John Edwards
Object
John Edwards
Object
South Grafton
,
New South Wales
Message
see attached PDF
Attachments
Beth Williams
Object
Beth Williams
Object
Robynne Picton
Object
Robynne Picton
Object
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
Armidale
,
New South Wales
Message
I oppose the proposed expansion of the Tarrawonga Coal Mine because of the following reasons:
1. The proposed "permanent" re-alignment of Goonbri Creek which is a 4th order stream in good to excellent condition, will turn a natural asset into a drain. The mine should halt 300m prior to Goonbri Creek and leave the creek in its current, natural and permanent location. Goonbri Creek is a major component of the groundwater recharge for the area of Barbers Lagoon and the township of Boggabri.
2. The clearing of 397 Ha of Native Vegetation including some
vegetation in the Leard State Forest. The consequence of this clearing is to increase the cumulative impact to the Leard Forest from the Boggabri Coal and Maules Creek Coal mines. This Forest is PUBLIC LAND and is being provided to a largely foreign owned company for private profit.
3. The project area will be rehabilitated by spreading a thin layer of topsoil over the overburden embankment. This is not sufficient to ensure the water holding capability can sustain White Box and other native trees which are currently found in the area.
4. The disturbance of surface water flows from the existing mine due to the overburden embankments has directed large volumes of mine water from within the project area onto the flood plain during the Nov 2011 and Feb 2012 floods. The increased project area in the Goonbri Creek Catchment due to the mine expansion will exasperate this issue.
5. The plan to leave a final void where there was native vegetation is not best practice. The void does not return the land to its pre-mining land capability and creates an evaporative pump that permanently negatively impacts on the ground water.
6. The water contained in the final void will increase in toxicity
and be a threat to native animals in the area and as shown in the recent flood event could be a major threat to the floodplain.
1. The proposed "permanent" re-alignment of Goonbri Creek which is a 4th order stream in good to excellent condition, will turn a natural asset into a drain. The mine should halt 300m prior to Goonbri Creek and leave the creek in its current, natural and permanent location. Goonbri Creek is a major component of the groundwater recharge for the area of Barbers Lagoon and the township of Boggabri.
2. The clearing of 397 Ha of Native Vegetation including some
vegetation in the Leard State Forest. The consequence of this clearing is to increase the cumulative impact to the Leard Forest from the Boggabri Coal and Maules Creek Coal mines. This Forest is PUBLIC LAND and is being provided to a largely foreign owned company for private profit.
3. The project area will be rehabilitated by spreading a thin layer of topsoil over the overburden embankment. This is not sufficient to ensure the water holding capability can sustain White Box and other native trees which are currently found in the area.
4. The disturbance of surface water flows from the existing mine due to the overburden embankments has directed large volumes of mine water from within the project area onto the flood plain during the Nov 2011 and Feb 2012 floods. The increased project area in the Goonbri Creek Catchment due to the mine expansion will exasperate this issue.
5. The plan to leave a final void where there was native vegetation is not best practice. The void does not return the land to its pre-mining land capability and creates an evaporative pump that permanently negatively impacts on the ground water.
6. The water contained in the final void will increase in toxicity
and be a threat to native animals in the area and as shown in the recent flood event could be a major threat to the floodplain.
Kate Boyd
Object
Kate Boyd
Object
Armidale
,
New South Wales
Message
I object to the proposal to expand this coal mine beyond its previously approved extent on the following grounds:
1. The mine will destroy high quality woodlands that are currently functioning as ecological communities providing habitats for a wide range of species. Too much of NSW's woodlands have already been destroyed or significantly altered so the remaining areas should be conserved. Improving management of one area cannot "offset" the destruction of an area that is currently a high quality functioning woodland. While keeping common species and communities common is important, the fact that these woodlands include an endangered ecological community and habitats of threatened species makes this proposal more unacceptable.
