Stratford Pumped Hydro and Solar

I strongly object to this proposal.
A massive overseas company with only one objective- to make money!
There will be no regards for the destruction this proposal will create in such a fragile environment.
Surveys conducted by the proponents are totally inadequate to truly account for the devastation and lasting effects to the flora and fauna, the nearby residents and the communities in the broader area .
More independent testing for all aspects of the project must be done before even considering the approval of this project .

Submission objecting to the Stratford Solar and Pumped Hydro (SSPH) Project being granted a planning permit or in any way proceeding to construction.
1. The SSPH is a parasitic Solar Farm and Pumped Hydro complex that is only able, (because of a shortage of weather fuel, sunshine) to operate for a maximum of eight hours a day (33%) and because of clouds and rain, the solar industry only averages six hours a day or 25% of each day. If it was not subsidised, investors would never consider it as a worthwhile investment.
This statement alone clearly sets out. That by its intermittent and unreliable nature of electricity production, (because of an unreliable supply of ‘weather’ fuel). The SSPH should never, ever be considered as an economic or dependable electricity generator for supplying baseload electricity to a modern electricity grid.
2. The SSPH will permanently pollute the farmland it is on, and the agricultural production will be lost each year for the next 100 years or more. Note: At present the SSPH land is producing each year, a good amount of agricultural produce, that economically benefits the farmer, surrounding towns, cities and eventually Australia with economic stimulation and jobs. As previously stated this will be a very large negative against the SSPH forever.
3. Adding a Pumped Hydro to the SSPH, is completely unnecessary and worthless. To add a Pumped Hydro to the mix, does not produce one MWh of power and actually loses 16% of the power, having to convert it from AC to DC current going into the Pumped Hydro. And again converting the current via Inverters from DC to AC current when transferring out of the Pumped Hydro. This loss via conversion only increases the price to the end electricity user. Extremely high prices do as much damage to economies as shortages of supply.
4. The SSPH does nothing to reduce the World’s emmissions. This is because all the Federal and State Net Zero emission goals, Emission Reduction goals and Carbon emission limits on big polluters, are all a waste of money, effort, and will not reduce Global emissions by one iota. The reason is that while Australia’s emissions of Co2 are approximately 1.3% of the World’s emissions at the same time China emits 30% of the World’s emissions and is still growing. Any reduction in Australia’s emissions will be quickly replaced by China’s emissions.
5. The SSPH is totally reliant on Climate Change subsidies and mandated energy retailer policies, without which it would never be built. Or if the subsidies, etc are removed this SSPH will be abandoned. Further if the SSPH cannot afford the cost of building the HV Transmission necessary to connect to the Grid. It is ridiculous for electricity consumers and taxpayers to have to pay for the connecting HV Transmission Lines.
6. Importantly this SSPH has not made adequate provision for the outbreak of a wildfire from the Solar Farm. Firebreaks are grossly inadequate and fixed water tanks are next to useless. In Victoria CFA fire fighters are refusing to enter Renewable Factories. The risk to surrounding rural residents is frightening.
5. As well the SSPH has made no financial provision for the dismantling and restoration of the site. Or the cost of the disposal of the toxic, batteries and associated toxic junk.
This is why the Stratford Solar and Pumped Hydro is not a net contributor to the electricity generation system or a viable economic proposition and should never be built.

This foolish plan has prohibitive National Security Risks.
Applicant Gloucester Coal Ltd is Yancoal.
Yancoal's major shareholder is Yankuang Energy Group Company Limited (62.26%) in the People's Republic of China
Yancoal Australia Ltd - ultimate parent and controlling entity is Shandong Energy Group Company Limited incorporated in China

Is this company subject to the CCP’s National Intelligence Law?

There are no secure measures currently in place to prevent malicious actors from using Solar Inverters to disrupt the Solar Electricity Grid.
https://www.senatorpaterson.com.au/news/chinas-spy-threat-to-energy-supplies


Communist China is setting us up for Solar Panel-Based Disaster: https://x.com/JunkScience/status/1824460766918926744

Beautifully Hackable - Irina Slav on Energy - 12/8/24
https://irinaslav.substack.com/p/beautifully-hackable?utm_campaign=email-post&utm_source=substack

Relying on our most hostile enemy and unreliable energy solutions raises serious concerns about our national security and sovereignty.
We need to invest in homegrown, secure energy solutions that enhance our independence rather than relying on precarious and untested foreign alternatives that will compromise our safety.

