Skip to main content

State Significant Development

Withdrawn

Mount Piper Energy Recovery Project

Lithgow City

Current Status: Withdrawn

The construction of an energy recovery boiler and storage facility and will be integrated with the existing Mt Piper Power Station electricity generating infrastructure.

Attachments & Resources

Request for SEARs (1)

Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project_Overview_Final_16Mar2017

SEARs (4)

Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project 120318 - Summary of Change
Modified SEARs - Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project - SSD 829
Attachment 1 - Modified SEARs - Mt Piper Energy Recovery Pr
FINAL SEARs - Mt Piper Power Station Energy Recovery Projec

Additional Information (1)

Ltr to DPE re Withdrawal of Application

Submissions

Filters
Showing 1 - 20 of 114 submissions
Division of Resources & Geoscience
Comment
Maitland , New South Wales
Message
I refer to your request to the Division of Resources & Geoscience (the Division) to provide comments on SSD-8294 Mount Piper Energy Recovery Project (the Project).

The Division has no issues to raise with the Project.

For further enquiries and advice in relation to this matter, please contact Scott Anson, Manager Assessment Coordination on 02 4063 6972 or [email protected]
Name Withheld
Object
PORTLAND , New South Wales
Message
I live in Portland NSW which is located 8kms from the Mount Piper Power Station.
I am concerned that the rubbish that will be used to fuel the power station will cause offensive odours to infiltrate Portland, as well as unprecedented damage to our already under maintained road network.
Portland is trying to establish itself as a tourist destination as evidenced by the old style advertising murals painted on shop walls, the silo's having Guido van Helten murals painted on them and the future plans for The Foundations group.
Already there is a local tip 2kms north from the town center which depending on wind direction can be smelt at times. To have another dump area to the east will potentially double the days that Portland will experience foul odors.
Portland has some serious issues with unrepaired roads, especially on the east side along the railway, which happens to be the major road into the town when coming from the Mount Piper Power Station. Increased usage by a constant barrage of garbage trucks delivering to the power station will only serve to exasperate the damage to these roads.

I am also very concerned that the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces has not directed that a public hearing should be held to discuss this project.
This planned Project will directly impact the residents of Portland and for the minister to not open it up for public debate reeks of arrogance, unfortunately a not all that uncommon attitude of today's politicians.

Mt Piper supplies between 10-15% of NSW power and is powered by an abundant supply of local clean coal. There is simply no need to find an alternative fuel source for the power station as the strictest emissions controls are already enforced upon it.

Is this project simply an attempt to appease the city Greens that infiltrate our local country councils when they deem necessary, only to disappear back to their concrete Sydney city offices once they have achieved their green agenda?

It is for these reasons I object to the project going ahead.

Yours Faithfully.
Lee Wiggins
Comment
BLACKMANS FLAT , New South Wales
Message
Overall, I support the project with one exception, I would like to provide comment on the transport arrangements for the RDF.

The study undertaken by Lycopodium has considered the two rail transport options, bulk transfer by rail and container transport by rail. Both of these options have been ruled out based puelry on an economic benefit. To my understanding, there was no environmental impacts taken in to account when undertaking this study. Particularly carbon emissions.

With this project aimed around the ability to claim that approximately one third of the energy produced can be classed as renewable, I find it to be wanting in the fact that vehicle emissions were not compared in this assessment.

The report considers the use of the Pipers Flat Rail Coal Unloader facilities to unload RDF and transfer this to Mt Piper via conveyor belt. The report is quick to dismiss this option as the facilities proposed are not able to handle the RDF. Whilst I understand this may be the case for existing technology, with both projects still in the design stages, I would think it prudent to further investigate this and implement a cost effective solution that would suit both materials.

Allowing an additional 96 (worst case) truck movements daily over the already crowded Blue Mountains is poor. The truck movements over the Blue Mountains should be reduced so far is reasonable practicable. Not increased.

