Hunter Power Project (Kurri Kurri Power Station)

The International Energy Agency has recently found that the world shouldn’t invest in any new gas or oil if we want to meet the climate change goals of the Paris Agreement.
This project is not needed and is the exact opposite of what we need to do to preserve a liveable environment for our children and all future generations. We have to stop burning stuff! This is a question of human rights, of intergenerational equity and of our obligations to the natural world that sustains us.
Surely that's enough! But if it's not (ie: if you are of the view that money for liberal party donors today is more important than life tomorrow) then consider that this is $600 million of public money that could be spent in so many better ways that will actually align with our goals for our children and their future. This project will pollute and it will increase electricity costs in NSW.
This project is "critical" only insofar as it is critical that it DOES NOT happen.
Get real! What more can I say? You can't be serious!

Any extraction of fossil fuel will contribute to Australia carbon footprint. We are already struggling to reduce our emissions to fulfull our obligations to the Paris agreement. This money should be invested in RENEWABLE ENERGY, which can provide plenty of jobs in the area. Extraction will also damage the water supply to this are meaning that farming and food supply to Australians is at risk.

Fund renewables, not fossil fuels.

I object to the Kurri Kurri power station project. The government funding is inappropriate given the lack of economic sustainable value provided by analysts, and the statement by the IEA that new gas/oil investments are unviable and will make climate change goals unlikely. Scientists, financial and industry experts forecast the rapidly advancing technologies of battery storage and other renewable energy capability therefore spending a significant portion of public money on a gas plant when new industry opportunities in renewable energy are fast approaching is not in the public's best interest. Taxpayer-supported funding should be invested in industries that will replace jobs of a declining sector with training and opportunities for future focused local employment. Otherwise the local community will be saddled with underperforming infrastructure with very few long-term jobs forecast, and the wider Australian economy will be held back by lost opportunities.
Please do not approve this unviable project.

The International Energy Agency reported that the world must not invest in any new gas or oil.

Gas (methane) is polluting and expensive, while battery-backed renewable energy (solar and wind) is cheaper, cleaner and doesn’t drive catastrophic climate change!

The proposed Kurri Kurri gas and diesel power station has been designated “Critical State Significant Infrastructure”, whereas it would be a “Critical Infrastructure Mistake” if it were to proceed.

The New South Wales Government and NSW Planning Minister Rob Stokes must appreciate that it would be reprehensible conduct to follow Scott Morrison’s guidance to build this type of power station.

It’s a terrible waste of money, it is not necessary, and it would dig us into an even greater polluted hole – the rest of the world is moving on – Australia should be a leading nation, not a pariah state that will suffer from Scott Morrison’s failure in judgement.

Australia should not be investing money in any more gas or diesel powered projects. We have huge potential in this country to invest money in renewable energy sources instead. That is the avenue that I want to see funds invested in instead so we can reduce pollution currently being produced by outdated fossil fuels. I certainly do NOT want any more to be opened.

I do not think that this project should go ahead. This project, even as peaking plant, may not be able to be financially viable and will become a stranded asset. More importantly, this will create continuous dependency on fossil fuel. The recent IEA report pointed out that we shouldn’t invest in any new gas or oil if we want to meet the climate change goals of the Paris Agreement.

I think we should be urgently investigating and investing in other forms of reserve and peaking capacity instead of gas.

The NSW GOVT has no need to follow the Morrison govt in this climate wrecking proposal. It simply is not in the interests of the people of NSW to build it. All groups internationally including the conservative IEA are saying that no new coal, gas or oil fired power plants should be built. Please do not go ahead with this proposal

Everybody understands that this project is unnecessary and will contribute to disastrous global heating, threatening ecosystems and the lives of future generations around the world.
Furthermore the International Energy Agency has recently stated that we can not afford to build any more fossil fuelled energy if we are the meet the targets of the Paris agreement on climate change

This is a disgraceful project in an industry with no future and our membership strongly objects to the project.

There is no good justification for this gas power station - it is purely political and has nothing to do with the wellbeing of people and the environment in New South Wales.
The proponent, Snowy Hydro, presents no information to back its claim that this gas power station is necessary. In fact, Snowy Hydro already operates a gas power station not far away at Colongra on the Central Coast which is used less than 1% of the time.

The high cost of gas has been driving up electricity prices and this will only get worse if we dig deeper into our dependence on polluting and expensive fossil fuels.
Gas is a polluting fossil fuel and extraction and transport of it is by our membership base in northwest NSW. We don’t need or want to create new demand for destructive unconventional gas.

Our members and the broader community have clearly stating their opposition to the opening up of NSW farmlands and forests for gasfields and this polluting project will only help move in this disastrous direction.

The power station will create 14.8 million tonnes of greenhouse gases over its thirty year operation. People in New South Wales are already suffering from the impacts of climate change, but the EIS for this gas plant makes no mention of NSW’s commitment to net zero greenhouse emissions by 2050. The International Energy Agency has said that achieving zero emissions by 2050 means no more fossil fuel developments of any kind.

Despite known contamination of soil and groundwater on the site, no detailed investigations of existing water or soil contamination was provided with the EIS. Contaminants of concern include fluoride, cyanide, Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs), aluminium, heavy metals and potentially PFAS.

Using diesel to run the power station will create more fine particle (PM2.5) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) pollution. Annual average PM2.5 levels at the nearest monitoring station already exceed national standards and ozone, which forms in the atmosphere as a pollution by-product of NOx emissions, already “occasionally” exceeds assessment criteria nearly every year. NSW residents should not be subject to further pollution to cover the Australian Government’s failure to manage an orderly transition to a fully renewable energy grid.

