Wallarah 2 Coal Mine

I live at Wyong Creek and am concerned about the future of the Wyong area and the proposed Wallarah 2 coal mine.

I object to the Amended Development Application for the Wallarah 2 coal mine. The amended application does not reduce the overall impacts of the mine proposal, which far exceed any benefits it would bring to NSW.

The proposed mine:

Poses a serious risk to Wyong's drinking water supply. It will undermine a major tributary and the void is modelled to soak up 2.5 million litres of water per day for at least 500 years - water diverted from creek and groundwater systems. For these reasons, the mine is opposed by the Central Coast Water Corporation.

Is opposed by Darkinjung traditional owners, who are disgusted with the arrogance the mine proponent has shown them. Rather than seek to make amends with the Darkinjung land council, the company has sought to cut them out of the process.

Is opposed by the directly affected communities of the Dooralong Valley, Blue Haven, and Wyee areas, whose health and livelihoods are threatened by the project. It is unfair and undemocratic to ask local residents to bear the impacts of a project that will provide no overall public benefit.

Is of highly dubious commercial viability. The ultimate owners of the project, the Korean Government, recently announced a strategic restructure for their resources companies, including Kores, away from thermal coal. In fact, the thermal coal industry is in the throes of terminal decline - many analysts expect the market will never recover, in the face of accelerating global climate change and the rapid development of renewable energy. The "economic assessment" put forward by the mine proponents is completely untrustworthy, and there is no reason to expect the mine would provide the long term financial benefits to NSW - in the form of jobs and royalties - that are promised.

For years the community has made it clear we do not want this mine in our area. Our "Water not Coal" signs can still be seen in the region.

The proponent KORES (owned by the Korean government and Japanese mining companies), have been donating towards community groups such as: Tuggerah Lakes Branch NSWJA Inc, Wyong District Museum / Historical Society, among others http://www.wallarah.com.au

I wish to inform KORES that there are those of us on the Central Coast that cannot be bought. No amount of money is compensation for the 28 years the project will last.

The extraction of up to 5 Million tonnes per annum of export quality thermal coal via longwall mining methods is unacceptable for Australia and the Central Coast.

Darkinjung Local Aboriginal Land Council owns the land planned for vital rail access to transport coal from the mine to Newcastle. They are in opposition to the mine. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/b-wallarah-coal-plan-could-be-declared-invalid-over-darkinjung-aboriginal-land-ownership-row/story-e6frg6n6-1226864029852

In the coming years Wyong Shire will be generating millions of dollars in tourism revenue from one of the biggest tourism projects ever seen in NSW. In November 2012, Council formally approved the sale of 15.7 hectares of land at Warnervale to the Australian Chinese

Theme Park Pty Ltd (ACTP) for $10 million, for the purpose of constructing a $500 million Theme Park. People from all over Australia and the world will be visiting us, how embarrassing for the Central Coast to have a coalmine 10 minutes drive from this Theme Park.

The exhibition material clearly shows that some objectors either have not read the exhibition material or are intentionally misstating things to cause alarm within the community.

The assessment of this Project's Development Application should be allowed to run its course without interference and undergo appropriate and rigorous scrutiny. If then approved the Project will bring investment to Australia that otherwise would not occur, additional revenue to the State of NSW and significant benefits to an area in need of jobs and opportunity.

I object to the Amended Development Application for the Wallarah 2 coal mine.

Not only does this mine pose a risk to the drinking water for the residents in the area, it also goes against the wishes of the area's traditional land owners. It is disgusting to see that a corporation with only its own interests in mind thinks that it is acceptable to propose such a mine after it has already been denied for the same reasons that are again being put forward.

I believe this project offers wide ranging economic benefits to the local community and give it my whole hearted support

This mine has been proven to be wrong from day 1
This latest modification of moving the coal loader closer to
Blue Haven shows the contempt Wallarah 2 has for the residents
of the Central Coast ; coal dust kills!
If this latest application is approved it will be undeniable proof
of corruption in the mining approval process in NSW

I am in full support of this project!
It is only a good thing for the Central Coast offering a lot of long term jobs for locals. I know I would appreciate not having to commute to the valley everyday and being able to work closer to home and spend more valuable time with my family.
There is very low noise and dust with underground mining and blue haven would have nothing to worry about.
There are only positives for this to be approved!
I can't wait to work here :-) and also my son one day dow the track there is a lot of potential to build a future for a lot of people.

