I am the grandparent of nine grandchildren. I am a retired university physicist. I have vowed to each grandchild that I will work every day of my remaining life to preserve the planet from the destruction caused by burning fossil fuels. The Science is absolutely valid and unambiguous: if humans are to survive the harm already caused and built into our future already then no more fossil fuels can be taken from the crust of the planet. I love my grandchildren, and I support the healthy lives of all children. Therefore: THIS PROJECT MUST NOT GO AHEAD.
I am making this submission from the State of Queensland where I live. My objection to this project is valid because the burning of fossil fuels anywhere on the planet effects life on the whole planet. The atmosphere is one single closed system. WE are all living with a closed system, what one company does effects the whole planet. It is valid for me to say from Brisbane, Brazil or wherever that THIS PROJECT MUST NOT GO AHEAD. OUR CHILDREN WILL MASSIVELY SUFFER. THIS IS A SCIENTIFIC CONCLUSION.

I submit the following reasons:
● This huge mine expansion will create 1.5 million tonnes of greenhouse gas pollution in the next ten years in NSW and over a 100 million tonnes in downstream emissions at a time when our state is not on track to meet its legislated 2030 or 2035 emissions reductions targets. The people of NSW are already suffering the impacts of climate change (HOTTER FIRES, MORE DAMAGING FLOODS), including in the Hunter region and adding further greenhouse pollution will do unacceptable harm to the public interest every where on the planet.

● The NSW Court of Appeal’s Denman Decision made it clear that the local impacts of climate change caused by the downstream greenhouse pollution from NSW coal have to be considered by planning authorities. As this decision is now in the High Court, acceptance of this application will cause legal and practical confusion with environmental and social consequences for the area.

● The expansion of this mine is in direct contradiction to the Government's own advice from the NSW Net Zero Commission in December of last year that “[c]ontinued extensions or expansions to coal mining in NSW are not consistent” with NSW climate law nor with the Paris Agreement temperature goals, nor with the scientific conclusions about the harm in the future for the whole planet.

● Approval would inflict harm on our people and our economy. The people of NSW are already dealing with increasing bills and escalating dangers from climate change fuelled extreme weather. This is demonstrably true - talk to people about their insurance bills.

● This expansion is not a modification. It is not “substantially the same development” as the one previously approved (DA 92/97) and calling it a “modification” avoids independent review. This project must go to the Independent Planning Commission (IPC) for proper assessment.

Your sincerely
James Butler

I am objecting to this project because of the major impact it will have on greenhouse gas emissions, and the fact it is completely inconsistent with Climate Change science and with state and commonwealth emissions reduction targets.
Page 12 of the NSW Net Zero Commission’s November 2024 Report states:
The Commission is concerned about the risks to the state's targets from increased emissions in the resources sector. There are pressures for increased emissions associated with new coal mining projects (extensions and expansions of existing mines), with a sizeable pipeline of projects that have been submitted for consideration and determination through the planning process. Any emissions increases associated with extended or expanded projects would require all other sectors to make greater emissions reductions if the state is to meet its emissions reduction targets.3 The emissions increases pose a major challenge for the state's regulatory arrangements.
NSW is under enormous pressure in other areas that will lead to increases in emissions, in particular in the area of Construction and Renovations. Sydney University has estimated Construction and Renovations drive 11.8% of Australia’s emissions. (Greenhouse Gas Consumption Atlas – Sydney University & ACF 2007). More recently Infrastructure Australia put the figure at 10% (Embodied Carbon Projections for Australian Infrastructure and Buildings https://www.infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/reports/embodied-carbon-projections-australian-infrastructure-and-buildings#:~:text=15%20July%202024-,Key%20Findings,the%20manufacture%20of%20construction%20materials.)
If NSW is to dramatically increase housing construction to overcome the housing crisis greenhouse gas emissions from this sector will increase substantially.
Transport emissions are similarly increasing. Since 2005 Australia’s population has increased by 33% but the number of vehicles on the road has increased by 56%. Sydney University estimated the contribution of Transport emissions as 10.5% in 2007. The Climateworks Centre at Monash University estimated in 2023 that the transport sector now produces 20% of Australia’s total greenhouse gas emissions. (https://climateworkscentre.org/resource/delivering-freight-decarbonisation-strategies-for-reducing-australias-transport-emissions/)
If one examines the National Greenhouse Inventory figures over the years it is quite clear Australia has made almost zero progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions since 2005. Nearly, all of Australia’s so-called reductions have come from spurious changes to Land Use. Even within this category the fiddling of the books is painfully obvious from the multiple revisions to estimated Land Use Emissions in the base year. Accounting changes have generated most of Australia’s emissions reductions! The Australia Institute has estimated Australia’s real greenhouse gas reductions without land use changes amount to 1.2%. (https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/the-government-needs-to-stop-using-dodgy-land-use-accounting-to-suggest-emissions-are-falling/)
The only way NSW and Australia will meet their greenhouse gas reduction targets is to rapidly reduce emissions from the fossil fuel industry.
In this context it is madness to contemplate new coal mines or coal mine extensions.
Please do not approve the Mount Pleasant Modification 8 proposal.