The report also states the following:
- A rail solution leverages off an existing rail service, which has spare capacity;
- The alternative rail transport solution would utilise the existing Main West rail line from Enfield to Bathurst and thus would not increase truck volumes on the Great Western Highway over the Blue Mountains;

If it is not possible to design a solution that can combine both coal and un-bailed RDF then the option of container transport by rail should be considered further. If a container unloading facility was to be built in conjunction with the coal unloader, the environmental benefits would be seen, the setup costs reduced and the ongoing transportation costs would be less.

For me to fully support this project, further consideration needs to be given to transporting the RDF via rail. This study should not be focused on economic befit alone.
Name Withheld
Object
LITHGOW , New South Wales
Message
I object to the Mount Piper Energy Project. Burning rubbish for energy has been already been rejected by several communities in Australia because the potential impacts on air quality, risks to human health and increased pollution outweigh the benefits of the project.
DEREK FINTER
Object
MUDGEE , New South Wales
Message
I wish to object most strongly to the proposed "energy recovery project", SSD-8294, at Mt Piper.

1. This project would cause a large number of issues, all of them detrimental to the environment and human health.

2. Toxic emissions could spread to the Blue Mountains and as far as Sydney, also threatening to pollute the Sydney water supply catchment area.

3. Much of the material proposed to be burnt should instead be recycled.

4. Disposal of the produced ash creates more issues due to the toxic material it contains. A proposed site would threaten the Cox's River.

5. Transporting the material to the site would place unnecessary stress on roads through the Blue Mountains, generating further pollution in the area.

6. The proposal is in contravention of the Stockholm Convention, to which Australia is a signatory.

7. An earlier proposal for a similar project at Eastern Creek was disallowed for most of the reasons mentioned.

This proposal must not be approved.



Yours sincerely,

DEREK R FINTER
Steven Hare
Object
WATSON , Australian Capital Territory
Message
Dear Ms Munk,

I object to the proposed “energy recovery project” (recyclable materials burning) at Mt Piper Power Plant, State Significant Development (SSD-8294). This proposal will have negative impacts upon people’s health, local communities and be a major emitter of greenhouse gases. Toxic ash and gasses produced from this incinerator are likely to poison the air and water ways, impacting both the Blue Mountains and Sydney. It is not a green energy project, as waste burning facilities produce far more carbon dioxide per unit of energy generated than coal, oil or gas fired power stations, in addition to destroying resources that should be reused, such as plastics and paper.

Incineration produces ash that contains toxins and dangerous gas emissions that have health risks. Ash from burning waste is toxic and must be disposed of as intractable waste, in this case in a lined cell. The location of the proposed plant next to Mt Piper Power Plant poses a risk to the Coxs River catchment and its use as a source of raw source of drinking water for Sydney.

The most energy-rich waste products, such as plastic and paper, should be recycled, not burnt. The establishment of waste incineration technologies will result in a reduction in Sydney’s recycling as plastic bags are burnt instead of not being produced at all or recycled. The proposal entrenches a wasteful society and is a step in the wrong direction if Australia is to adapt and thrive in the 21st century.

The proposal will be in contravention of the Stockholm Convention (which Australia is a signatory to) as it will generate air emissions that include highly toxic and carcinogenic persistent organic pollutants. The Stockholm Convention specifies those Persistent Organic Pollutants whose production should be avoided or terminated which includes the highly toxic compounds such as dioxins, furans and toxic metals that are by-products of the incineration process. They are carcinogenic in humans (Stockholm Convention, 2008). Persistent organic pollutants from this proposed facility will contaminate the airshed, which will drift over the Blue Mountains and, in some circumstances, reside in the Sydney Basin. These contaminants will also pollute Sydney’s water supply catchment and build up over an extended period. While I don't personally live in the Sydney basin, over 5 million people do including family and friends of mine, and I encourage you to consider the health and wellbeing of all these people in your consideration of the proposal.

