Cleanaway's Western Sydney Energy & Resource Recovery Centre

N

I disagree with this project

this would be detrimental to Western Sydney, especially for future generations of children and anyone, old or young, with any sort of medical condition

I strongly oppose this project, as implementing an incinerator in Eastern Creek will effect surrounding residents in Western Sydney from its toxic fumes. Incinerators also align with the current governments negative rejection of renewable energy sources, pushing Australia even further back on reducing emissions to reduce impacts of climate change, and cleaner air. Implementing incinerators encouraged to create energy for waste stifles future innovations for actual clean energy innovations.

I wholeheartedly object to any approval of any Waste to Energy Facility in the Western Sydney Region on concerns of the health and well being of my family, my children, and the health of my fellow neighbours for the following reasons:

1. Releases toxic air pollutants.
Waste incinerators produce large amounts of toxic air pollution that impact on the environment and human health. These emissions include highly toxic and carcinogenic persistent organic pollutants such as dioxins and furans (PCDD and PCDF), hexachlorobenzene (HCB), PCBs and brominated persistent organic pollutants.
2. Produces toxic ash.
Waste incinerators all generate ash that is contaminated with toxic heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants (POPs) such as dioxins and furans. The levels of contamination vary according to the waste burned, the process used and configuration of the pollution controls on the smoke stack but all solid and air emissions contain contaminants, many of which can be at a level that can impact on human health and the environment depending on the disposal method and exposure.
3. Dirtiest form of energy production.
Waste incinerators have re-branded themselves as ‘green’ energy suppliers. The reality is that burning waste is the dirtiest form of energy generation both in toxic emissions and climate change gases. Waste burning facilities produce far more carbon dioxide per unit of energy generated than coal, oil or gas fired power stations. In addition to producing larger quantities of greenhouse gas per energy unit than coal, incinerators also destroy the ‘resources’ in waste that could be recovered if the discarded material in waste were recycled or reused. Much of the waste material burned in incinerators is based on petrochemicals. These include plastic bottles, bags, packaging and even electronic waste. Petrochemicals are fossil fuels and burning plastics derived from fossil fuels does not create ‘green’ energy – it is simply burning fossil fuels in another form.
4. Destroys embedded energy.
Waste incinerators destroy the resources entrained in waste including the embedded energy. The embedded energy in any given product includes the energy expended in extracting resources, refining, manufacturing and transporting the product to the point of sale. This energy is lost when a discarded product is burned in an incinerator and the whole cycle must begin again. Most of this energy is retained when the discarded product is recycled or reused. The only energy ‘recovered’ from burning a product in an incinerator is the ‘calorific’ energy of that item – in other words - the small amount of heat energy it contains. For example burning a PET plastic water bottle yields 3.22 gigajoule per tonne whereas recycling it saves 85.16 gigajoule per tonne. That means recycling a PET plastic bottle saves 26.4 times the energy that burning yields demonstrating that incinerating waste is an enormous waste of energy
5. Undermines recycling efforts.
Waste incinerators seek the highest calorific value fuels available to burn as this increases the efficiency of their energy. Unfortunately those high calorific value wastes are also highly valued for recycling. These include plastics, paper, wood-waste and cardboard. By competing for the same materials as recycling operations incinerators undermine the recycling sector and destroy valuable resources and their embedded energy.
6. Destroys resources.
When a discarded product is burned it is converted to energy, toxic emissions and contaminated ash. The discard is destroyed forever and the energy intensive process of material extraction, refining, manufacture and transport must be repeated to replace that product. The alternative of recycling and re-use of such materials retains most of that embedded energy and reduces the inputs to the production and consumption cycle. For organic materials, such as food waste, soiled paper, cardboard and timber derivatives, composting retains the valuable resource and converts it into much needed agricultural fertilisers and soil conditioners that increase productivity and save water. Anaerobic digestion of organics prior to composting also gives the added benefit of generating energy through biogas production, a ‘cool’ WtE technology. Incineration of organic materials denies the potential for these further beneficial uses.
7. Stifles innovation.
Waste incinerators require waste supply contracts that last for 25-30 years to become financially viable and to ensure their fuel supply.11 This means that local governments must supply the incinerators with a steady flow of waste at an agreed volume for that period of time. If the waste stream is locked for decades, alternative waste treatment technologies including recycling, re-use, composting and anaerobic digestion are effectively stymied. This is a significant barrier to achieving sustainability as new developments in environmentally friendly technology are prevented from accessing the resources.
8. Waste incineration costs jobs.
Independent studies have reported that waste management systems that use recycling, re-use, composting and anaerobic digestion generate many more jobs and far outstrip the few positions required to run an incinerator. In general terms waste incinerators are expensive, computer controlled, largely automated technology that only require a small workforce to operate. Conversely waste management systems based around recycling, re-use and ‘cool technologies’ have a high employment generation potential and flow-on effects throughout the community and economy. Installing a waste incinerator means that communities forego employment opportunities while squandering valuable resources.
9. Waste incineration undermines real renewable energy.
Waste incinerators are expensive to build, operate and upgrade and require public subsidies to become financially viable. By claiming to produce ‘green’ energy incinerator operators can obtain public subsidies, credits, tax breaks and transferable benefits that should be spent on assisting real ‘green’ energy projects to establish such as wind, wave and solar power. The incineration industry claim that because a fraction of waste they burn is ‘biogenic’ in origin (such as paper and other organics) they should be classed as ‘renewable’ energy generators and given access to taxpayer subsidies for green energy projects. This undermines real renewable energy and diverts funds away from genuine green energy projects. Millions of taxpayer dollars have already been directed to incinerator projects that are still in the ‘proposal phase’ in Australia.
10. Entrenches a linear economy.
Waste incineration entrenches a linear economy in our society that relies on the extraction of virgin materials and rewards consumptive and wasteful lifestyle choices. Our society needs to transition as soon as possible to a circular economy where resources are not destroyed through landfills or incineration but rather are conserved through reuse, recycling and composting schemes generally known as Zero Waste Solutions.