An active Coal Mine is far more beneficial than yet another Snowy 2 like debacle!

*ECOCIDAL Industrialised Solar is NOT FOR THE GREATER GOOD.

Leaching Via Weak Spots in Solar Panels 
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348883160_Leaching_via_Weak_Spots_in_Photovoltaic_Modules
“Our long-term experiments clearly demonstrate that it is possible to leach out all, or at least a large amount, of the (toxic) elements from the photovoltaic modules. It is therefore not sufficient to carry out experiments just over 24 h and to conclude on the stability and environmental impact of photovoltaic modules.”

Solar Realities - Physicist John Droz jr
https://election-integrity.info/Energy/Solar_Energy_Concerns.pdf 
We know that these are some of the toxic (some carcinogenic) chemicals that have been identified as likely being in solar panels (click on the links to get an idea of what some of the adverse health consequences are):
Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAs) (also see here and here) Perfluorooctane sulphonate (PFOS)
Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE)
Fluorinated Ethylene (FEP)
Cadmium Telluride
Copper Indium Selenide Cadmium Gallium diselenide Copper Indium Gallium diselenide Silicon Tetrachloride Hexafluoroethane
Polyvinyl Fluoride
Also, here is a basic explanation of the silicon manufacturing part of solar panels. The following are some additional toxic chemicals that have been identified as possibly being involved in the fabrication of solar panels, which might end up in the finished product:
Hydrogen chloride 
Silicon tetrachloride 
Hydrochloric acid 
Sulfuric acid
Nitric acid
Sulfuric acid
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Formaldehyde
Arsine gas 
Trichlorosilane gas 
Silane gas
Sulfur dioxide
Sulfur hexafluoride 
Sodium hydroxide 
Potassium hydroxide 
Lead

Contamination from Industrialised Solar’s Galvanised Steel Supports
 https://www.facebook.com/share/p/srbXaCbKgVXocgsm/?mibextid=xfxF2i 
 James Falcsik White County Indiana Residents Against Solar
21 h  

Unmasking the Toxic Truth - The Solar Panel Waste Story 
https://youtu.be/_Ck2dHflJ3s?si=0WS5CYhuCb6hNvP0

*Where is the Factual Assessment of the Increased🔥FIRE Risks of Industrialised Solar - including evidence from the local Volunteer Fire Fighters, all landowners in the area, Rural Fire Fighting Pilots & Medical Experts?

Solar Inverter "Burst into Flames:" Fire Injures Worker at South Australia Solar Farm | RenewEconomy - 10th Jan 2024
https://reneweconomy.com.au/inverter-burst-into-flames-investigations-underway-into-fire-at-south-australia-solar-farm/

*The Developer needs to Guarantee to Ensure Clean Drinking Water & No Environmental Contamination as “We have a human right to clean drinking water and an environment free of toxic load,” Dr Stops said. “Dr Orellana reminded us that Australia has ratified the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) in 2004

*The Full Life-Cycle Embedded Energy & all Emissions is required to be factually documented - from mining materials, processing, manufacturing, transportation, road works, construction, operation, recycling & waste disposal including all components used for all parts of the plan -  the PHES, Solar EG Works, Grid Connection & Ancillary Infrastructure, etc.

*Accurately Document the Most Potent Greenhouse Gas of all - SF6 Emissions from the full life-cycle of Industrialised Solar, Switch Gear, Circuit Breakers, etc.
Climate change: Electrical industry's 'dirty secret' boosts warming - BBC News
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49567197

*Upfront Decommissioning/Remediation Bond is required to cover full costs (updated in real time) of independently calculated amount with full explanation & identification of where it will be securely held.
Engineer certified, full explanation of all practical actions required to guarantee immediate clean-up after Fires, Storm/Hail Damage, Degradation, etc. & return of the Solar site to its uncontaminated, inherent, food producing capability, including identifying immediately present supplies of substances required to coat broken panels prior to removal, ready access to recycling & toxic waste capability & capacity apart from local Council.

*Transparently confirm the plan to Indemnify Neighbours - due to inability of neighbours to acquire adequate Public Liability Insurance because of Hazardous ‘Renewable’ Industry.

*Adherence  to Commonwealth Modern Slavery Act so NO Components - including Solar Panels are sourced from cruelly tortured Slave Labour Supply Chains.