A large fleet of rubbish trucks will be used to transport waste to this plant, which will cause great disruption and negatively impact the Blue Mountains community. Deliveries of smelly loads of rubbish, by large and noisy trucks, will likely occur during the early morning and afternoon (end of school day), causing maximum traffic disturbance. It will alter the atmosphere of the towns within the mountains and will impact negatively on the Great Western Highway and the Bells Line of Road.

This proposal must be rejected.

Yours sincerely,

Steven Hare
118 395 Antill Street
Watson Australian Capital Territory 2602
OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENT AND HERITAGE
Comment
DUBBO , New South Wales
Message
Hi Sally,
Please find attached BCD's comments on the EIS. Please contact us if you have any questions.
Regards,
Renee.
Attachments
WaterNSW
Comment
PARRAMATTA , New South Wales
Message
Please find WaterNSW's signed letter.
Attachments
Keith Muir
Object
Newtown , New South Wales
Message
Attachments
Michael Ellwood
Object
NORMANHURST , New South Wales
Message
Attachments
Susan Ambler
Object
KATOOMBA , New South Wales
Message
Dear Ms Munk,
I object to the proposed Mount Piper Energy Recovery Project (recyclable materials burning) at Mt Piper Power Plant, State Significant Development (SSD-8294). This proposal will have negative impacts upon people’s health, local communities and be a major emitter of greenhouse gases. Toxic ash and gasses produced from this incinerator are likely to poison the air and water ways, impacting both the Blue Mountains and Sydney. It is not a green energy project, as waste burning facilities produce far more carbon dioxide per unit of energy generated than coal, oil or gas fired power stations, in addition to destroying resources that should be reused, such as plastics and paper.
Incineration produces ash that contains toxins and dangerous gas emissions that have health risks. Ash from burning waste is toxic and must be disposed of as intractable waste, in this case in a lined cell. The location of the proposed plant next to Mt Piper Power Plant poses a risk to the Coxs River catchment and its use as a source of raw source of drinking water for Sydney.
The most energy-rich waste products, such as plastic and paper, should be recycled, not burnt. The establishment of waste incineration technologies will result in a reduction in Sydney’s recycling as plastic bags are burnt instead of not being produced at all or recycled. The proposal entrenches a wasteful society and is a step in the wrong direction if Australia is to adapt and thrive in the 21st century.
The proposal will be in contravention of the Stockholm Convention (which Australia is a signatory to) as it will generate air emissions that include highly toxic and carcinogenic persistent organic pollutants. The Stockholm Convention specifies those Persistent Organic Pollutants whose production should be avoided or terminated which includes the highly toxic compounds such as dioxins, furans and toxic metals that are by-products of the incineration process. They are carcinogenic in humans (Stockholm Convention, 2008). Persistent organic pollutants from this proposed facility will contaminate the airshed, which will drift over the Blue Mountains and, in some circumstances, reside in the Sydney Basin. These contaminants will also pollute Sydney’s water supply catchment and build up over an extended period.
A large fleet of rubbish trucks will be used to transport waste to this plant, which will cause great disruption and negatively impact the Blue Mountains community as well.
This is a step backwards and seems like a 'quick fix' but will create more problems than solutions.
I have not made political donations or gifts totalling $1,000 or more in the last two years.
This proposal must be rejected.
Yours sincerely,
Susan Ambler.
Paul Vale
Object
BLACKHEATH , New South Wales
Message
Ms Sally Munk
Principal Environmental Planner
Industry Assessments
Department of Planning, Industry and Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001
Dear Ms Munk,
I object to the proposed “energy recovery project” (recyclable materials burning) at Mt Piper Power Plant, State Significant Development (SSD-8294). This proposal will have negative impacts upon people’s health, local communities and be a major emitter of greenhouse gases. Toxic ash and gasses produced from this incinerator are likely to poison the air and water ways, impacting both the Blue Mountains and Sydney. It is not a green energy project, as waste burning facilities produce far more carbon dioxide per unit of energy generated than coal, oil or gas fired power stations, in addition to destroying resources that should be reused, such as plastics and paper.