My wife and I object to the proposal by Cleanaway for an incinerator to burn millions and millions of tones of waste so close to people in there homes including my family.
My wife and I are not convinced with the information that the plant is safe for our health and the environment, it is simply to close to to residents.
Until you live near a plant like this you cannot foresee the impact on the residents especially with the increase in truck traffic and the smell of waste and fumes. This plant should be built away from residential habitants.

I do not want to live near an establishment that releases toxic air pollutants when most of this could be recycled. Main reason for not wanting is the health ramifications from the toxic ash, bad smells etc

I object to this project

I object to the project, this is not a viable nor safe project for residents in the immediate and surrounding area.

I live in the area as do all my children and grandchildren, there is enough deadly pollution in the area and the world without adding more

I object to any Planning projects that relate to the building of Cleanways Incinerator Easter Creek . I believe the incinerator in close proximity to school and homes is unsafe and unhealthy. . I worry about the health and well-being of all those that live in close proximity to the incinerator. I worry that Prospect Reservoir our water supply will be affected.

I live in the nearby suburb of Bossley Park. I have asthma, so too do my young children. We have enough breathing issues without now having to deal with the threat of toxic pollution from this proposal for an incinerator which is simply outdated and archaic technology.
You should be well aware that these toxic “Waste to Energy” Incinerators are being decommissioned in cities in the EU and the US due to unacceptable risks to health, the environment, the economy and the climate. They are essentially a fossil fuel-fired power station with the main accelerant for the combustion being fossil fuel-based plastics, supported by natural gas backup to reach operating temperature. We live in a dry and sunny country, there is so, so much space here - why the hell, if the energy solution of solar power is being blindly ignored, would you put this toxic incinerator in the middle of Australia's largest, most populous city!!?? If you must put it somewhere - put it out back of Bourke, in some of the vast open spaces away from masses of people... better yet build solar out there!
“Waste to Energy” facilities threaten to undermine our transition to a circular economy by locking local councils into long-term contracts with the same unsustainable model of resource extraction, single use and disposal that has failed us for decades. This is not a way to recycle plastics. This whole proposal is 1970s ideas and thinking.. in 2020.
Waste incinerators are incredibly expensive, yet are estimated to create 10 times less energy than a solar plant for the same upfront investment.
Burning waste is not the solution to our waste crisis. We should instead be investing 100% of the waste levy into solutions to transition to a zero-waste and circular economy.