2. The woodlands (including their soils) also have values as a carbon store and in the regional water cycle. Areas that have been cleared also have some of these values. Digging them up, storing the bits and puting it back after mining on top of the piles of crumbled rock will result in release of some of the stored carbon and gross alteration for ever to the way the water cycle functions. The thin layer of top soil will not enable recreation of the same types of ecological communities - not in a thousand years. Some of the same plant species may be able to grow there but not all. Some animals may die out as a result of cumulative impacts or climate change and never be able to return. New communities will develop and the new landscape will have some values but they won't be equivalent to the present values.
3. Leard State Forest is public land that was set aside to be kept as a publicly owned forest. It should not be destroyed for the private benefit of mining companies and their customers nor for very short term public financial gain from royalties. It should be managed sustainably for many hundreds of years not wrecked for 20 years of profit and royalties.
4. Similarly, the soil and ecological resources of the privately owned parts of the project site should be sustainably managed and handed on to future generations in better not poorer condition. I am sceptical about the claim that some land can be restored to class 3 agricultural value. Whether or not that is possible, there is no plan to restore class 4 areas to class 4 and leaving a final void is not leaving that land in equal or better condition.
5. The final void is unacceptable. When water evaporates from its surface that will enable water from higher groundwater layers to move into it, at least inperiods when evaporation exceeds rainfall. Being connected to coal seams it is likely to have water quality that is toxic to many species.
6. The whole mine and the adjoining mines will grossly alter the regional surface and groundwater systems, with adverse impacts on other water users. The fact that contaminated water had to be released from mines in this area in recent wet weather shows that the mining companies have not planned on avaoiding pollution in all types of weather events: worse extremes are likely to occur in the next few decades due to climate change and worse still in millenia to come. The mine therefore exposes pollutants that have been trapped for millenia and should be expected to cause future pollution as well as changing ground and surface flow patterns.
7. Goonbri Creek should not be moved. there should be no mining anywhere near it. There is too much risk that the engineers will make a mistake, e.g. not enough freeboard, or that future people will not understand the importance of leaving the proposed wall in tact, then the creek could be deverted into the void in some future big flood event (like or bigger than that which wiped out Grantham in Qld).
8. The expanded mine is to extract both steaming and coking coals. Australian and world economies should be moving rapidly to reduce their dependence on and use of steaming coal by using less energy and shifting to renewable sources in order to minimise risks of serious climate change. Our economies should also be reducing their dependence on extracting and using raw materials, particularly non-renewable ones like coking coal, to reduce both the impact of mining and carbon emissions (e.g. from mining/transport equipment burning oil and in steel making). We should be making better use of the steel, aluminium and other materials we have already produced. Yes, I do use non-renewable resources because I live in and try to help improve our society: a society which needs to reorganise itself partly by planning to significantly shift away from inefficient use of non-renewables. Planning in NSW should be aiming to achieve this, not to enable ongoing dependence on fossil fuels, wasting of non-renewable resources, and destruction of functioning ecosystems in the vane hope that a little effort will be sufficient to replace them. If no new coal projects were approved the markets would get a strong signal to shift economic resources into efficiency, recycling and renewable.
Thank you for considering these issues.
1. The mine will destroy high quality woodlands that are currently functioning as ecological communities providing habitats for a wide range of species. Too much of NSW's woodlands have already been destroyed or significantly altered so the remaining areas should be conserved. Improving management of one area cannot "offset" the destruction of an area that is currently a high quality functioning woodland. While keeping common species and communities common is important, the fact that these woodlands include an endangered ecological community and habitats of threatened species makes this proposal more unacceptable.
2. The woodlands (including their soils) also have values as a carbon store and in the regional water cycle. Areas that have been cleared also have some of these values. Digging them up, storing the bits and puting it back after mining on top of the piles of crumbled rock will result in release of some of the stored carbon and gross alteration for ever to the way the water cycle functions. The thin layer of top soil will not enable recreation of the same types of ecological communities - not in a thousand years. Some of the same plant species may be able to grow there but not all. Some animals may die out as a result of cumulative impacts or climate change and never be able to return. New communities will develop and the new landscape will have some values but they won't be equivalent to the present values.