*How does this plan adhere to the Paris Agreement when taking over farmland to build facilities to produce intermittent energy is a violation of Article 2, Section 1(b) of the Paris Agreement (2015).
Article 2 1(b) of the 2015 Paris Agreement states:
“This Agreement... aims to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change, in the context of sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty, including by:
“(b) Increasing the ability to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change and foster climate resilience and low greenhouse gas emissions development, in a manner that does not threaten food production”; See: https://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/convention/application/pdf/ english_paris_agreement.pdf .

*Livestock Production Assurance Program Clarification is required for grazing Stock on Solar sites:-

The particular question is 2.8 of the "Food Safety on Your Property" section. 

*”Do livestock have access to leaking electrical transformers, capacitors, hydraulic equipment, solar panels, wind turbines, coal seam gas structures or coal mine wastes?"*

- Yes
- No
- I am now aware and making plans to restrict access

https://www.facebook.com/groups/2147446775628698/posts/2222816628091712/ https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2222816628091712&id=2147446775628698

*Factually outline the Engineering Facts of how this plan meets all the Objectives Equally - of the National Electricity Law.
AEMO, and everyone in 'authority', wrongly place primacy on the emissions target rather than the other requirements of the NEL - price, quality, safety, reliability & security, when ALL OBJECTIVES ARE EQUAL.

As we have clearly seen proven at Broken Hill recently “Wind and Solar are worse than useless in a crisis like this, because it’s detrimental to having a consistent power supply,” Mayor Tom Kennedy said. 
“I’d hate to see what happens in the capital cities in a similar crisis.”
https://joannenova.com.au/2024/10/650m-in-renewable-energy-didnt-save-broken-hill-from-days-of-blackouts-after-a-storm-islanded-it/

*Independent, expert clarification of the average Capacity Factor of Industrialised Solar & capability of the PHES is needed in order to satisfy the Developer’s claim of supplying reliable energy to power the designated number of households stated.

*Where is the accurate Independent Analysis & Truthful Comparison of all Sources of Power for Reliability, Security, Affordability, Emissions, Toxic Waste Reduction & Minimal Environmental Footprint?

Nuclear VS Renewables: What Will It Cost? | Zoe Hiltonhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mw_AX9WaJ08

Inclusion is required of the Proponent’s & Consultant’s Commitment to Integrity & Ethical Behaviour & their Knowledge of the Legal Consequences for any lies or deceit - eg. “confection ….. made up evidence - so lacking in integrity that no weight can be placed on it” which appears to be the basis of all RenewaBULL Approvals.

Please find attached my detailed objection submission.

The plan for delivery of Large Scale Renewables across the State has not been fairly or transparently laid out for the people of NSW. Individual project assessment of hundreds of SSD projects and many SSI projects is not fair or just for the people of NSW to adequately understand what the end scale of Energy Generation Infrastructure will look like. Nor is the ultimate dependency on new Natural Gas power stations for firming being clearly portrayed to the public either. I object to the SSI status of this project and I object to SCM land pledged to be rehabilitated after completion of Coal Mining to be further subject to industrial development of any kind. Will the land across NSW previously used for coal mining all just be re-purposed for other industrial energy projects? Will this set a precedent? Or... will Coal mining mostly continue and Australia just export to other countries who are happy to utilise modern coal-fired power stations for their own safe and affordable base-load energy generation? How environmentally friendly is this transition - when nearly every project requires additional destruction of native vegetation - for access roads, solar panel installation, dam construction or turbine bases?

I Object to this plan because:-
* It is destructive to native flora and fauna;
* Construction will leave a legacy of land destruction that is unlikely to be rectified by the builder;
* It is an abomination on the natural landscape.
* It is part of a system that costs billions, does not work reliably and attempts to solve a problem that does not exist, in other words useless and irresponsible use of public funds;
* All such infrastructures should be built at developer’s expense, NOT on public funds.
We are told wind and solar are the cheapest, well prove it, remove all subsidises do not build this system on public funds;
* The TOTAL cost has not been verified by independent experts, (refer to cost overruns of most projects in NSW);
* There is NO verified scientific basis for reduction of CO2 in the atmosphere so this project is a total waste of public money, along with all other such projects.  There is in fact reliable verifiable scientific proof that CO2 is beneficial to plant life and by extension to human life on earth.