Incineration produces ash that contains toxins and dangerous gas emissions that have health risks. Ash from burning waste is toxic and must be disposed of as intractable waste, in this case in a lined cell. The location of the proposed plant next to Mt Piper Power Plant poses a risk to the Coxs River catchment and its use as a source of raw source of drinking water for Sydney.
The most energy-rich waste products, such as plastic and paper, should be recycled, not burnt. The establishment of waste incineration technologies will result in a reduction in Sydney’s recycling as plastic bags are burnt instead of not being produced at all or recycled. The proposal entrenches a wasteful society and is a step in the wrong direction if Australia is to adapt and thrive in the 21st century.
The proposal will be in contravention of the Stockholm Convention (which Australia is a signatory to) as it will generate air emissions that include highly toxic and carcinogenic persistent organic pollutants. The Stockholm Convention specifies those Persistent Organic Pollutants whose production should be avoided or terminated which includes the highly toxic compounds such as dioxins, furans and toxic metals that are by-products of the incineration process. They are carcinogenic in humans (Stockholm Convention, 2008). Persistent organic pollutants from this proposed facility will contaminate the airshed, which will drift over the Blue Mountains and, in some circumstances, reside in the Sydney Basin. These contaminants will also pollute Sydney’s water supply catchment and build up over an extended period.
A large fleet of rubbish trucks will be used to transport waste to this plant, which will cause great disruption and negatively impact the Blue Mountains community. Deliveries of smelly loads of rubbish, by large and noisy trucks, will likely occur during the early morning and afternoon (end of school day), causing maximum traffic disturbance. It will alter the atmosphere of the towns within the mountains and will impact negatively on the Great Western Highway and the Bells Line of Road.
The proposal did not adequately cover the use of rail links to haul rubbish from Sydney to the site. It did not consider building a fit-to-purpose unloading facility at Mt Piper.
The proposal should be stripped of its status as a state significant development, which exempts it from adequate review. It is primarily a waste disposal project, not energy production, which affords it this status.
I have not made political donations or gifts totalling $1,000 or more in the last two years.
This proposal must be rejected.
Yours sincerely,
Paul Vale
81 Prince Edward Street
Blackheath New South Wales 2785
Tuesday, January 28, 2020 - 20:41
Jennifer Kent
Object
DULWICH HILL , New South Wales
Message
Ms Sally Munk
Principal Environmental Planner
Industry Assessments
Department of Planning, Industry and Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001
Dear Ms Munk,
I object to the proposed “energy recovery project” (recyclable materials burning) at Mt Piper Power Plant, State Significant Development (SSD-8294). This proposal will have negative impacts upon people’s health, local communities and be a major emitter of greenhouse gases. Toxic ash and gasses produced from this incinerator are likely to poison the air and water ways, impacting both the Blue Mountains and Sydney. It is not a green energy project, as waste burning facilities produce far more carbon dioxide per unit of energy generated than coal, oil or gas fired power stations, in addition to destroying resources that should be reused, such as plastics and paper.
Incineration produces ash that contains toxins and dangerous gas emissions that have health risks. Ash from burning waste is toxic and must be disposed of as intractable waste, in this case in a lined cell. The location of the proposed plant next to Mt Piper Power Plant poses a risk to the Coxs River catchment and its use as a source of raw source of drinking water for Sydney.
The most energy-rich waste products, such as plastic and paper, should be recycled, not burnt. The establishment of waste incineration technologies will result in a reduction in Sydney’s recycling as plastic bags are burnt instead of not being produced at all or recycled. The proposal entrenches a wasteful society and is a step in the wrong direction if Australia is to adapt and thrive in the 21st century.
The proposal will be in contravention of the Stockholm Convention (which Australia is a signatory to) as it will generate air emissions that include highly toxic and carcinogenic persistent organic pollutants. The Stockholm Convention specifies those Persistent Organic Pollutants whose production should be avoided or terminated which includes the highly toxic compounds such as dioxins, furans and toxic metals that are by-products of the incineration process. They are carcinogenic in humans (Stockholm Convention, 2008). Persistent organic pollutants from this proposed facility will contaminate the airshed, which will drift over the Blue Mountains and, in some circumstances, reside in the Sydney Basin. These contaminants will also pollute Sydney’s water supply catchment and build up over an extended period.