I object to the Amended Development Application for the Wallarah 2 coal mine. The amended application does not reduce the overall impacts of the mine proposal, which far exceed any benefits it would bring to NSW.

The proposed mine:

Poses a serious risk to Wyong's drinking water supply. It will undermine a major tributary and the void is modelled to soak up 2.5 million litres of water per day for at least 500 years - water diverted from creek and groundwater systems. For these reasons, the mine is opposed by the Central Coast Water Corporation.

Is opposed by Darkinjung traditional owners, who are disgusted with the arrogance the mine proponent has shown them. Rather than seek to make amends with the Darkinjung land council, the company has sought to cut them out of the process.

Is opposed by the directly affected communities of the Dooralong Valley, Blue Haven, and Wyee areas, whose health and livelihoods are threatened by the project. It is unfair and undemocratic to ask local residents to bear the impacts of a project that will provide no overall public benefit.

Is of highly dubious commercial viability. The ultimate owners of the project, the Korean Government, recently announced a strategic restructure for their resources companies, including Kores, away from thermal coal. In fact, the thermal coal industry is in the throes of terminal decline - many analysts expect the market will never recover, in the face of accelerating global climate change and the rapid development of renewable energy. The "economic assessment" put forward by the mine proponents is completely untrustworthy, and there is no reason to expect the mine would provide the long term financial benefits to NSW - in the form of jobs and royalties - that are promised.

I object to the Amended Development Application for the Wallarah 2 coal mine. The amended application does not reduce the overall impacts of the mine proposal, which far exceed any benefits it would bring to NSW.

The proposed mine:

Poses a serious risk to Wyong's drinking water supply. It will undermine a major tributary and the void is modelled to soak up 2.5 million litres of water per day for at least 500 years - water diverted from creek and groundwater systems. For these reasons, the mine is opposed by the Central Coast Water Corporation.

Is opposed by Darkinjung traditional owners, who are disgusted with the arrogance the mine proponent has shown them. Rather than seek to make amends with the Darkinjung land council, the company has sought to cut them out of the process.

Is opposed by the directly affected communities of the Dooralong Valley, Blue Haven, and Wyee areas, whose health and livelihoods are threatened by the project. It is unfair and undemocratic to ask local residents to bear the impacts of a project that will provide no overall public benefit.

Is of highly dubious commercial viability. The ultimate owners of the project, the Korean Government, recently announced a strategic restructure for their resources companies, including Kores, away from thermal coal. In fact, the thermal coal industry is in the throes of terminal decline - many analysts expect the market will never recover, in the face of accelerating global climate change and the rapid development of renewable energy. The "economic assessment" put forward by the mine proponents is completely untrustworthy, and there is no reason to expect the mine would provide the long term financial benefits to NSW - in the form of jobs and royalties - that are promised.

I strongly object

I object to the Amended Development Application for the Wallarah 2 coal mine. The amended application does not reduce the overall impacts of the mine proposal, which far exceed any benefits it would bring to NSW.

The proposed mine goes against all movements toward a sustainable, fairer future for all, placing the interests of the wealthy and powerful above the needs of the vulnerable and marginalised. It is interesting to note how the latter will be those who feel the effects of mining, climate change, and injustice first and hardest.

The proposed mine:

- Poses a serious risk to Wyong's drinking water supply. It will undermine a major tributary and the void is modelled to soak up 2.5 million litres of water per day for at least 500 years - water diverted from creek and groundwater systems. For these reasons, the mine is opposed by the Central Coast Water Corporation.

- Is opposed by Darkinjung traditional owners, who are disgusted with the arrogance the mine proponent has shown them. Rather than seek to make amends with the Darkinjung land council, the company has sought to cut them out of the process. This is abhorrent and disgusting, and only further perpetuates the atrocities that White Australia has conducted against its Indigenous history, present, and future.

- Is opposed by the directly affected communities of the Dooralong Valley, Blue Haven, and Wyee areas, whose health and livelihoods are threatened by the project. It is unfair and undemocratic to ask local residents to bear the impacts of a project that will provide no overall public benefit.