We Object to this Environmentally Destructive Plan that has no Public Benefit Assurance.
Power plans must prioritise efficient, affordable, reliable power for the people that works - proving the cost benefits & that our National Security is assured with our own independent, Australian energy resources.

Please see attached formal submission from Advanced Gloucester Inc. in objecting to the project as currently proposed.

I Vehemently Oppose PHES and Solar Farms Outright Outright.
Past and Current PMs and State Premiers Are Responsible for Sale of Australia. How Dare You. How Dare You. How Dare You.
Cease Now, gov.au - all. All. Every one of you as gov.au. Look what you've Done to Australia. Shame On You All. Add Ex PM. Him. Who will be Responsible hey. Yes. Will.
Yancoal Hey Hey Hey. China Get Out of My Nation Now. You Don’t understand it At All. Nor do Our gov.au, about to Sell us Again.
Do you come from Australia, YanCoal ?
No.
Get Off Australia, China.
Stop Trade Now with this Country please gov.au.
Trade Cease Now and Do So, with China, a nation of slavery and known to be by the Australian Government complicit in slavery manufacture, using Australian Coal, Mind You.
Do you know what is manufactured in China ?

https://www.afr.com/companies/energy/chinese-group-mulls-bid-for-australia-s-biggest-listed-coal-miner-20220526-p5aou7

The Chinese majority owner of Yancoal – Australia’s largest listed coal miner – is considering a $1.8 billion bid to acquire the remaining stake in the company, a deal that would be a litmus test of Labor’s willingness to repair ties with Beijing.

Hmmm. Forget about Aussies hey. What have You Done to us, gov.au. The Demand is a Completely New Government Immediately Now. Has to be One Nation and no other. Absolutely. Or Advance. Getting heard hey.

 https://www.marketindex.com.au/news/yancoal-cements-its-position-as-the-asx-200s-highest-paying-dividend-stock

"Yancoal reported solid coal production figures for the December quarter and hit its full-year production guidance
The company added $477 million cash over the quarter, bringing its cash balance to $1.4 billion
Investors are piling into Yancoal on Friday, with the stock up 8.7% at 11:00 am AEDT
Yancoal produced 18.1 million tones of coal in the December quarter, up 4% quarter-on-quarter and marks the fourth consecutive quarter of higher output......At the start of 2023, Yancoal aimed to increase its production output in each successive quarter. We met this goal and delivered 33.4 million tonnes, the mid-range of the 31-36 million tonne 2023 guidance for attributable saleable production," the company said in a statement."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2023-11-06/chinese-mining-investment-australia/103047580

A major shareholder in Stratford Pumped Hydro and Solar is a Chinese state-owned company.
OK. Hey You gov.au, yeah You, gov.au, Hey. Net Zero is A Scam and Is. Need a Royal Commission Now Immediately Now into Net Zero, pumped Hydro in Australia, and and and the Emissions Stories as Media Stories.
Get Off Our Nation now China.
And you people in gov.au will be fully responsible, will.
How Dare you deal with China, a Threat to the Pacific ? Hmmm. One day Australian Government and All State Governments Will Be Held Responsible.
"The SREH could beneficially use part of the Stratford Mine site to generate more renewable energy for NSW via a pumped hydro scheme and potential solar facility, contributing to the state’s net zero emissions goals – with the NSW Government declaring the potential project Critical State Significant Infrastructure (CSSI) in July 2024. Additionally, the NSW Government has legislated 16 GWh of long-duration storage (LDS) by 2030 under the Electricity Infrastructure Investment Act 2020, with plans to increase the target to 28 GWh by 2034." NSW Energy Minister Penny Sharpe stated, “This is a clear signal for investors that NSW is committed to supporting more long-duration storage—and we’re in it for the long haul.”

Scam Scam Scam is this issue low emissions scam scam scam. Out Now You lot in gov.au all departments now and back to this particular year. 1901.

