Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project

I object to the Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project (SSD-17017460).
I am a resident in the air shed of both Eraring & Vale’s Point power stations & decry the fact
that the burning of the Chain Valley colliery’s coal regularly produces exceedances over
NEPM Air Quality limits for PM10 & world’s best practice for PM2.5 standards at Wyong
Racecourse. That this directly reduces members of this community’s & my own life
expectancy is absolutely unconscionable.
Last years IPCC in Glasgow stated that that we MUST PREVENT opening any more coal,
gas or oil deposits. Australia was a signatory to this statement & must abide by it’s own
international undertaking. Restating, this mine extension must be refused forthwith,
furthermore failure to reject this mine extension is & will further imperil life on the Central
Coast with increased & more intense bushfire frequency, storm damage & flooding caused
by climate warming which is caused by continued burning of fossil fuels anywhere on the
planet.
Specifically, Delta Coal plans to extract an additional 9.5 million tonnes of coal if the Project
is approved.
The greenhouse gas assessment estimates that if the Project is approved there will be an
additional 25,350,157 tonnes CO2-e of greenhouse gases emitted (Scope 1, 2 and 3).
In reviewing the GHG assessment, the expert’s opinion was:
The feasibility of capturing and burning the fugitive methane emissions caused by mine
depressurisation should be evaluated to reduce GHGs.
The estimate of GHG emissions does not attempt to quantify gases liberated by the mine
depressurisation systems that are not captured by the mine ventilation systems.
NCC’s position is that the EIS fails to assess the likely impacts of GHG emissions from the
Project in contributing to climate change and climate harms. NCC objects to the Project on
the basis that Australia’s GHG emissions must be urgently reduced by 74% by 2030, while
the Project would instead increase Australia’s emissions by 25 million tonnes over the next 7
years.
Renewable electricity is the future for NSW & international community.
Yours sincerely,
Douglas Williamson

I object to the Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project (SSD-17017460).
I'm Steven James, a concerned citizen who was born and bred in the Hunter. PLEASE... the
science is clear. IPCC has told us time and time again that the planet cannot withstand more
fossil fuel extraction if we are to avoid pushing global temperates above 1.5C. Please be on
the right side of history and consign this Delta Coal proposal to consolidate two of their
mines at Lake Macquarie proposal into bin where it belongs. We need less coal extraction,
not more. There is no time or place any more where a proposal like this makes sense.
Please, stop it now.
Yours sincerely,
Steven James

I object to the Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project (SSD-17017460).
I am very concerned about Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project from a global
warming prospective but also as a mother and grandmother. My son lives in the area with
his wife and two young children so I am worried for their health.
I don't believe that the EIS has adequately covered the impact of this project on air quality, in
particular the impacts of burning the coal extracted from the mines at Vales Point Power
Station.
The impact on water quality in the area and the danger of subsidence has also not been fully
addressed and could have long term effects on the environment, biodiversity and therefore
the health of the community
Yours sincerely,