I wholeheartedly OPPOSE and OBJECT TO THIS PROJECT - for the health of my family, the health of the people in my community and the health of the planet.

Dear Sir/Madam
My name is Maria Schettino. I am writing to object to the construction of the Cleanaway Incinerator at Blacktown. The health concerns over incinerators are well documented so it is outrageous that one is going to be built so close to homes, schools and a reservoir by a company with so many violations of environmental regulations! The state government's role is to act in the interests of citizens and residents and not in the intersts of powerful lobby groups who think only of profit with no regard to the health of people or to the environment. Please act in the best interests of the community and people of Sydney and NSW and consider the following

HEALTH EFFECTS OF WASTE TO ENERGY INCINERATORS - STUDIES

The proposal to build the Cleanaway & Macquarie Capital Incinerator at Eastern Creek, is a recipe for disaster. The public health claims made by proponents at their citizen panel are challenged by the experiences of communities around the world where these incinerators are already operating.
Sydney will have high levels of pollution if five incinerators go ahead. This current Harvard Study proves regions with high levels of air pollution are more likely to have a higher death rate from COVID 19 than less polluted areas. This current 2020 study is the first to look at the link between long-term exposure to fine particulate air pollution (which is known to be released from incinerators) (PM2.5) And COVID 19.
A recent study that looked into a medium sized city in southwestern Sweden, clearly identified their new modern incinerator as the single most significant source of PM2.5’s. http://senedd.cynulliad.cymru/documents/s7994/Yr%20Athro%20Vyvyan%20Howard%20Papur%202.pdf
Waste-to-energy incineration is also a source of mercury emissions. The increased mercury levels have been recorded in fish living in the reservoirs for hydroelectricity. The adverse effects of mercury exposure on human health have been indicated in a number of studies, and there seems to be no ‘zero effect’ exposure level. As a result, the mitigation of mercury emissions is gaining more and more attention. The danger of mercury pollution drew widespread attention after the cause of the Minamata disease (Ekino et al., 2007) was identified as a severe case of mercury poisoning. Mercury compounds are generally more toxic than the compounds of other nonradioactive heavy elements (Pushie et al., 2014). Mercury can easily vaporise in combustion processes and be released into the atmosphere as mercury vapours. Moreover, combustion temperatures are usually high enough to decompose mercury compounds and release Hg0 vapour (metallic Mercury).
Elemental mercury has a very low solubility in water, which makes it challenging to remove elemental mercury by commonly used methods for flue-gas cleaning. Human exposure to metallic mercury takes place mostly by swallowing contaminated foods or drinks or breathing in mercury vapours. When ingested, only a very small amount of metallic mercury (less than 0.01% of the dose) is absorbed through the gastrointestinal tract (Da Broi et al., 2017). Inhaling of mercury vapours is much more dangerous as mercury enters the bloodstream through the lungs. The density of saturated mercury vapour strongly depends on the temperature. Charvat. P ‘et.al., 2020, ‘An overview of mercury emissions in the energy industry - A step to mercury footprint assessment’, Journal of Cleaner Production, ScienceDirect, Volume 267, No 122087
It is now established beyond reasonable doubt that particulate air pollution causes death by various means.
It is also now established that incinerators produce high quantities of ultra-fine particulates. There is no technology available to capture these 0.01PM’ which are invisible to the naked eye and are proven to cause a range of health problems.
Particulate Matter has been found to:
•Increase the risk of respiratory death in infants
•Affect cough and bronchitis in children
•Increase death rates from cardiovascular and respiratory diseases including lung cancer and asthma.

Cleanaway & Macquarie Capital both have a history of operating outside the law. Both proponents have contravened environment protection legislation making their corporations an unfit person under the Act. Below lists some of their EPA violations. This is why our community has no faith in them building and operating an incinerator near our homes. Cleanaway (Over 35 EPA violations) and Macquarie Cleanaway can’t be trusted to keep our air quality clean.
25/03/1997 - Transpacific (Cleanaways old name) Failed to comply with conditions of a licence to undertake the following prescribed activities of environmental significance: incineration of chemical, medical and solid trade waste, waste depot and activities producing listed wastes.