"As outlined in the EIS, PHES is the central element of the proposed project. The site’s natural topography, land holdings, and proximity to existing electricity transmission infrastructure and demand centres makes it an ideal location for PHES. The project represents a beneficial use of the water that is stored in the mine voids." ( Says Who Hey? Says Who?)."..The Stratford PHES system has been designed as a ‘closed system’ ( Says Who? Who? ) ..to allow the water to be reused, while keeping it on-site. ( You people are Insane. Insane. And a Threat.)
"Testing of the water stored in the Stratford East Dam and other mine voids shows similar water quality to groundwater within the local and regional aquifers. Water quality has always been a consideration in the engineering design, including the pump maintenance schedule.....The pumped hydro system is currently being designed to produce approximately 3.6 GWh of energy. This energy storage would provide 300 MW for up to 12 hours – equivalent to the daily energy consumption of between 140,000 to 180,000 households" ( Solar On ROOFTOPS ONLY Can Offer This! ) "While batteries are " ( toxic infrastructure flammable) "Therefore, this makes PHES a more feasible and cost-effective option for supporting grid-scale renewable energy systems over longer periods of time." ( You people need to be Under Investigation because because because the Lies are Obvious.)

Vital Upper Tributary Catchments Are under Threat Gloucestor area and are now and are and are.
Are. And Why ? Well, because gov.au are Ignorant and a Threat to a Dry Continent under Threat of PHES for God’s Sake they offer Dry Continent Upper Tributary Catchments they have Never Walked or even Understood, sadly.
Oh dear, Someone Save Australia from gov.au Immediately Now.
Who can ? Who ? Who ? Who ? You ? You ? Do you Know this region, please ? Prone to Fire yeah.
Do you Understand Catchments gov.au? No. So Please Get Out of a Dry Continent.

Be able to offer a Different method of Energy Generation practiced upon Coastlines Australia, Albany WA area, where Wave Energy Must be The Way to be a Way Now from Now to energise grids Australian, NB.
A new RE innovation using Wave Motion as RE - the Launch of the World's First Moored Multimode Multibody M4 Wave Energy Converter, utilising the wave
Wave Power is the Future. Consistent. Reliable. Persistent. Australia is an island. Most of the population is near the Coast. Better Option all round and Very Much Available.
Interview Director of UWA Oceans Institute Prof. Gaudin thank you very much gov.au, nsw.gov.au etcetera.

You don’t understand this Country, gov.au all departments, and that’s a Threat to All On Country NSW and Australia.
The Highest Mountain Range in the Eastern Seaboard is The Great Dividing Range and Is it SNOW covered please ? No it Isn’t.
Cease NOW Every Single Project in plan that is PHES - Unsuitable , Very Much So, for Dry Continent Australia , the Driest Continent upon Earth, and is.
I need a Different future for a Dry Continent and Do.
Wave Energy is the Way forward. Is. Is is is.

Cease Now, Immediately Now all PHES projects Now and Do so Now, and let this Land be Cared for Forever and Ever when gov.au Cease and Desist PHES in Australia, the Driest Continent upon Earth, and Without Alps under Snow All Year. Understand.
God Help Our Dear Dry Continent and Please Stop the PHES plans for a dry Continent under The Greatest Threat So Far offered by the ignorant Land managing a Dry Continent that are gov.au, nsw.gov.au, qld.gov.au, wa.gov.au, tas.gov.au, sa.gov.au, nt.gov.au, vic.gov.au, Completely Ignorant about Australia, the Driest Continent on Earth, under Threat Unlike Ever Before, do you Understand, do you Understand, do you Understand, gov.au, nsw.gov.au, qld.gov.au, wa.go.au, tas.gov.au, sa.gov.au, nt.gov.au, vic.gov.au.
Protect All On Country Dry Continent Australia from gov.au - All.
Ask for Healing of this Dry Nation named Australia in the Wrong Hands, Correct.
Anyone can work it out. What ? We are an Island, did you know.
Surrounded by Sea.
Wave Energy please. Wave Energy please. Wave. Reliable. Continual. Unceasing. Always Available. Fully available 24/7. And Not a Threat to the Nation Australia.
One day a New Government will be With 186 representatives of Mulloon Institute in the planning departments of All NSW regions.
They will be the people who Decide Our Future and They Will because Our Nation Australia is in the Wrong Hands and is at this time.
Cease Now All PHES and All Solar Farms and Batteries Immediately Now. 
Stop the Nonsense called pumped Hydro in Australia - the Driest Continent on Earth in this way.
Over the last 148 years in Australia the Catchments show us the Harm Caused by Inappropriate Land Management gov.au.
You there, in the office looking at screens day after day dsu after day and day after day without a clue what is Gloucestor Region. Don't you consult with Elders, hmm ? Mustn't.
What would they say to a PHES development upon a mine site, hm ? What ? Leave it alone. Use Coal. It's Already available. Net Zero is a Scam. Yes. Everyone knows that. Everyone. Yet you get away with it, don't you gov.au, don't you.
It's all in the Land where you want a what - a pumped Hydro development! You don't know what you're doing.
I need Minister Plibersek interviewing mob in this area near Gloucester thanks. Thank you. Yes thanks. Must be her. Female. Yes. A Female. She might hear a Sacred word but you fellas won't. Never have, have you. Ex PM never has, hey. Never heard the word. A bloke. Not Female.
OK. I do Demand a Moratorium of Immediate nature into PHES, Inappropriate for a Dry Continent which is Unlike any other Continent but not Yet Noticed by the Ignorant in gov.au, sadly.
Do you Ever notice Anything, you in there, in the office, looking at screens day after day after day.
Sadly no.
Oh dear, what Can we do ? What ?
Sack gov.au. Have to. They'll threaten us further. Yes will. And Are. Are. Not one member of gov.au understands Dry Continent Australia, therefore Australia is in a way under Threats Cumulative, Accumlating, continually Accumlating just because gov.au have No knowledge about Her, Her, She's a She you see. She. Care for Her, Dry Continent Australia