I object to the Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project (SSD-17017460).
As a resident of Lake Macquarie, I oppose the current proposal for Delta Coal to extend its
mine under Lake Macquarie as stated in its Environmental Impact Statement, released 18
Nov 2022.
The mine is a threat to the health of Lake Macquarie and residents because of its
association with the Vales Point coal-fired power station, one of most polluting in Australia.
On the release of the EIS, Delta Coal’s Steve Gurney said “anti-coal activists” had “one
objective” to “shutdown coal fired power stations”- Newcastle Herald, Saturday Nov 19,
2022.
This misinterprets my protest.
I support the need for a workable, yet enthusiastic transition from fossil fuels to renewables.
But the proposal that Delta Coal extend the licence of it’s Chain Valley coal mine to feed it’s
power station at Vales Point overlooks a series of unanswered environmental questions.
I believes public concern is understandable considering the parlous history of power
generation on Lake Macquarie.
Lake Macquarie is still smarting from years of environmental abuse. Heavy metals limit the
fish and seafood that can be safely consumed, doctors confirm power station air pollution to
be a health hazard and large expanses of toxic ash dams close to the shores pose a
constant threat of contamination.
Delta Coal might argue that most of the environmental concerns apply to Vales Point Power
Station, not the mine. My response is that the mine and the power station are under common
ownership and are intrinsically linked. My concerned is how little residents know about the
future of both the mine and the power station.
Residents read that the polluting coal -fired power station at Vales Point recently sold for
around $200 million. Why? What plans does the new owner have for its future. In an age of
cheaper, non-polluting renewables, what do the new owners know that Lake Macquarie
residents don’t ? How long must Lake Macquarie residents endure power station pollution
and the threat of toxic waste leaking from the ever-expanding ash dam? We don’t know. And
what of plans to clean up the hazard ? How will it be done and who pays? The answers to
these questions are at worst non-existent, at best, vague.
We are now confronted by a mine extension EIS to support the power station with phrases
like -
• Existing waste management practises will continue.
• Existing subsidence measures will continue.
• Impacts associated with the project will be largely identical to existing approved
operations.
I question whether Lake Macquarie residents should tolerate more of the same - more toxic
ash, more contamination, more risk to the lake?
The EIS refers to the mine’s financial benefits to the State from royalties and taxes.
3
‘A detailed economic analysis of the Project has been undertaken which includes
consideration of the Project’s economic benefits and costs associated with adverse impacts.’
How is this determined considering the vagaries associated with the cost to the environment,
public health and for proper rehabilitation of the company’s mines and the Vales Point
Power Station, especially the ash dam?
What does ‘a fully integrated mine closure and rehabilitation program,’ actually mean?
Similarly, ‘Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan would be reviewed and
updated accordingly.’
Groundwater also appears to raise questions. The EIS states:
‘The Project Area and immediate surrounds are subject to both active and historical coal
mining operations which have impacted the local and regional groundwater system through
depressurisation of strata.’ Yet in a following paragraph it states:
‘Existing groundwater licences held by Delta Coal are sufficient to cover the predicted
groundwater over the life of the Project.’
The EIS says ‘licensed discharges flow into Swindles Creek,’ (a tributary of Lake Macquarie)
as if implying, they are licensed so that’s ok, then.
And generally - ‘This assessment has indicated that while the Project, like most large-scale
development, will have impacts, these impacts will be largely the same as those of the
existing approved operations and do not involve a significant increase in impacts.
After years of neglect, it is reasonable to expect an improvement in standards applying to
both the operation of the mine and to the Vales Point power station.
Which raises further questions about the future of toxic ash dam seepage and spillage .
How much more pollution will find it’s way from the Vales Point power station, into
waterways and eventually the Lake, unknown, unreported and so penalty free? How much,
how often and how toxic? And will whatever pollution penalties apply be any sort of a
disincentive? Again, we don’t know.
Certainly the EIS might relate specifically to the mine. But the mine’s viability relies on the
power station and vice versa. So it’s reasonable to ask, whether a heavily financially
committed owner might, at some future time, apply to extend the mine licence yet again, to
service an ever-ageing power station for which proper maintenance is an incumbrance to be
avoided. Might it be thought more economical to accept whatever fines the EPA imposes as
a cost of doing business. As for cleaning up the current mess and toxic waste resulting from
future operations, Lake Macquarie residents have no guarantee that the new owner will be
either willing or capable of meeting its obligations.
This EIS is more notable for what it doesn’t say than for what it does say. It lacks the sense
of enquiry and urgency expected in a world struggling against the inertia to efficiently
replace fossil fuels with less destructive alternatives.
Yours sincerely,
David Ransom

I object to the Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project (SSD-17017460).
As a concerned citizen who has lived in the Upper Hunter for many years I have watched
how the coal mines have moved in and taken over the valley and how their existance has
affected the quality of the air that we all must breath here. So I can relate to the people living
in the Lake Macquarie area and how they would be worried about air pollution from the
Delta's Chain Valley Colliery and Mannering Colliery. We all have a right to lodge a
submission to defend the state of our air, water and the environment in which we live. I am
writing this submission to help them defend themselves against this pollution. The people of
the Hunter have always had to live with the threats of their health from the coal mines and it
in unfair to force them, yet again, to contend with risks to their health and their surrounds.
I am particularly concerned about the number of coal trucks taking coal from the mines to the
Port of Newcastle each day and the danger they present to the communities they will be
passing through. It will take a considerable amount of trips to move 9.5 million tons of coal.
This represents a substantial number of truck movements throughout the life of the coal
extraction. These movements present, as I mentioned, danger to the communities. They
also damage the roads we all use, forcing more taxpayers' dollars to be used in their
upkeep. These trucks are not clean, efficent electric vehicles, but rather ones which pump
their dirty emissions directly into the air that people around them must breath as they move
back and forth between the mine and the port. Transport in Australia is a major contributor to
climate change. At a time when Australia is suffering from the effects of climate change we
must not be adding to our problem by digging up and burning this coal or by having these
countless truck movements spread over many years.
Yours sincerely,
Colleen Wysser - Martin

