivocally failing nature and that are currently under review.
Verdant want to burn 850 000 tonnes of habitat and woodchips per year – more than the entire native forest logging industry in NSW produces.

• It will hinder decarbonisation of the energy system. We should be working on true renewable energy solutions.
Burning cleared vegetation is not carbon neutral and this project will produce huge quantities of greenhouse gas.

• Biomass releases dangerous air pollution.

In all honesty this proposal is just madness, to burn native bush and forests for electricity generation does not pass the pub test.
What is going on?
The number one threat to native animals and fauna is land clearing, period. This is the case for private as well as public land.
This scheme will make land clearing even worse by encouraging landowners to get rid of native bush and needs to be stopped one and for all before it's too late.
We need to save native bushland, destroy what little we have left and to burn for electricity is morally wrong and completely unsustainable.
Thank you.

I cannot understand why such a project is being considered in a time when we must urgently cut Co2 emissions, not add to them. Burning biomass for energy emits 50% more Co2 than coal per MWh.
It is incorrect to call the project carbon neutral since the removed vegetation would take decades to grow back– if indeed it was replanted – and our world does not have such time. NSW has a biodiversity and wildlife extinction crisis, largely due to land clearing. This project would increase clearing of vegetation on private land, whatever they designate it . 'Invasive native species' is still habitat, if you do not only view it from the agricultural viewpoint.
While it was once favoured overseas, and biomass was mistakenly called 'renewable',that position has changed as precious forests were felled solely for the process. 800 scientists internationally have signed a petition condemning burning biomass for electricity. Listen to the science, to objectivity, rather than to a company motivated by self-interest.
The Hunter around there already has serious air pollution; this project would add to that. Why allow it?
We have commercially viable genuine renewable technologies already, and should be encouraging investment in those rather than this polluting and unsustainable method.
I urge you to reject this pathetic piece of greenwash that can only bring more harm to the Hunter region and to our planet.

Hello, I have recently started volunteering for Science for Wildlife, monitoring Koala's in Wollemi & Kanangra National Parks. Habitat is being lost not only for Koala's but all creatures and the fauna doesn't just live in national parks but on private property. This loss of habitat doesn't only effect them but our own existence, the clearing of and burning native vegetation will contribute further to climate change. With the rain event last night 5/4/24, making this the 4th flooding of the Nepean catchment since 2020 with scientist stating the frequency is due to human impact, I can't believe the NSW Goverment is serious in reconsidering Redbank Biomass Energy Project and allowing them to use a loophole to burn 850,000 tonnes per year, are you kidding? Here's other reasons for you to consider;
• The new proposed fuel source for Redbank power station will create a market to destroy even more habitat.
• This project is an unnecessary distraction from real renewable energy solutions. It will not help, but hinder decarbonisation of the energy system.
• Burning cleared vegetation is not carbon neutral and the project would create a new source of greenhouse pollution.
• The proposal is to use cleared habitat and forest biomass from land that has been stripped for farming, not regrowth, meaning there will not be any future carbon sequestration to theoretically reduce the power plant's emissions.
• A massive increase in truck movements to deliver fuel to Redbank is another source of emissions and a far-reaching disturbance.
• The proposal seeks to exploit NSW land management rules that are unequivocally failing nature and that are currently under review.
• Biomass has negative and unjust health impacts including releasing dangerous air pollution.
Please do what is right, do not allow this project and support other power generation that will prevent our temperatures rising any further, Narelle Wilson.

I oppose the burning of any native vegetation on freehold land as it is not carbon neutral and the project would create a new source of greenhouse pollution.

The new proposed fuel source for Redbank power station will create a market to destroy even more habitat.
This project is an unnecessary distraction from real renewable energy solutions. It will not help, but hinder decarbonisation of the energy system.
Burning cleared vegetation is not carbon neutral and the project would create a new source of greenhouse pollution.
The proposal is to use cleared habitat and forest biomass from land that has been stripped for farming, not regrowth, meaning there will not be any future carbon sequestration to theoretically reduce the power plant's emissions.
A massive increase in truck movements to deliver fuel to Redbank is another source of emissions and a far-reaching disturbance.
The proposal seeks to exploit NSW land management rules that are unequivocally failing nature and that are currently under review.
Biomass has negative and unjust health impacts including releasing dangerous air pollution.