CWO REZist objects to this project. Energy retailers are already cutting feed in tariffs for rooftop solar as they have an excess of solar power during the peak hours of the day, why then do we need more industrial solar? Pumped hydro is exorbitantly expensive per kwh produced and locally environmentally destructive.

I am a permanent resident of Gloucester.

My OBJECTION is expanded upon in the attachment.

My OBJECTION to the Project is for the following reasons –

1. The Proponent has failed to adequately assess alternatives to the Project.

2. The Proponent has failed to adequately address the traffic generating potential of the Project and the Project’s potential impact on the Bucketts Way, including its intersection with the Pacific Motorway.

3. The Proponent has failed to adequately address the social impacts of the construction workforce on the local area.

4. The Proponent has failed to adequately address the long term legacy that mine voids represent in terms of the possibility of gradual decline in water quality in streams and groundwater flows.

5. There is inadequate detail on the use of land where the proposed solar panels are proposed to either enhance biodiversity or undertake agricultural activities, including cropping and grazing.

I attach a petition signed by 52 people requesting a delay for the response for submissions for the Stratford pumped hydro project and for more community information forums and discussion

Stratford Renewable Energy Hub – Environmental Impact Statement.  SSI 73368213
Also known as Stratford Pumped Hydro and Solar

OBJECTION to Pumped Hydro part of the project
APPROVAL of the Solar Farm part of the project

Yancoal have proposed to use the void created by Stratford Mine as part of a pumped hydro project. This project involves creating an upper dam in a section of dry rain forest, home to, more than twenty threatened species, including the seriously and irreversibly impacted scrub turpentine, sooty owl and stuttering frog. It is not possible to recreate their home elsewhere however much money is raised in credits. The project is worded as a sustainable method of creating electricity, but in this time of climate change the government must consider carefully the loss of any area of rainforest, any endangered animals. There are better, creative uses of this land than yet more destruction of our precious carbon absorbing forest.

Every year batteries become more efficient and their price comes down, a solar farm supported by batteries on land which can include grazing could be an economical success, a model that Yancoal and the government could be proud of. There would be opportunities to develop a tourist education picnic reserve just off Bucketts Way, promoting understanding of both the dry rainforest area and its endangered species and a successful sustainable development of electricity production.
Such a project could be a positive benefit to the little village of Stratford who have suffered from years of mining at both the Stratford and Duralie mines.

Pippa Robinson Community Artist, Member of Gloucester Environment Group

The Gloucester Knitting Nannas Against Gas and Greed wish to lodge an objection to the Pumped Hydro aspect of the Stratford Pumped Hydro and Solar Project, SS1 73368213. As a group committed to preserving the environment for future generations, we have many concerns and reservations regarding this.

Environmental Issues :
• Our main concern is with the construction of the new upper reservoir, which will involve the loss of 145 hectares of native forest, and impact some 20 threatened species (both flora and fauna), including 5 that are listed as "endangered", 1 "critically endangered", and 3 "seriously and irreversibly impacted" (scrub turpentine, sooty owl and the stuttering frog). When looking at credits in the list of "Credit Species Requirements" the total is alarmingly high for such a small area, and we believe renders this area unsuitable. We do not believe that their suggestions for mitigation are acceptable or adequate.