The Federal Government is touting this plant as “hydrogen ready,” but the EIS says that though there is potential for the gas turbines to be fired on a certain percentage of hydrogen in the future, that “would require some modification to the power station and gas turbines.” We suggest a swift move straight to renewable Hydrogen and forget about wasting tax payers funds on middle steps that are highly polluting.

There should be no new gas projects if we want to meet the climate change goals of the Paris Agreement.
Its a terrible waste of money and is not needed.
Australia is the driest Continent on Earth and therefore renewables are the way to go to stop the effect on the water tables. If we drop our water tables any further then we have real issues and lead to a slow death of our Country.

Australia will have a brighter and healthier economic future if we invest in exportable renewable energy such as hydrogen processed by solar electricity.

According to a recent report by the International Energy Agency, the world shouldn’t invest in any new gas or oil if we want to meet the climate change goals of the Paris Agreement.

It is foolhardy and wasteful to create this un-needed power plant. I strongly object to the proposal. The money spent on this project would be far better used in the renewable energy sector.

The entire Hunter Region is already staggering and polluted by numerous power stations and coal mines.
Please do not add to this already rather dangerous and harmful situation.
The health of our children and the country is paramount, and we all have a right to clean air and clean water, building yet another Power Station at Kurri Kurri would severely jeopardise these health issues.
Thanking you for your attention.

I write to strongly oppose this project on behalf of our organisation and its members. To build a new power station that will operate with gas and diesel at a time when it couldn't be clearer that global economic and environmental stability necessitate that fossil fuels stop being used for energy generation. Even a recent report by the International Energy Agency has stated that no new investments for oil or gas can be made if the terms of the Paris agreement are to be met. The excellent commitment by the NSW State government to reach net zero emissions by 2050 and to roll out Renewable Energy Zones should not be undermined by approving the Hunter Power Project. We urge you to reject it!

The future of earth relies on moving away from a fossil fuel based economy as soon as possible. This project should not be built, and will be a $600million stranded asset.
1/ The International Energy Agency has just released a report saying that NO MORE Fossil Fuel Power Plants should be built - starting from now.
(https://www.iea.org/reports/net-zero-by-2050)
2/ Each cubic metre of Methane Gas absorbs up to 35 times heat as the equivalent or CO2 hence it is more environmentally unfriendly.
(https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/feb/19/oil-gas-industry-far-worse-climate-impact-than-thought-fossil-fuels-methane)
3/ The Environmental Impact Statement states that to plant would run only 2% of the time (1 week a year) which is an extremely inefficient use of $600million. (https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/major-projects/project/40951 -> EIS Executive Summary paragraph 4)
4/ The project is only expected to provided 10 full time jobs on completion.
5/ It is likely to run on diesel for the first few years - so will do nothing for energy prices. Gas prices are also wet to rise.
6/ The Australian Energy Market Operator stated that the Liddell Coal Power Plant does not need to be replaced (the rationale behind the need for Kurri Kurri).
(https://aemo.com.au/-/media/files/electricity/nem/planning_and_forecasting/nem_esoo/2020/2020-electricity-statement-of-opportunities.pdf)

I am not happy that my tax dollars are being spent on propping up the fossil fuel industry instead of progressing a carbon neutral agenda.
It is the responsibility of government to protect those that are unable to protect themselves. The planet and our environment needs to be protected not only for ourselves, but for all future generations. Short term gain thinking with regards jobs is preventing us moving forward in the way we need to be doing.
Public money should not be being used for projects like these that don't have majority public support and licences should not be provided to polluting industries that have be shown to not be mindful of their impact on the environment.
It is the responsibility of government to lead the way, be progressive and lift us out of the fossil fuel dependency that can be left behind with the right will.

This project does not met the guidelines from the IEA on emissions, where all fossil fuels should stay in the ground.

Our submission is attached as a pdf file.
We have presented evidence to show that the proposed power station at Kurri Kurri will contribute to the global climate crisis. For the sake of our grandchildren, all future generations and the animals we love, we ask the New South Wales Government to dismiss the application from Snowy Hydro Limited to build a new power station at Kurri Kurri. The $600 million earmarked for a new power station must be redirected to fund research, technological innovation and development that will give Australia a safe and dependable power supply generated from renewable energy.

HI
I strongly object to this proposal.
I think the community consultation should have captured a wider scope and does not cover off the question of renewables development over fossil fuels. There are no details of the community consultation detail or reports of what was actually said and this is unacceptable for a major government project that is highly contestable.
My biggest objection to this plant is with the the new plant is that we’re investing in new fossil fuel generation as the climate crisis worsens, and for only 10 jobs when this new plant is completed.
I also ojbect to the economics and rationale of this project.
Although gas power is less carbon-intensive than coal, estimates about the environmental impact of gas are often understated because the production process releases lots of methane, a potent greenhouse gas. The IEA said developed economies like Australia should be setting more ambitious emissions reductions targets to hit net zero sooner than 2050, which will require stopping new fossil fuel investment. Based on government
advice commissioned last year, itound only 215MW would be needed to compensate for Liddell’s closure because other probable projects would likely be “more than sufficient” to fill most shortfalls.
I also object to who will be running the development and rationale for this project.
The government will direct the Commonwealth-owned Snowy Hydro company to build the gas plant. However, this is chaired by people from the coal, gas and oil industry. Will this plant be eventually be owned by by the McCloy Group and the Stevens Group? Not the government?