A large fleet of rubbish trucks will be used to transport waste to this plant, which will cause great disruption and negatively impact the Blue Mountains community. Deliveries of smelly loads of rubbish, by large and noisy trucks, will likely occur during the early morning and afternoon (end of school day), causing maximum traffic disturbance. It will alter the atmosphere of the towns within the mountains and will impact negatively on the Great Western Highway and the Bells Line of Road.
I have not made political donations or gifts totalling $1,000 or more in the last two years.
This proposal must be rejected.
Yours sincerely,
Jennifer Kent
75 Riverside Cres
Dulwich Hill New South Wales 2203
Tuesday, January 28, 2020 - 20:17
Kevin O'Neill
Object
Botany , New South Wales
Message
Ms Sally Munk
Principal Environmental Planner
Industry Assessments
Department of Planning, Industry and Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001
Dear Ms Munk,
I object to the proposed “energy recovery project” (recyclable materials burning) at Mt Piper Power Plant, State Significant Development (SSD-8294). This proposal will have negative impacts upon people’s health, local communities and be a major emitter of greenhouse gases. Toxic ash and gasses produced from this incinerator are likely to poison the air and water ways, impacting both the Blue Mountains and Sydney. It is not a green energy project, as waste burning facilities produce far more carbon dioxide per unit of energy generated than coal, oil or gas fired power stations, in addition to destroying resources that should be reused, such as plastics and paper.
Incineration produces ash that contains toxins and dangerous gas emissions that have health risks. Ash from burning waste is toxic and must be disposed of as intractable waste, in this case in a lined cell. The location of the proposed plant next to Mt Piper Power Plant poses a risk to the Coxs River catchment and its use as a source of raw source of drinking water for Sydney.
The most energy-rich waste products, such as plastic and paper, should be recycled, not burnt. The establishment of waste incineration technologies will result in a reduction in Sydney’s recycling as plastic bags are burnt instead of not being produced at all or recycled. The proposal entrenches a wasteful society and is a step in the wrong direction if Australia is to adapt and thrive in the 21st century.
The proposal will be in contravention of the Stockholm Convention (which Australia is a signatory to) as it will generate air emissions that include highly toxic and carcinogenic persistent organic pollutants. The Stockholm Convention specifies those Persistent Organic Pollutants whose production should be avoided or terminated which includes the highly toxic compounds such as dioxins, furans and toxic metals that are by-products of the incineration process. They are carcinogenic in humans (Stockholm Convention, 2008). Persistent organic pollutants from this proposed facility will contaminate the airshed, which will drift over the Blue Mountains and, in some circumstances, reside in the Sydney Basin. These contaminants will also pollute Sydney’s water supply catchment and build up over an extended period.
A large fleet of rubbish trucks will be used to transport waste to this plant, which will cause great disruption and negatively impact the Blue Mountains community. Deliveries of smelly loads of rubbish, by large and noisy trucks, will likely occur during the early morning and afternoon (end of school day), causing maximum traffic disturbance. It will alter the atmosphere of the towns within the mountains and will impact negatively on the Great Western Highway and the Bells Line of Road.
I have not made political donations or gifts totalling $1,000 or more in the last two years.
This proposal must be rejected.
Yours sincerely,
Kevin O’Neill
17 William St
Botany New South Wales 2019
Tuesday, January 28, 2020 - 20:14
Gregory Davis
Object
LEURA , New South Wales
Message
Ms Sally Munk
Principal Environmental Planner
Industry Assessments
Department of Planning, Industry and Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001
Dear Ms Munk,