I object to the Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project (SSD-17017460).
I am an elderly resident, living not far from the lake waterfront. I am aware of recent fish kills
in the southern part of the lake, and I am concerned about any contribution to that from
operations at Vales Point power station.,
We have poor air quality where I live, that affects my breathing. Particles fall on my roof,
verandah and washing line. I am a keen gardener and am concerned that particles fall on
the soil I use to grow my food.
We need a thorough study of the biodiversity in and around the lake and an assessment of
any impacts on that from coal mining and the burning of that coal at Vales Point.
In recent years we have experienced extreme weather associated with climate change. Our
governments and corporations need to reduce activities and operations that could contribute
to climate change. It is unwise to consider extending the life of the Chain Valley mine and
Mannering Colliery, the coal from which will be burned at Vales Point.
I ask that these matters be considered in relation to the project.
Yours sincerely,

I object to the Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project (SSD-17017460).
I am strongly opposed to any plans for the expansion of mining for fossil fuels. We need to
make a shift towards renewable sources of energy to protect the planet and provide a
healthy environment for future generations.
There are just too many risks to human health which far outweigh the benefits of extracting
coal which is more than likely being sold to China anyway.
We have to be seen as an active participating nation in doing everything possible to reduce
global warming
I'm frustrated by the mining companies who seem to be placing profit ahead of any other
consideration despite the overwhelming evidence of the damage they are causing. FORGET
COAL.
Yours sincerely,

I object to the Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project (SSD-17017460).
I live at Toronto, on the western side of Lake Macquarie, close enough to Eraring Power
Station to see the plume of cloud rising up after the release of steam. I am a retiree. My
brother and his partner live at Chain Valley Bay in one of the retirement villages in the area
immediately affected by what happens at Vales Point. I am a climate emergency activist and
try to keep myself up to date with what is happening around the lake.
As the UN says, if the planet is to heal itself after over 200 years of polluting the atmosphere
with carbon dioxide and other noxious gasses, then no new coal mines should commence,
and those operating should be closed down as soon as possible. The idea of extending the
time that coal mining for the Vales Point Power Station continues is abhorrent to me. I want
a world where everyone can breathe fresh air, and all living things can live a healthy life.
Operators of coal mines in the Lake Mac area do not have a good reputation. The "Expert
Opinion Chain Valley Consolidation Project (SSD-17017460) tells it like it is - not a glowing
recommendation I suggest.
Yours sincerely,
Wendy Davidson

I object to the Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project (SSD-17017460).
I have long despaired over the sacrificing of our planet and all life there on for fossil fuel
profit and easy energy generation.
There should be no expansion of mines. Quite the reverse.
Don’t be captured any longer by the big boys NSW government. Have some gumption.
Lake Macquarie and the Hunter have born the ill effects of the health of the environment and
the population for far too long.
Stop it. Now.
Yours sincerely,
Sandra Kirby

I object to the Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project (SSD-17017460).
I am a retired Grandmother and with 4 grandkids and I fear for the planet and think that we
should stop mining coal.
We should stop mining coal and do something to keep our wonderful planet livable for future
generations, not just think of profit.
Lets change direction and work to repair the damage that the human race has inflicted on
our planet.W
What is the point of extracting an additional 9.5 million tonnes of coal, it will just make things
worse.
Yours sincerely,
Patricia Bleuel

I object to the Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project (SSD-17017460).
As a researcher and a mother I am deeply concerned about the environmental and health
effects of the proposed Consolidation Project. I want future generations to be able to enjoy
the beautiful country and ecosystems around Lake Macquarie. I believe we all have a right to
healthy land and healthy bodies, which this project compromises.
The air pollution from this Project has not been adequately assessed by the EIS, and the
health impacts of this pollution could be huge, with associated economic impacts and burden
on an already stretched health system.
The EIS also doesn't adequately consider the detrimental impacts of the Project on local
biodiversity as a result of dirty run off water in Swindles Creek and Lake Macquarie. This
could affect a wide variety of ecological communities that are not assessed.
It's plain stupid to add to our green house gas emissions the way this Project will,
considering our national commitment to large scale emmissions reductions.
Yours sincerely,
Chloe Watfern

I object to the Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project (SSD-17017460).
There can be no further coal mines or extensions thereof if we are to avert dangerous
climate change. We do not need the coal as current mines will supply enough for our needs
while we make the transition to clean renewable energy. I understand there are health
problems already with the mining of the coal from this mine. That alsone should enough to
stop its expansion, even without climate change reasons.
We simply cannot add to GHG emissions if we are to keep within our committed targets
(43% reduction on 2005 levels by 2030, nationally).
The situation is urgent. Resources/investment must be made into renewables, storage and
transmission and NOT into maintaining coal mining.
Yours sincerely,
Jenny Goldie