I support this project as I believe that Mt Pleasant Operation and Mach Energy contribute to the local community and economy in many ways. The employment opportunities this mine provides the local area is very important to Muswellbrook and surrounding towns, and would have negative effects on the economy if it doesn't go ahead. Mach Energy contributes a lot to the local charities and is very supportive of local sporting groups. I believe that the expansion of this mine is critical to Muswellbrook and surrounding towns economy not only with direct employees but also the local businesses that supply and contract to Mt Pleasant Operation.

Our company provides plan and equipment to mining projects, I have been working with them for over 10 years. 4. Working in the industry, I see firsthand how important operations like Mount Pleasant are for the Hunter Valley. The mine provides opportunities for local businesses and contractors and keeps many people employed. Continuing the operation will provide stability for the region during a time when other mining projects are coming to an end. Working in Finance I see firsthand the benefit ad support to local communities and families that work in these industries.

Provides Local employment @ 70%. Mount pleasant plays a significant role in financial contributions to the state and local government.
Provides opportunity to contractors suppliers and local small businesses.
Contributes to local indigenous community via the ACDF development Fund and also providing Employment .
Supports and Invest in local schools , sporting clubs and community groups.
Over 650 Million in royalty contributions since the project started from Mach Energy.

This Modification is NOT business as usual and it is NOT substantially the same as the current approval


This modification is NOT in the public interest - because:
it does not meet the Government’s ecologically sustainable development principles - particularly inter-generational equity
it does not meet the Government’s legislated Net Zero Emissions targets
It is in direct opposition to the NSW Net Zero Commission’s advice (December 2025) that “continued extensions or expansions to coal mining in NSW are not consistent” with NSW climate law.

Through my involvement in engineering work connected to the project, I have seen the importance of maintaining operational continuity at Mount Pleasant. The project is also important for the company I work for, as it supports ongoing engineering services, project delivery, and employment associated with the site.
Extending the existing consent is a practical measure that would allow operations to continue while the approval process for the new SSD remains subject to legal proceedings. Maintaining continuity provides certainty for workers, contractors, and businesses involved in supporting the operation.