I object to the proposed “energy recovery project” (recyclable materials burning) at Mt Piper Power Plant, State Significant Development (SSD-8294). This proposal will have negative impacts upon people’s health, local communities and be a major emitter of greenhouse gases. Toxic ash and gasses produced from this incinerator are likely to poison the air and water ways, impacting both the Blue Mountains and Sydney. It is not a green energy project, as waste burning facilities produce far more carbon dioxide per unit of energy generated than coal, oil or gas fired power stations, in addition to destroying resources that should be reused, such as plastics and paper.
Incineration produces ash that contains toxins and dangerous gas emissions that have health risks. Ash from burning waste is toxic and must be disposed of as intractable waste, in this case in a lined cell. The location of the proposed plant next to Mt Piper Power Plant poses a risk to the Coxs River catchment and its use as a source of raw source of drinking water for Sydney.
The most energy-rich waste products, such as plastic and paper, should be recycled, not burnt. The establishment of waste incineration technologies will result in a reduction in Sydney’s recycling as plastic bags are burnt instead of not being produced at all or recycled. The proposal entrenches a wasteful society and is a step in the wrong direction if Australia is to adapt and thrive in the 21st century.
The proposal will be in contravention of the Stockholm Convention (which Australia is a signatory to) as it will generate air emissions that include highly toxic and carcinogenic persistent organic pollutants. The Stockholm Convention specifies those Persistent Organic Pollutants whose production should be avoided or terminated which includes the highly toxic compounds such as dioxins, furans and toxic metals that are by-products of the incineration process. They are carcinogenic in humans (Stockholm Convention, 2008). Persistent organic pollutants from this proposed facility will contaminate the airshed, which will drift over the Blue Mountains and, in some circumstances, reside in the Sydney Basin. These contaminants will also pollute Sydney’s water supply catchment and build up over an extended period.
A large fleet of rubbish trucks will be used to transport waste to this plant, which will cause great disruption and negatively impact the Blue Mountains community. Deliveries of smelly loads of rubbish, by large and noisy trucks, will likely occur during the early morning and afternoon (end of school day), causing maximum traffic disturbance. It will alter the atmosphere of the towns within the mountains and will impact negatively on the Great Western Highway and the Bells Line of Road.
I have not made political donations or gifts totalling $1,000 or more in the last two years.
This proposal must be rejected.
Yours sincerely,
Greg Davis
Gregory Davis
21 Rawson pde
Leura New South Wales 2780
Tuesday, January 28, 2020 - 19:46
Sean Corrigan
Object
Trinity Beach , Queensland
Message
Ms Sally Munk
Principal Environmental Planner
Industry Assessments
Department of Planning, Industry and Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001
Dear Ms Munk,
I object to the proposed “energy recovery project” (recyclable materials burning) at Mt Piper Power Plant, State Significant Development (SSD-8294). This proposal will have negative impacts upon people’s health, local communities and be a major emitter of greenhouse gases. Toxic ash and gasses produced from this incinerator are likely to poison the air and water ways, impacting both the Blue Mountains and Sydney. It is not a green energy project, as waste burning facilities produce far more carbon dioxide per unit of energy generated than coal, oil or gas fired power stations, in addition to destroying resources that should be reused, such as plastics and paper.
Incineration produces ash that contains toxins and dangerous gas emissions that have health risks. Ash from burning waste is toxic and must be disposed of as intractable waste, in this case in a lined cell. The location of the proposed plant next to Mt Piper Power Plant poses a risk to the Coxs River catchment and its use as a source of raw source of drinking water for Sydney.
The most energy-rich waste products, such as plastic and paper, should be recycled, not burnt. The establishment of waste incineration technologies will result in a reduction in Sydney’s recycling as plastic bags are burnt instead of not being produced at all or recycled. The proposal entrenches a wasteful society and is a step in the wrong direction if Australia is to adapt and thrive in the 21st century.