I object to the Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project (SSD-17017460).
I say No to increased coal mining, increased coal burning, increased coal transportation in
my local area
I’ve lived in Wangi Wangi for many decades, and remember our place and our Lake before
the Wangi Power Station was built, before the coal mines at Awaba and Wangi were
resourced to produce electricity.
In my local area I have seen, first-hand, the results of coal mining and industrial coal
burning.
Settling ponds at the local mine have overflowed into Wangi Creek, into the Power Station
Channel, and into Wangi Bay on the populated north-side of the peninsula. The Lake and
marine life has been polluted by water borne coal particulates.
In the 1960s air-borne dust from the Wangi Power Station stacks accumulated on house
weatherboards and roofs, even in bushland at Wangi Point where my family lived.
I’ve seen local children unable to breathe without recourse to asthma puffers. I’ve heard
those rib-cracking coughs of ex-miners and power station workers who suffered from
exposure to coal, coal-ash, asbestos finings.
I’ve seen a remarkable decline in fish and bird populations in my local area …
Nowadays I live on ridge land of the Wangi Peninsula, a few kilometres north east of Vales
Point Power Station. My place is affected by particulate matter (coal dust from power station
stacks) that travels on southerly and south westerly breezes and winds.
In recent years the dust particles have become smaller - they get inside my house, even
when windows and doors are closed. The dust is fine and black.
I’m sick and tired of bouts of sneezing coughing when the dust arrives.
I’m sick and tired of cleaning dust fall-out inside my house.
I’m sick and tired of cleaning dust from my house roof and gutters, along with the acid splots
fromairborne pollution.
I’m sick and tired of witnessing the damage that coal mining and coal burning dust is doing
to the lungs of humans and animals in my local area.
Where I live, Wangi, Air Quality is already poor, no matter what the strategically placed
machines say. I am very concerned about the health impacts of coal dust and fine particulate
stack emissions on myself and my neighbours, human and otherwise.
If more coal is mined at Vales Point, if more coal is burned at Vales Point, my place, Wangi,
will get more polluting fine dust. I don’t want to breathe it; I don’t want to clean it up.
As for other Mine and Power Station emissions, I don’t want to see our Lake and denizens
die more.
3
As for coal mined at Vales Point being transported elsewhere, I’m concerned about any
increase in heavy truck movements on our local roads.
In recent times I’ve noticed that there are more ash recycling and concrete trucks on the
road between Eraring and Wangi. Big trucks with industrial loads of ash make travelling on
local roads less safe for drivers of smaller vehicles,
Yours sincerely,

I object to the Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project (SSD-17017460).
The earlier we stop mining fossil fuels, including coal, the less catastrophic will be the
consequences on our grandchildren.
I am prepared to suffer hardship now for the sake of my children and grandchildren; and
everyone else’s.
In 2019, UN Secretary-General António Guterres said we are in a deep climate hole and to
get out we must first stop digging. https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/world/un-chiefsays-we-are-in-a-deep-climate-hole-and-to-get-out-we-must-first-stopdigging/video/952985f17b6c064c928c011cca25039d
Yours sincerely,
George Carrard

I object to the Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project (SSD-17017460).
As someone who lives in the centre of Hunter Valley mining projects and as someone who
experiences daily the dust (mainly coal-dust) from the ever increasing slag heaps opposite
my home. I am concerned soewhat for my own health but, more importantly, for the health of
my grandchildren and great grandchildren when they stay here. I am concerned for their
futures in a world where ever increasing GHG emissions are affecting climate change. In the
previous year this place, I live in, has experienced the effect of the huge bush fires and
devastating flood damage. This includes the collapse of the only acccess road to our
property where we were marooned for a week.
I am concerned that, despitea change of government there are still in excess of 100 fossil
fuel projects in the planning.
It is not logical for Australia to excuse such projects since a vast ammount of the pollution
damage they cause is generated in other jurisditions. The damage starts right here, in
Australia.
What humanity is facing is GLOBAL, not localised Climate Change. Enough IS enough!!!
The time to stop is now.
This project should not be permitted to go ahead
Yours sincerely,
Judith Leslie

I object to the Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project (SSD-17017460).
Coal mining is unnecessary with the rise of renewables.
Coal mining further exacerbates the problem of climate change, endangering the future of
the planet.
Coal mining is detrimental to the local communities it operates with pollution and destruction
of the environment that cannot undone by the lie of offsetting the damage in other ways.
It is done for greed and henceforth should not threaten water catchments which humans rely
on.
Yours sincerely,
Troy Walsh