I object to Mod 8 - Extension of mine life for the following reasons.:
This will produce much more CO2 emissions exacerbating global warming and this will delay transition to cleaner energy sources, locking in emissions.
Further dust and particulate matter that is harmful to humans and ecosystem health.
It will raise air pollution locally for example levels of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides.
Further contamination of nearby water bodies with heavy metals, acids, sediments.
Increased production intensifies water extraction affecting local water availability.
Acid mine drainage can persist long after mining ends with harm to aquatic life.
Expansion and prolongimining will disrupt more soil structure leading to erosion and loss of fertile land as large scale extraction destroys vegetation and topsoil.
Waste rock and tailings piles can contaminate soil and water.
This will result in more overburden and waste rock which must be managed.
Improper waste disposal can lead to environmental contamination.
Expansion will destroy habitats of many species.
Loss of forest, grasslands, or wetlands will reduce biodiversity causing fragmentation of habitats limiting animal movement and breeding.
This isolation can reduce genetic diversity and increase vulnerability.
Polluted run off harms fish, amphibians and aquatic plants.
Changes in water flow & quality affect species dependent on wetlands and streams.
Noise and light pollution from mining disturbs wildlife behaviour, feeding and reproduction.
Nocturnal animals may be particularly affected by artificial lighting.
Endangered species will suffer further decline:
such as: Koalas - land clearing and fragmentation of habitat and loss of eucalyptus forest.
Greater Gliders- Nocturnal reliant on mature forests which are often cleared.
Regent Honeyeater - critically endangered, disruption to feeding and breeding.
Green and Gold Bell Frog - depends on clean, wetland habitat, vulnerable to pollution and water disruption from mining run off and habitat alteration threaten their survival.
Broad headed Snake and Large eared Pied Bat - are threatened species found in Hunter Valley region and face habitat destruction.
Weeping Myall-Coobah Scrub, Wilga Scrub land is a critically endangered ecological community in Hunter Valley.
Greenhouse gas emissions will increase to 1.5 million tonnes over 10 years. With 100 million tonnes of downstream emissions.
NSWwill not meet its 2030/2035 emissions reduction target. There is unacceptable harm to Hunter Valley region and to climate change.
NSW Court of Appeals Denman decision made it clear that the local impacts of climate change caused by downstream GHG emissions from NSW coal have to be considered by planning authorities. This decision is before the High Court, acceptance of this proposal will cause legal and practical consequences for this area.
Expansion is a direct contradiction of government's own advice from NSW net zero commission December last year - expansion is not consistent with NSW climate law nor with the Paris agreement temperature goals.
Approval will inflict harm on people and animals and economy due to the population dealing with increasing bills and extreme weather events due to climate change.
Expansion is not a modification, it is not substantially the same as the one previously approved (DA 92/97) and calling it a modification avoids independent review.
This project must go to the Independent Planning Commission for proper assessment.
You must reject this expansion and prolonged project immediately.

Objection to Mt Pleasant Coal Mine Mod 8 (Extension of Mine Life)
Thank you for the opportunity to comment as a Hunter Valley resident directly affected by coal mining. The proposed six-year extension of the Mt Pleasant Coal Mine to 2032 by MACH Energy should not be approved.
This proposal should not be treated as a minor modification. The proposed expansion differs substantially from the previously approved project (DA 92/97). This mine application is an attempt to avoid detailed scrutiny and comprehensive environmental assessment. At a minimum, it should be assessed as a new project and referred to the Independent Planning Commission (IPC).
The NSW Court of Appeal’s Denman decision confirmed that planning authorities must consider the local impacts of climate change resulting from downstream greenhouse gas emissions from NSW coal. As this ruling is currently under appeal in the High Court, approving this extension would create legal uncertainty regarding the full environmental and social impacts that must be assessed.
The NSW Net Zero Commission has found that further coal mine extensions are incompatible with the state’s emissions reduction targets. Despite this, agencies continue to rely on outdated policies such as the Environment Protection Authority’s 2025 Guide, which excludes emissions from exported coal. International legal developments also emphasise that states must prevent significant climate harm. The approval of new fossil fuel projects whether or not they are described as modifications or extensions, contribute directly to that harm.
Scientific evidence clearly shows that every tonne of CO₂ contributes to rising global temperatures and increasing climate risks and health of the community. Every coal mining job is working towards producing those harmful tonnes of fossil CO₂ and thus cannot be seen as a community benefit. Australia’s 2025 National Climate Risk Assessment identifies growing threats such as more frequent extreme weather events and heightened bushfire risk—impacts already being experienced in the region.
Local communities and volunteer groups should not bear the burden of conducting complex and costly assessments to scrutinise mine expansions or monitor corporate compliance. Government agencies have a responsibility to ensure rigorous evaluation consistent with the Net Zero Act and international obligations. Government decision-makers need to decide who they represent - mining lobbyists or the community and consider the dire health consequences of the mining and burning of coal.
This proposal cannot be justified on the grounds of employment or community benefit. There are no significant examples of successful rehabilitation of open-cut mine land in the Hunter. The need to transition is urgent, jobs will continue in mine rehabilitation and the emergence of new industries around renewable energy considering the exceptional infrastructure, port facilities and skilled workforce available in this area.
What the Hunter Valley needs are binding mine closure plans, along with appropriate policy and investment to drive an orderly transition away from coal—not further coal mine extensions
Yours sincerely,
Colin Imrie 4 March 2026