07/05/2002 - Brambles Australia (owned by Transpacific, Cleanaway old name) Caused an environmental nuisance in the form of odour from the depot.
3. June 2010 – Transpacific (old cleanaway name) who owned Rutherford Oil Processing and Recycling Plant were fined $70,000 – for emitting benzene at levels in breach of environmental protection licence during March and Aug 2008.
June 2010 – Transpacific (old Cleanaway) fined for supplying false information – whiting-out emission test results (the subject of the above breach) in its annual return for its oil recycling facility to NSW EPA
Since Nov 2010 – VIC EPA has issued 18 Pollution Abatement Notices in an attempt to address odour impacts on the Clayton / Dingley area of VIC administered by Kingston City Council. Of these, 8 were issued to Transpacific (Cleanaway) companies (TWM & Baxter Business P/L).
In Aug 2011 Transpacific (Cleanaway), in contravention of its EPA licence, set up a treatment trial to deodorise “Elf Atochem Spotleak” an odorous compound added to natural gas and LPG. The offensive odour was discharged beyond the boundary of the company’s Portland site and reported by 130 residents who complained of nausea, throat irritation and general illness. Fined $80,000 and Court costs $10,000.
Feb 2011 – VIC EPA Notice of Contravention Transpacific (Cleanaway) Deals Rd Landfill (Clayton South), putrescible / municipal waste – off-site odour (landfill closed 2010, matter ongoing)
Incinerators and landfills are not the answer to waste management. New technology and innovation has provided alternative options that do not affect the public health or environment in the way incinerators and landfills do:
•Source Reduction. Researchers estimate that 70% of all current waste and emissions from industrial processes can be prevented at the source by using technically sound and financially profitable procedures. New Jersey mandates pollution prevention planning based on the tracking of materials throughout each industry. Ultimately, saving companies a total net sum of $105 million per year.
•Recycling and Composting. An analysis of recycling potential (including composting) found that 72.8% of waste reclamation was possible. Recycling facilities produce more than twice the number of jobs provided by landfills and incinerators combined, as well as profitable for companies.
Other technologies that offer safer and cleaner methods exist. 45% of medical waste can be sterilized and reused through autoclaving, and the remaining materials can be treated and reduced through microwave disinfection and steam sterilization. Biomass and household waste can be handled through a process called thermal desorption and vitrification.

thank you
Maria Schettino

We object to this project.
The proposal to build the Cleanaway & Macquarie Capital Incinerator at Eastern Creek, is a recipe for disaster. The public health claims made by proponents at their citizen panel are challenged by the experiences of communities around the world where these incinerators are already operating.
It is now established beyond reasonable doubt that particulate air pollution causes death by various means.

It is also now established that incinerators produce high quantities of ultra-fine particulates. There is no technology available to capture these 0.01PM’ which are invisible to the naked eye and are proven to cause a range of health problems.

Particulate Matter has been found to:
Increase the risk of respiratory death in infants
Affect cough and bronchitis in children
Increase death rates from cardiovascular and respiratory diseases including lung cancer and asthma.

The incinerator site has Warragamba Pipelines running adjacent to the southern boundary of the site that supply drinking water to Prospect Reservoir only 1.7km away.
Incinerators create toxic fly ash, which contains some of the most poisonous concentrations of substances such as dioxins and heavy metals. Incinerators actually need more landfill space than regular landfill disposal. Overseas Toxic fly ash is stored in large piles, often inches from roads, communities, and waterways, blowing ash over schools, playgrounds, rivers and streams.
Incinerators release particulate matter (PM), which can be found in solids, liquids (like our water supply, and suspended within the air.

CLEANAWAY INCINERATOR TOO CLOSE TO HOMES AND SCHOOLS
This site is very close to homes, schools and preschools. Horsley Park Public School is around 2 km south of the site. A childcare centre is located only 1 km to the west of the site, while homes are located only 1km away.