NSW already has an abysmal track record of unrestrained habitat clearing. Habitat clearing on freehold land is now the biggest cause of environmental loss in NSW.
This proposal will make the problem exponentially worse as Verdant want to burn 850 000 tonnes of habitat and woodchips per year – more than the entire native forest logging industry in NSW produces.
The new proposed fuel source for Redbank power station will create a market to destroy even more habitat.
This project is an unnecessary distraction from real renewable energy solutions. It will not help, but hinder decarbonisation of the energy system.
Burning cleared vegetation is not carbon neutral and the project would create a new source of greenhouse pollution.
The proposal is to use cleared habitat and forest biomass from land that has been stripped for farming, not regrowth, meaning there will not be any future carbon sequestration to theoretically reduce the power plant's emissions.
A massive increase in truck movements to deliver fuel to Redbank is another source of emissions and a far-reaching disturbance.
The proposal seeks to exploit NSW land management rules that are unequivocally failing nature and that are currently under review.
Biomass has negative and unjust health impacts including releasing dangerous air pollution.

NSW already has an abysmal track record of unrestrained habitat clearing. Habitat clearing on freehold land is now the biggest cause of environmental loss in NSW.
This proposal will make the problem exponentially worse as Verdant want to burn 850 000 tonnes of habitat and woodchips per year – more than the entire native forest logging industry in NSW produces.
The new proposed fuel source for Redbank power station will create a market to destroy even more habitat.
This project is an unnecessary distraction from real renewable energy solutions. It will not help, but hinder decarbonisation of the energy system.
Burning cleared vegetation is not carbon neutral and the project would create a new source of greenhouse pollution.
The proposal is to use cleared habitat and forest biomass from land that has been stripped for farming, not regrowth, meaning there will not be any future carbon sequestration to theoretically reduce the power plant's emissions.
A massive increase in truck movements to deliver fuel to Redbank is another source of emissions and a far-reaching disturbance.
The proposal seeks to exploit NSW land management rules that are unequivocally failing nature and that are currently under review.
Biomass has negative and unjust health impacts including releasing dangerous air pollution.

I am opposed to the project as the new proposed fuel source for Redbank power station will create a market to destroy even more habitat and we should not be burning native forests for power. This is an unnecessary distraction from actual renewable energy solutions. This will not help, but greatly hinder decarbonisation of the energy system. Burning cleared vegetation is not carbon neutral and this project will create a new source of greenhouse pollution. This proposal is to use cleared habitat and forest biomass from land that has been stripped for farming, not regrowth, meaning there will not be any future carbon sequestration to theoretically reduce the power plant's emissions. As a consequence there will be a massive increase in truck movements to deliver fuel to Redbank this is one more source of emissions with far-reaching effects. This proposal seeks to exploit NSW land management rules that are unequivocally failing nature and that are currently under review.  Biomass has negative health impacts including releasing dangerous air pollution. This project is not the way forward in the twenty first century when we are facing a massive environmental crisis.

I do not support the Redbank power station proposal to burn cleared vegetation as fuel. Native vegetation has been cleared consistently and extensively since European occupation and there is not enough left to provide habitat to support native species, especially given the challenge of a changing climate and the increased risk of wildfire in ever increasingly separated remnants. So-called managed forest harvest should not be used for low-grade products such as woodchip for any purpose (fuel or pulp). And hauling and burning vegetation is not carbon neutral. I support further development and transition to use of actual renewable energy sources.

This project should not go ahead. The idea of burning biomass is environmentally dreadfully dangerous because it encourages clearing of bushland. We are now in an era when we must be retaining all the native vegetation that we possibly can, whether on public or private land, as habitat for native species and as part of the ecosystem that maintains human life as well. Burning biomass also produces unacceptable levels of CO2.

Verdant want to burn 850 000 tonnes of habitat and woodchips per year – more than the entire native forest logging industry in NSW produces. NSW already has an abysmal track record of unrestrained habitat clearing. Habitat clearing on freehold land is now the biggest cause of environmental loss in NSW. This project would make NSW problems much worse. The reasons are as follows:

Biomass has negative and unjust health impacts including releasing dangerous air pollution.

A massive increase in truck movements to deliver fuel to Redbank is another source of emissions and a far-reaching disturbance.

The proposal seeks to exploit NSW land management rules that are unequivocally failing nature and that are currently under review.

Burning cleared vegetation is not carbon neutral and the project would create a new source of greenhouse pollution as well as the inevitable emissions of other pollutants. The proposal is to use cleared habitat and forest biomass from land that has been stripped for farming, not regrowth, meaning there will not be any future carbon sequestration to theoretically reduce the power plant's emissions.

The new proposed fuel source for Redbank power station will create a market to destroy even more habitat.