- Is of highly dubious commercial viability. The ultimate owners of the project, the Korean Government, recently announced a strategic restructure for their resources companies, including Kores, away from thermal coal. In fact, the thermal coal industry is in the throes of terminal decline - many analysts expect the market will never recover, in the face of accelerating global climate change and the rapid development of renewable energy. The "economic assessment" put forward by the mine proponents is completely untrustworthy, and there is no reason to expect the mine would provide the long term financial benefits to NSW - in the form of jobs and royalties - that are promised.

I object to the Amended Development Application for the Wallarah 2 coal mine. The amended application does not reduce the overall impacts of the mine proposal, which far exceed any benefits it would bring to NSW.

The proposed mine:

Poses a serious risk to Wyong's drinking water supply. It will undermine a major tributary and the void is modelled to soak up 2.5 million litres of water per day for at least 500 years - water diverted from creek and groundwater systems. For these reasons, the mine is opposed by the Central Coast Water Corporation.

Is opposed by Darkinjung traditional owners, who are disgusted with the arrogance the mine proponent has shown them. Rather than seek to make amends with the Darkinjung land council, the company has sought to cut them out of the process.

Is opposed by the directly affected communities of the Dooralong Valley, Blue Haven, and Wyee areas, whose health and livelihoods are threatened by the project. It is unfair and undemocratic to ask local residents to bear the impacts of a project that will provide no overall public benefit.

Is of highly dubious commercial viability. The ultimate owners of the project, the Korean Government, recently announced a strategic restructure for their resources companies, including Kores, away from thermal coal. In fact, the thermal coal industry is in the throes of terminal decline - many analysts expect the market will never recover, in the face of accelerating global climate change and the rapid development of renewable energy. The "economic assessment" put forward by the mine proponents is completely untrustworthy, and there is no reason to expect the mine would provide the long term financial benefits to NSW - in the form of jobs and royalties - that are promised.

I, like most people on the Central Coast wholeheartedly object to the Amended Development Application for the Wallarah 2 coal mine. Any small benefits the mine would bring are grossly exceeded by the overall impact of the proposed amendments.

The Central Coast Water Corporation is deeply concerned as are the residents about the serious risk to Wyong's drinking water supply. The mine will still undermine a major tributary with serious impact.

This project will affect surrounding communities by adding stress because of the impact on their health,livelihoods and even their property values which will plummet. It is unfair to them especially as the public will receive no overall benefit.

In a disgraceful show of disrespect the company has sought to cut the Darkinjung traditional owners out of the process. The Darkinjung people oppose the project and this highlights the arrogance of the mine proponents.

The "economic assessment " put forward by the mine proponents is deeply flawed, and it is highly unlikely that the long term financial benefits will eventuate. We are and should be seeking to move away from destructive coal and in keeping up with the rest of the world look towards renewables.

Lastly I would like to question why you would want to see profits go to Korea while the Central Coast has got so much to loose from this venture.

Lisa Adorna

Wallarah 2 Coal Project SSD 4974 Amended Development Application

I wish to voice my objection to the current ADA on exhibition, and also to the further progression of the mine proposal itself. The application clearly portrays the economic benefits and job figures for the whole project and does not confine itself to this amendment alone, and therefore cannot be considered as an independent submission.

My early years were spent on the Central Coast, and my wife and I moved back here at the time when your government gave a written "guarantee" that the Wallarah 2 mine would not be allowed to proceed and destroy this pristine environment. We now find that this guarantee appears to have been a "non-core" promise to allow the government to be re-elected. Having thus gained our votes, we now appear to have been abandoned.

The current dire financial situation of KORES and it's reported intention to withdraw from foreign developments gives a clear indication that the company is not intending to follow through with this proposal, but more likely sell it off once approved, to claw back some of it's outlay from the many years it has been promoting this flawed application.

This outcome would in no way reduce the impact on the residents, the water supply, and the environment, regardless of who then proceeds with the development.

POINTS OF OBJECTION

Emissions and the Environment

There is a world-wide shift away from the use of fossil fuels for power generation due to the identified effects on air quality, global warming and the environment in general. Australia wants to promote itself as fighting the good fight to reduce these emissions. Whether we burn this coal ourselves or condone a foreign government to burn it for us, the resulting environmental vandalism is the same.