I object to the Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project (SSD-17017460).
How often do we have to say NO MORE COAL.
It's bad for the environment.
It adds to the carbon dioxide in the planet.
We have to learn to live without it.
If you were a responsible organisation you would by working to find alternatives for future
generations.
Yours sincerely,
Julie James Bailey

I am providing comments on the Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project (SSD17017460).
I live about 10kms from the mine and am aware that it is one of the closest mines to living
population. Its expansion therefor needs detailed assessment. I am making this objection
as the local air quality will be impacted, it will contribute to overall climate change and the
local waterways will be impacted. My husband suffered incredibly with asthma as he grew up
so any increase to poor air quality is a huge issue to the life of the surrounding population.
I do not feel that the assessment by the EIS is adequate in relation to the effect the mine will
have on air quality. I would like to see more detail of the measurement of burning the coal
extracts on the environment. Asthma has already been a real problem in the area of the
local mines. Local people have already had demonstrations around the area in relation to
their children's health.
The Eis has not provided up to date assessment of the effects of the groundwater being
pumped to the surface mine, then to Swindles Creek and then into Lake Macquarie The
assessment needs updating and should not rely on old assessments. The Salin level is
already risen and minerals are discharges into the creek and then move into the Lake. Have
the Assessments detailed the effect on the area of the sediment dams? Details need to be
provided for preservation and monitoring of aquatic life, surrounding shores, and sea grass.
Also steps need to be set to ensure the mining owners and developers have reserve to
cover for recovery and legislation to make this obligatory. Otherwise it will be like Coal ash
left by the other local mines, simply be covered over.
When addressing the question of Lake subsidence the EIS has not provided steps it would
take if the subsidence is greater than predicted. The assessment of damage to the shores of
the Creek and Lake seems to be inadequate. This should include manmade structures.
Provision for this needs to be over the mining time but extended well into the years after
mining stops.
Lastly the EIS now needs to provide measures it will take to keep the greenhouse gas
emissions as low as possible. This proposal does not conform to lowering emissions but will
raise them by 25 million tonnes over the 7 years. It will raise Australia's contribution to
polluting the atmosphere.
I believe the EIS assessments are inadequate and object to this local development.
Yours sincerely,
Margaret Hagan

I object to the Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project (SSD-17017460).
We all know how projects such as this - coal mining and its effect on people's health and the
environment - is negative and unacceptable. Consolidating two mines which Delta Coal
plans to do and producing more coal is not the path, Australia and the world, should be
pursuing.. still. I care, because I'm concerned about not necessarily my future, but those
that are younger than me and our planet. We need to radically shift our way of life and the
paradigm that exists now, to a renewable one. There's no excuse that companies such as
Delta Coal & Woodside for that matter.. doesn't take the impact of projects such as these,
seriously. WHY?
Yours sincerely,
Angela Schmick

I object to the Chain Valley Colliery Consolidation Project (SSD-17017460).
I'm a psychologist and a researcher, working primarily with young people in Newcastle and
Lake Macquarie. Each day I hear stories about people's distress related to instability in their
lives. A growing concern for many is the impact of natural disasters, such as bushfires and
floods, that have devastated their own or their friends and family's lives. These natural
disasters have contributed to destruction of people's housing, created barriers to work and
education opportunities, and have led to social isolation that is driven by helplessness and
hopelessness for the future.
As discussed in the report titled "HOW CLIMATE CHANGE AFFECTS MENTAL HEALTH IN
AUSTRALIA" written by Doctors for the Environment Australia (DEA), there are clear direct
and indirect effects of climate change on the mental health of Australians. Young people and
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are among those who experience the most
significant consequences of climate change. Depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress
disorder, and suicide are all more common among those who experience the direct effects of
climate change (i.e., natural disasters) , while grief and hopelessness is common among
those witnessing a government failing to act on this climate emergency. It is wrong to think
that these mental health conditions can be fixed with medication or psychotherapy. In part,
because such approaches are not always successful treatments, but more importantly,
because this distress can be prevented by government action that prevents further adding to
climate change.
I am very concerned that this proposal will both increase human the impact on climate
change and will be clear evidence that the government is doing too little to act, leading to
further deterioration of the mental health of Australians.
The likely impacts of the proposal include poorer air quality due to the pollution created by
burning coal, which leads to increased rates of chronic diseases among people of all ages.
My research on young people with chronic diseases, such as asthma, cystic fibrosis, cancer,
and heart disease, found that they were absent from school more often, had poorer mental
health, and lower academic grades than young people without chronic diseases. School
absenteeism, poorer mental health and lower academic grades contribute to lower quality of
life and more years of life lost. These are personal and social costs that can be reduced by
ending further coal exploration, extraction, and burning.
Yours sincerely,
Alistair Lum