A Study was completed; "Relationship Between Distance of Schools from the Nearest Municipal Waste Incineration Plant and Child Health in Japan" In Japan, the main source of cancer causing dioxins are incinerators. This study examined the relationship between the distance of schools from waste incineration plants and the prevalence of allergic disorders and general symptoms in Japanese children. Study subjects were 450,807 elementary school children aged 6–12 years who attended 996 public elementary schools in Osaka Prefecture in Japan. The study showed that a positive association with fatigue was pronounced in schools within 4 km of waste incinerators. The findings also suggested incineration near schools may be associated with an increased prevalence of wheezing, headaches, stomach ache, and fatigue in Japanese children.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-005-4116-7

Schools Near The Site Proposed For Cleanaways Incinerator
Horsley Park Public School
Marion Catholic School
Erskine Park Primary School
Erskine Park High School
Clairgate Public School
Minchinbury Public School
Eastern Creek Public School
Minchinbury Early Learning Centre
Tyndale Christian School
Bethel Christian School
Sacred Heart Primary School
Rooty Hill Public School
Walters Road Public
Blacktown West Public
St Patrick's Primary School

We strongly object to the projects, thank you

I would like to lodge my extremely strong objections to the proposed energy & resource recovery centre planned in Eastern Creek / Blacktown area of Western Sydney!
A health environment for all life forms to live in that is free of toxins should FAR OUTWAY THE PROFITS of such a large, obviously toxic furnace based business in the midst of suburbia! Western Sydney is repeatedly sold out by high flying politicians & business people wishing to make a buck at the expense our wellbeing!!! Would this ever be considered in the Eastern Suburbs, the Northern Beaches, the North Shore or other affluent suburbs where there's a higher population of highly paid people like Barristers, Politicians or Doctors? I cannot imagine this proposal getting a moment's airtime in Canberra. DON'T DO IT! If you have no empathy for the citizens of Western Sydney, consider the future of Sydney, the environment & the future of the planet that awe are all racing the clock to protect from unrepairable damage caused by the greed of humanity! My prayers will be to guide the hired decision makers to use their conscience & prevent this appalling proposition! We already have an asbestos tip & a 24 hour airport coming too (not good enough for Sydney residents). Very disappointing that this has been raised & needs to be fought once again!!! ...and the method to protest is not a quick & easy process (so many more would raise their disgust & disagreement if it weren't such a rigmarole to sign up, add your personal details (not intimating at all!!!), before decoding the jargon & options to get here. PLEASE DON'T DO THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ive resided in erskine park for 9 great years and this project changes everything. It’s a quiet working class suburb that doesn’t deserve to be turn into a dumping ground or surrounded by it!!. Its already starting to get congested with the new airport Construction and road traffic due to the business parks. Soon we will have noise and air pollution forcing us to leave the place I’ve called home.
This incinerator is NOT suited to the western Sydney area.
It was dismissed in 2017 and should be dismissed in 2020-2021 and I strongly agree to this happening.

Dear Sir/ Madam,
I am writing this submission to OBJECT to the Incinerator proposal at the Eastern Creek Site. Whilst I am not against the incineration of some flammable materials such as timber, I do object to the incineration of other non organic materials. In any event I do not believe that Eastern Creek would be suitable even for organic material incineration as the fumes would still be present , especially on foggy days.
Western Sydney already has air quality issues i.e. M7 Tollway, F4 Expressway, Future Airport and M12. All these will not assist with the air quality improvement.

I am wanting to strongly oppose the incinerator in western Sydney as I do not want to raise my children near an incinerator which will emit fumes very near to my home and impact the quality of life and health for my children and I. I believe this project should be relocated away from housing where people need to raise their families. Western Sydney already has less resources than the rest of Sydney, and we really do not want the fumes from an incinerator impacting our lives even more negatively.

I am strongly opposed to the incinerator being built in western Sydney as I believe it will have extremely negative health benefits due to the fumes which will be emitted. I also believe it will negatively financially affect the area also making it a less desirable place to live due to the fumes, and will drive down the quality of the area and make the homes less valuable and more difficult to sell.

because of all the fumes, smell and smoke that will be spread over a large area of western Sydney. We will be left with breathing all the toxic gases which will be harmfull to every person,animal and the enviroment. Please concider that this idea of a incinerator will be detrimental to all life and the enviroment. Thank you .