Water Supply

"The project predicts risk of reduced availability of water for the Central Coast Water Supply" according to the PAC wherein they... " recommended there should be no net impact on potential catchment yield". The Central Coast water catchment supply in the Wyong valleys is at real risk of destruction due to massive subsidence and loss of potable water to the mine area below. KORES original submission indicated that it would be uncertain of the impact of mining above the soft bedded Awaba Tuff strata, which exists below the proposed mine. As it is, the proposal identifies around 245 homes, my own included, that will be subject to subsidence once the mine is developed. The resulting fracturing below the water table will mean loss of water for the Dooralong and Yarramalong valleys, devastating the farming properties reliant on it, but also will destroy the major catchment for the water supply for the entire Central Coast.

The recently completed Mardi to Mangrove Creek Link pipeline is the largest water infrastructure project undertaken on the Central Coast since the mid-1980s when Mangrove Creek Dam was built. This project was expected to meet the water needs of the Coast for the next 50 years, but will be wasted if the catchment is allowed to be run dry to satisfy the greed of a foreign company.

The mining process itself will also consume vast quantities of the coast's drinking water. As a waste product, it becomes hyper-saline and there is then the real risk that this will find it's way into the aquifer and contaminate the groundwater relied upon by the farmers of the Yarramalong and Jilliby/Dooralong valleys.

Land Subsidence

The Development Application identifies that parts of the Jilliby/Dooralong valley will be subject to subsidence of 1.5 metres which could have serious consequences in times of flood, when access for residents can already be cut off for days at a time. Mitigating works required by local council to alleviate this situation could add a significant financial burden on ratepayers.

The fact that the Mine Subsidence Board has accepted only about 25% of the claims made on it over the past 10 years, and that of those accepted only the housing and not farming infrastructure will be considered, gives little comfort to those of us who will suffer directly from this project.

Costs/Benefits

Page 85 of the ADA states that the royalties to the State over the proposed 28 years life of the mine is $200 million, which equates to just over $7 million per annum. With falling coal prices and Government concessional rebates this figure is inflated. The costs of repair and rehabilitation, particularly in the Jilliby Valley water catchment and Hue Hue subdivisions following subsidence, easily negates the benefits to the State and local authorities. By adding the long term cost to public health and to greater airborne diseases in the population, it seems that NSW will be worse off, in addition to subsidising KORES to remove our resources.

Employment

Pages 86 and 87 of the submission state job creation beginning with 79 through to direct and indirect job figures in year 2 of 1,111 jobs. This application states very clearly that this assessment is only looking at this Amendment and not the whole Project, yet the job figures are obviously being included for the whole project such as a larger "intersectoral linkages" job quotation during construction of 1605 direct and indirect jobs.
The replacement of the original rail spur with a conveyor system (essentially being the main thrust of this Amendment) does not create an additional 1605 jobs for the whole Project as identified above. As in the original EIS, the job prospects are not defined and again highly inflated and misleading.
The conveyor system land-locks Darkinjung Aboriginal Land Council land, downgrades value and restricts projected developments and therefore threatens hundreds of valuable jobs in construction which is totally unacceptable.

Dust, Health and Noise

Dust remains a real issue for health in the Blue Haven and Wyee areas despite partial coverage of infrastructure. There is no attempt to cover coal wagons which will travel through the southern suburbs to Newcastle affecting all those communities of southern Lake Macquarie and Newcastle as has been demonstrated in the Hunter to Port line. There has been great concern about the mapping of coal dust and the lack of authorities to control those emissions.

Pm10 emissions from the site are conservative and do not take into account the changing nature of intense wind and storm events in the recent years. Blue Haven and Wyee townships are now as close as 200 and 400 metres respectively from the new proposal, bringing even greater problems for families in the area for both constant dust and noise 24 hours per day with a huge overhead structure on the main rail line and loading hopper. There are many schools, pre-schools and establishments within 5 kilometres of the facility and they will suffer from emissions from the proposed site.

Please refer back to the submission by Dr. Peter Lewis, Area Director of Public Health for North Sydney and the Central Coast wherein he outlines greater risks to children and health sufferers in this region should this project be approved.

Noise excesses are admitted to for "residences to the north of Bushells Ridge Road at Wyee" and general noise 24 hours per day for those living in Blue Haven and Wyee areas are issue of concern.