3. Leard State Forest is public land that was set aside to be kept as a publicly owned forest. It should not be destroyed for the private benefit of mining companies and their customers nor for very short term public financial gain from royalties. It should be managed sustainably for many hundreds of years not wrecked for 20 years of profit and royalties.
4. Similarly, the soil and ecological resources of the privately owned parts of the project site should be sustainably managed and handed on to future generations in better not poorer condition. I am sceptical about the claim that some land can be restored to class 3 agricultural value. Whether or not that is possible, there is no plan to restore class 4 areas to class 4 and leaving a final void is not leaving that land in equal or better condition.
5. The final void is unacceptable. When water evaporates from its surface that will enable water from higher groundwater layers to move into it, at least inperiods when evaporation exceeds rainfall. Being connected to coal seams it is likely to have water quality that is toxic to many species.
6. The whole mine and the adjoining mines will grossly alter the regional surface and groundwater systems, with adverse impacts on other water users. The fact that contaminated water had to be released from mines in this area in recent wet weather shows that the mining companies have not planned on avaoiding pollution in all types of weather events: worse extremes are likely to occur in the next few decades due to climate change and worse still in millenia to come. The mine therefore exposes pollutants that have been trapped for millenia and should be expected to cause future pollution as well as changing ground and surface flow patterns.
7. Goonbri Creek should not be moved. there should be no mining anywhere near it. There is too much risk that the engineers will make a mistake, e.g. not enough freeboard, or that future people will not understand the importance of leaving the proposed wall in tact, then the creek could be deverted into the void in some future big flood event (like or bigger than that which wiped out Grantham in Qld).
8. The expanded mine is to extract both steaming and coking coals. Australian and world economies should be moving rapidly to reduce their dependence on and use of steaming coal by using less energy and shifting to renewable sources in order to minimise risks of serious climate change. Our economies should also be reducing their dependence on extracting and using raw materials, particularly non-renewable ones like coking coal, to reduce both the impact of mining and carbon emissions (e.g. from mining/transport equipment burning oil and in steel making). We should be making better use of the steel, aluminium and other materials we have already produced. Yes, I do use non-renewable resources because I live in and try to help improve our society: a society which needs to reorganise itself partly by planning to significantly shift away from inefficient use of non-renewables. Planning in NSW should be aiming to achieve this, not to enable ongoing dependence on fossil fuels, wasting of non-renewable resources, and destruction of functioning ecosystems in the vane hope that a little effort will be sufficient to replace them. If no new coal projects were approved the markets would get a strong signal to shift economic resources into efficiency, recycling and renewable.
Thank you for considering these issues.
Alistair Todd
Object
Alistair Todd
Object
Boggabri
,
New South Wales
Message
Dear Sir,
As a resident of Maules Creek i object to the merits of theTurrawonga Coal Project. The three main reasons being, cummulative dust effects from the Leard Forrest Coal Complex, the relocation of the Goonbri Road into a natural floodplain and the flow on effects that this will have when considering the closure of the Leard Forrest Road due to the Boggabri Coal Project - Taking away the only flood free access for the Maules Creek Community, and thirdly on environmental grounds - NSW does not need any new or expanded coal projects to provide for its own energy needs.
Thankyou ror the opportunity to comment.
Alistair Todd
As a resident of Maules Creek i object to the merits of theTurrawonga Coal Project. The three main reasons being, cummulative dust effects from the Leard Forrest Coal Complex, the relocation of the Goonbri Road into a natural floodplain and the flow on effects that this will have when considering the closure of the Leard Forrest Road due to the Boggabri Coal Project - Taking away the only flood free access for the Maules Creek Community, and thirdly on environmental grounds - NSW does not need any new or expanded coal projects to provide for its own energy needs.
Thankyou ror the opportunity to comment.
Alistair Todd