• We are also concerned about the use of contaminated water from the existing voids. We are in a climate emergency, and can expect unprecedented rain events, which could easily result in polluted water entering local waterways.

Solar vs Pumped Hydro
It appears that Stratford Coal/Yancoal have dismissed the possibility of using solar with batteries as storage, but it is our understanding that battery technology has greatly improved since their initial study, and would now be a suitable alternative to pumped hydro, and have much less impact on the area. The Hunter Regional Plan 2041 recommended that both Stratford and Duralie mines be used for solar farms after mining ends. If South Australia can do, why can't Yancoal?

The use of pumped hydro would mean that they would not have to rehabilitate the existing voids for another 50 years, and we cannot help but wonder if this had some bearing on their decision to go with pumped hydro rather than solar.

Aborginal Heritage
We do not believe that the Aboriginal Heritage of the location has been sufficiently investigated.

Traffic
The Bucketts Way is the only access route from the Pacific Highway to Gloucester. It is also used as a Diversion route in the event of the Pacific Highway being closed due to an emergency between the north and south intersections of The Bucketts Way and the Pacific Highway. It is already under stress, and the addition of some 60 heavy vehicle movements per day on the Bucketts Way during the construction phase of the project (anticipated to last 4 years) is of concern, particularly when the cumulative effect of this with other proposed quarry sites is taken into consideration. Parts of the Bucketts Way have recently been upgraded, but will not withstand constant use by heavy vehicles, and their impact on the junction with the Pacific Highway raises further concerns.

Community Consultation
We do not believe the local community has been given sufficient opportunity or enough time to review the 200+ page EIS; the whole process has been too rushed to permit an informed response. Stratford Coal refer to a survey with 38 responses, which we feel hardly gives a representative view, given that the combined population of Gloucester and Stratford townships is around 2,500, and the project is likely to impact on all residents, especially during the construction period.

Summary
We would ask that you seriously question the use of pumped hydro for this project.

I, Angela Bennett, wish to lodge an objection to the Pumped Hydro aspect of the Stratford Pumped Hydro and Solar Project, SS1 73368213.

Environmental Issues
The construction of the new upper reservoir will involve the loss of 145 hectares of native forest, and impact some 20 threatened species (both flora and fauna), including 5 that are listed as "endangered", 1 "critically endangered", and 3 "seriously and irreversibly impacted" (scrub turpentine, sooty owl and the stuttering frog). This is not an acceptable impact, and I am of the opinion that their proposals for mitigation are inadequate and unacceptable.

The use of polluted water from the existing voids is a major problem on 2 counts :

- In the current climate emergency, extreme rain events are to be expected, and could result in contaminated water entering local waterways.

- It is an acknowledged fact that wells used in fracking will all fail over time. It is therefore seems inevitable that the cement tunnels proposed for this project will also fail.

Pumped Hydro or Solar
In the Hunter Regional Plan 2041 it is was recommended that once mining ceased, solar farms be established on both the Stratford and Duralie mine sites. Yancoal are keen to use pumped hydro rather than solar, and say that battery storage will not last as long. However I believe there have been vast improvements in batteries since they initially reviewed this, and I would suggest that solar is the way to go. I wonder if the fact that Yancoal would not be required to rehabilitate the exisiting voids if pumped hydro is used was a contributory factor to this decision.

Benefits to the Community
According to Yancoal is will take 4 years to build the pumped hydro facility, and employ some 300 people. Apparently it is anticipated that only 10% are expected to come from the MidCoast area, i.e. locally. The influx of workers from outside the area is likely to be detrimental on 2 counts; if they are driving to shifts it will involve additional traffic on the Bucketts Way; or if they choose to rent locally it's likely to impact the cost of already inflated rental prices, which are also few and far between, and make it more difficult for local people to find accommodation.

To be honest I cannot see any benefits.

Traffic
During the anticipated 4 year building period, 60 addtional heavy vehicle movements a day are likely to impact the Bucketts Way, which is the only access route between the Pacific Highway and Gloucester. The road surface was not designed for heavy vehicle traffic and is unlikely to withstand these additional movements, combined with those from several new quarries that are proposed along the route. There is also the likelihood of more accidents occurring due to the increased traffic, with some of it possibly slow moving.