This Amendment should be rejected and the whole project put aside due to the many areas of risk, as well as our responsibility to the environment and professed aim to reduce greenhouse emissions.

RE: WALLARAH 2 COAL PROJECT SSD 4974 AMENDED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION

I wish to object to the current ADA on exhibition and also to the further progression of the mine proposal itself. The application portrays the economic benefits and job figures clearly for the whole project and does not confine itself clearly to this Amendment alone.
PREAMBLE
The real fact that the proponent KORES is withdrawing from overseas development due to massive debt ratios, as recently expressed in the Korean press tells the community that the future job prospects, development and most importantly environmental repair, compensation and rehabilitation have little hope of being realised.
POINTS OF OBJECTION
Costs/Benefits
.Page 85 of the ADA states that the royalties to the State over the proposed and improbable 28 years life of the mine is $200 Million which equates to just over $7 million per annum. With falling coal prices and Government concessional rebates this figure is inflated. Taking into account the costs of repair and rehabilitation, particularly in the Jilliby Valley water catchment and Hue Hue subdivisions following subsidence, easily negates the benefits to the State and local authorities. By adding the long-term cost to public health and to greater airborne diseases in the population it begins to look like a costly enterprise for the public purse.
Employment
.Pages 86 and 87 state job creation beginning with 79 through to direct and indirect job figures in year 2 of 1,111 jobs. This application states very clearly that this assessment is only looking at this Amendment and not the whole Project yet the job figures are obviously being included for the whole project such as a larger "intersectoral linkages" job quotation during construction of 1605 direct and indirect jobs.
. Because the original rail spur is not being built and will be replaced by a conveyor system (essentially being the main thrust of this Amendment) does not create an additional 1605 jobs for the whole Project as configured above. As in the original EIS the job prospects are not defined and again highly inflated and misleading.
The conveyor system land locks Darkinjung ALC land, downgrades value and restricts projected developments and therefore threatens hundreds of valuable jobs in construction, which is totally unacceptable.
Dust and Health and Noise
. Dust remains a real issue for health in the Blue Haven and Wyee precincts despite partial coverage of infrastructure. There is no attempt to cover coal wagons that will travel through the southern suburbs to Newcastle affecting all those communities of southern Lake Macquarie and Newcastle as has been demonstrated in the Hunter to Port line. There has been great concern about the mapping of coal dust and the lack of authorities to control those emissions.
Pm10 emissions from the site are conservative as usual and do not take into account the changing nature of intense wind and storm events in the recent years. Blue Haven and Wyee townships are now as close as 200 and 400 metres respectively from the new proposal bringing even greater problems for families in the area for both constant dust and noise 24 h/per day with a huge overhead structure on the main rail line and loading hopper. There are many schools, pre-schools and establishments within 5 kms of the facility and they will suffer from emissions from the site.
.Please refer back to the submission by Dr.Peter Lewis, Area Director of Public Health for North Sydney and the Central Coast wherein he outlines greater risks to children and health sufferers in this region should this project be approved.
. Noise exceedances are admitted to for "residences to the north of Bushells Ridge Road at Wyee" and general noise 24 h/per day for those living in Blue Haven and Wyee areas are issue of concern.
Unresolved issue from the EIS 2014
.Massive subsidence figures represented in the proponents EIS affect 245 homes and their infrastructure,86 of which are destined to suffer a metre or more drop right up to 2.3 metres and the valley floor suffering subsidence up to 1.8 metres fall right up to 2.6 metres near the Jilliby Conservation Area provokes "inevitable uncertainty concerning subsidence predictions" as a PAC principal finding. The regular flooding of the Jilliby Valley means that this proposal condemns the area to degradation and to long periods of separation from facilities and emergency services.
.The woeful performance of the Mine Subsidence Board in refusing the vast majority of claims State-wide for subsidence year in year out does not protect residents as is claimed in the application.
."The project predicts risk of reduced availability of water for the Central Coast Water Supply" according to the PAC wherein they... " recommended there should be no net impact on potential catchment yield" .The Central Coast water catchment supply in the Wyong valleys is at real risk of destruction due to massive subsidence and loss of potable water to the mine area below.
This Amendment should be rejected and the whole project put aside due to many areas of risk.

I object to the Amended Development Application for the Wallarah 2 coal mine. The amended application does not reduce the overall impacts of the mine proposal, which far exceed any benefits it would bring to NSW.