I wish to lodge a formal objection to Mount Pleasant Modification 8.

Although I live in Western Australia, decisions about coal mining in Australia affect every Australian. Climate change does not recognise state borders, and the greenhouse emissions generated by fossil fuel projects contribute to impacts felt across the entire country. The consequences of increasing emissions, including extreme weather, environmental degradation and economic disruption, affect communities nationally, not just in the region where a project is located.

This proposal seeks to extend the life of the Mount Pleasant Coal Mine to 2032. According to the information available, this extension could result in approximately 1.5 million tonnes of local greenhouse gas emissions and more than 100 million tonnes of downstream emissions over the next decade. At a time when Australia and NSW are already struggling to meet legislated emissions reduction targets, approving additional coal expansion is inconsistent with both the public interest and responsible environmental management.

The NSW Net Zero Commission has clearly advised that continued extensions or expansions of coal mining in NSW are not consistent with NSW climate law or the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement. Approving this modification would therefore contradict the government’s own expert climate advice.

There is also ongoing legal uncertainty surrounding the NSW Court of Appeal’s Denman decision, which confirmed that the downstream climate impacts of NSW coal must be considered in planning decisions. As this decision is currently before the High Court, proceeding with approval of another expansion at the same mine risks creating legal uncertainty and undermining confidence in environmental decision making.

In addition, extending the life of coal mines carries significant economic risk. Global energy markets are rapidly shifting towards renewable energy and lower emission industries. Approving extensions to coal operations risks creating stranded assets and delaying investment in industries that will provide long term economic stability and employment opportunities for Australian communities.

Importantly, this proposal appears to go beyond the scope of a simple modification. Extending the life of a coal mine by six years and enabling significant additional emissions cannot reasonably be considered “substantially the same development”. Treating such a major change as a modification avoids the level of scrutiny that a project of this scale warrants.

For this reason, the proposal should be referred to the Independent Planning Commission for proper independent assessment.

I request that the full climate, environmental, social and economic impacts of this proposal, including downstream greenhouse gas emissions, be thoroughly assessed and transparently addressed in the final determination. These impacts must be properly considered in accordance with current legal requirements and the broader public interest.

Decisions about long lived fossil fuel infrastructure have consequences that extend well beyond the present decade. Approving further coal expansion shifts environmental and economic burdens onto younger Australians and future generations who will have to deal with worsening climate impacts.

Australia is already experiencing the effects of climate change through increased extreme weather, environmental damage and rising costs to communities. Approving further coal expansion moves us further away from responsible climate management and a stable long term future.

Given the significant climate implications and the current legal context surrounding the consideration of downstream emissions in NSW planning decisions, it is essential that the assessment process demonstrates clear and transparent reasoning regarding how these impacts have been evaluated. Failure to properly consider these factors risks undermining public confidence in the planning system and may expose the decision to further legal scrutiny.

For these reasons, I strongly object to Mount Pleasant Modification 8 and urge that this proposal be refused or, at minimum, referred to the Independent Planning Commission for full independent review.

I ask that my submission be fully considered and addressed in the Department’s assessment report.