Community Consultation
Can only be described as minimal. Few residents are aware of the proposal, and the time frame from the publication of the EIS to the closure of submissions is far too short. I would like to ask that it be extended to allow the community to be made more aware of the project, and able to make informed submissions.

Aboriginal History
I believe a more detailed study of Aboriginal history and heritage sites is required.

Summary
I believe many in the community would be in favour of a wholly solar-based project, but would have the same reservations I do regarding pumped hydro.

I object to the scale of the project mostly in regard to the solar panel distribution over existing grazing land and native forest zones.
The loss of biodiversity from the bushland and the loss of potential grazing land, far outweighs the gain for solar energy.
The Hydro in itself seems on face value to be opportunistic in its ability to utilise disturb areas. This is of lesser concern.
Putting all your eggs in one basket is not logical and obviously a money spinner for Yancoal :)
I think we all know that community based 'satellite' solar systems integrated in to existing localised grid stations & sub-stations plus supported by the Government would mean less reliance on large scale, large expenditure ... large failure systems!
Please reject the Solar component of this project or at the very least, only take up the land that was physically mined & NONE of the grazing or bush land.

STRATFORD PUMPED HYDRO AND SOLAR PROJECT SSI 73368213

I have lived at Wootton for over 38 years.
I have strong ties to the Gloucester township and the general locality , as I was a Councillor on Great Lakes Council from 1991 to 2016.

I am a well known advocate for the protection of the MidCoast’s natural environment.
I have notionally known about this Project for some time, and concerned that residents have been provided with so little background information regarding both the measures in place for the rehabilitation of the Stratford Mining site and how the rehabilitation commitments will be achieved with the proposed re-use of the site for Pumped Hydro. The significant incursion on vegetated lands (owned by Yancoal) that surround the mining site is of great concern.

This is in an important area of habitat connectivity for the region. Such in tact vegetation acts as a carbon sink and protects our waterways.

The proposal has identified a total of 28 threatened species, 26 fauna and two flora species, while not endangered or threatened, there are countless other species that will also be impacted.

The loss of over 145 hectares of important vegetation required for the upper reservoir will be permanent and have significant impact on a number of species listed under the BC Act and Threatened Ecological Communities listed under the EPBC Act

The Social Impact Assessment for the Project is not reflective of the community’s concern about the project. It focusses on the solar farm aspect of the project rather than the Pumped Hydro component. Anecdotedly, a friend of mine attended the initial Yancoal community presentation at the old Gloucester Council Chambers. She reported that there were more Yancoal staff than community representatives and that she had suggested that because that often happened for Council meetings at that venue, perhaps Yancoal could set up a pop up shop in the main street so people could drop in and have a face to face meeting to ask questions. She said the staff were most responsive to the idea – but it didn’t eventuate.
Many people support the idea of renewable projects – but not at the extreme incursion onto the surrounding highly biodiverse, landscape. What alternatives have been transparently considered that show Pumped Hydro is the only solution for the site?

Our landscape is culturally important to our First Nations community. The mining operation had a large impact on Aboriginal Heritage, and as a matter of course the pumped hydro component of this project will further those impacts.
We face a climate catastrophe that is exacerbated by continued land clearing and habitat loss. The Stratford Mining Project had significant impacts on the then existing environment, including threatened species and changes to hydrological systems, and now Yancoal propose to expand those impacts. We have to call a halt to developments that perpetuate environmental degradation.
There is an almost incomprehensible species credit requirement resulting from the pumped hydro’s impact on the environment. There is no offset plan or lands that can compensate for the environmental loss the project will cause.

There are other cumulative impacts from the project that have not been fully examined, including traffic impacts and pollution impacts from the contaminated mine voids in the mining site.

I object to the Stratford proposal.
We can do better when it comes to renewable energy projects.
Yours faithfully,
Linda Gill.

As a long-term resident and owner of a property close to the project area, I would broadly support the SREH, subject to a strengthening of measures to reduce or compensate for impacts arising from the siting of the upper reservoir. Please refer to attached document.

See attachment

Submission in attachment

The environmental degradation caused by these Fake Green, Environmentally destructive energy depriving projects is not just alarming, it is unacceptable.
We must ensure that our energy policies are designed to protect our natural resources and ecosystems, rather than sacrificing them for greedy developers & vested interests who ultimately do extensive harm & NO good.