The proposed mine:

Poses a serious risk to Wyong's drinking water supply. It will undermine a major tributary and the void is modelled to soak up 2.5 million litres of water per day for at least 500 years - water diverted from creek and groundwater systems. For these reasons, the mine is opposed by the Central Coast Water Corporation.

Is opposed by Darkinjung traditional owners, who are disgusted with the arrogance the mine proponent has shown them. Rather than seek to make amends with the Darkinjung land council, the company has sought to cut them out of the process.

Is opposed by the directly affected communities of the Dooralong Valley, Blue Haven, and Wyee areas, whose health and livelihoods are threatened by the project. It is unfair and undemocratic to ask local residents to bear the impacts of a project that will provide no overall public benefit.

Is of highly dubious commercial viability. The ultimate owners of the project, the Korean Government, recently announced a strategic restructure for their resources companies, including Kores, away from thermal coal. In fact, the thermal coal industry is in the throes of terminal decline - many analysts expect the market will never recover, in the face of accelerating global climate change and the rapid development of renewable energy. The "economic assessment" put forward by the mine proponents is completely untrustworthy, and there is no reason to expect the mine would provide the long term financial benefits to NSW - in the form of jobs and royalties - that are promised.

As a local living on the Central Coast I am very concerned about the serious risk to Wyong's drinking water supply should this mine go ahead. It will undermine a major tributary and the void is modelled to soak up 2.5 million litres of water per day for at least 500 years - water diverted from creek and groundwater systems. For these reasons, the mine is opposed by the Central Coast Water Corporation.

This mine Is opposed by Darkinjung traditional owners, who are disgusted with the arrogance the mine proponent has shown them. Rather than seek to make amends with the Darkinjung land council, the company has sought to exclude them out of the process.

This mine is opposed by the communities of the Dooralong Valley, Blue Haven, and Wyee areas, whose health and livelihoods are threatened by the project. It is unfair and undemocratic to ask local residents to bear the impacts of a project that will provide no overall public benefit.

This mine is of a highly dubious commercial viability. The ultimate owners of the project, the Korean Government, recently announced a strategic restructure for their resources companies, including Kores, away from thermal coal. In fact, the thermal coal industry is in the throes of terminal decline - many analysts expect the market will never recover, in the face of accelerating global climate change and the rapid development of renewable energy. The "economic assessment" put forward by the mine proponents is completely untrustworthy, and there is no reason to expect the mine would provide the long term financial benefits to NSW - in the form of jobs and royalties - that are promised.
My main concern is with the water catchment and the high risk of contamination that would affect our water supply and therefore put people's lives at risk.
If this were to occur should the project go ahead mining companies have a bad reputation of not rehabilitating the environment and taking responsibility for their actions.
At the very least these provisions of environmental protection should be included in the development application.
I daresay if they were this would stop them in their tracks from proceeding.

Yours Sincerely

Robert Patey-Downes




and if

I support the Wallarah 2 project. I am an environmental scientist who cares deeply about our environment and believes in sustainable energy production, and I believe that at this point the Australian economy and community is not in a position to cease or limit coal operations. Agriculture is generally far more harmful to the environment than coal mining, and it is each human on earth's responsibility to reduce their usage of heavily produced products and serviced, and over time we will reduce our dependency on coal, but we are not there yet.
This project will make a positive contribution to the Australian economy, which we need to support Australian's to make better choices for the environment in the long term.

I support the Wallarah 2 coal project.

It will not only bring more jobs to the Central Coast it will also bring more people to the coast meaning that other local business will benefit from this.

I have read through all the fact sheets and the company is doing everything they can to make the mine safe for everyone who is working within in the mine & the people who are currently living in the area.

At the end of the day coal is a product that is high in demand and is used by everyone including the people that are objecting to the project.

I strongly Object the the Wallarah 2 Coal mine.
I moved to Lake Munmorah in 2014 after the original application was stopped. Now I have just learnt that it is back on the table.
We should be moving forward alternate energy solutions rather than known high risk mining.

I support the project.

From everything i have read I can't see any reasons why the project shouldn't go ahead. It will be bring more jobs for the Central Coast & bring more business to the Central Coast. I'm a business owner myself so anything that brings business to the coast is a positive thing.