The proposal will be in contravention of the Stockholm Convention (which Australia is a signatory to) as it will generate air emissions that include highly toxic and carcinogenic persistent organic pollutants. The Stockholm Convention specifies those Persistent Organic Pollutants whose production should be avoided or terminated which includes the highly toxic compounds such as dioxins, furans and toxic metals that are by-products of the incineration process. They are carcinogenic in humans (Stockholm Convention, 2008). Persistent organic pollutants from this proposed facility will contaminate the airshed, which will drift over the Blue Mountains and, in some circumstances, reside in the Sydney Basin. These contaminants will also pollute Sydney’s water supply catchment and build up over an extended period.
A large fleet of rubbish trucks will be used to transport waste to this plant, which will cause great disruption and negatively impact the Blue Mountains community. Deliveries of smelly loads of rubbish, by large and noisy trucks, will likely occur during the early morning and afternoon (end of school day), causing maximum traffic disturbance. It will alter the atmosphere of the towns within the mountains and will impact negatively on the Great Western Highway and the Bells Line of Road.
I have not made political donations or gifts totalling $1,000 or more in the last two years.
This proposal must be rejected.
Yours sincerely,
Sean Corrigan
Lae Street
Trinity Beach Queensland 4879
Tuesday, January 28, 2020 - 19:30
Chris Brown
Object
BELLEVUE HILL , New South Wales
Message
Ms Sally Munk
Principal Environmental Planner
Industry Assessments
Department of Planning, Industry and Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001
Dear Ms Munk,
I object to the proposed “energy recovery project” (recyclable materials burning) at Mt Piper Power Plant, State Significant Development (SSD-8294). This proposal will have negative impacts upon people’s health, local communities and be a major emitter of greenhouse gases. Toxic ash and gasses produced from this incinerator are likely to poison the air and water ways, impacting both the Blue Mountains and Sydney. It is not a green energy project, as waste burning facilities produce far more carbon dioxide per unit of energy generated than coal, oil or gas fired power stations, in addition to destroying resources that should be reused, such as plastics and paper.
Incineration produces ash that contains toxins and dangerous gas emissions that have health risks. Ash from burning waste is toxic and must be disposed of as intractable waste, in this case in a lined cell. The location of the proposed plant next to Mt Piper Power Plant poses a risk to the Coxs River catchment and its use as a source of raw source of drinking water for Sydney.
The most energy-rich waste products, such as plastic and paper, should be recycled, not burnt. The establishment of waste incineration technologies will result in a reduction in Sydney’s recycling as plastic bags are burnt instead of not being produced at all or recycled. The proposal entrenches a wasteful society and is a step in the wrong direction if Australia is to adapt and thrive in the 21st century.
The proposal will be in contravention of the Stockholm Convention (which Australia is a signatory to) as it will generate air emissions that include highly toxic and carcinogenic persistent organic pollutants. The Stockholm Convention specifies those Persistent Organic Pollutants whose production should be avoided or terminated which includes the highly toxic compounds such as dioxins, furans and toxic metals that are by-products of the incineration process. They are carcinogenic in humans (Stockholm Convention, 2008). Persistent organic pollutants from this proposed facility will contaminate the airshed, which will drift over the Blue Mountains and, in some circumstances, reside in the Sydney Basin. These contaminants will also pollute Sydney’s water supply catchment and build up over an extended period.
A large fleet of rubbish trucks will be used to transport waste to this plant, which will cause great disruption and negatively impact the Blue Mountains community. Deliveries of smelly loads of rubbish, by large and noisy trucks, will likely occur during the early morning and afternoon (end of school day), causing maximum traffic disturbance. It will alter the atmosphere of the towns within the mountains and will impact negatively on the Great Western Highway and the Bells Line of Road.
I have not made political donations or gifts totalling $1,000 or more in the last two years.
This proposal must be rejected.
Yours sincerely,
Chris Brown
22 bunyula rd
Bellevue hill New South Wales 2023
Tuesday, January 28, 2020 - 19:18
Penelope Park
Object
BLACKHEATH , New South Wales
Message
Ms Sally Munk
Principal Environmental Planner
Industry Assessments
Department of Planning, Industry and Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001
Dear Ms Munk,
I have deep objectIons to the proposed “energy recovery project” (recyclable materials burning) at Mt Piper Power Plant, State Significant Development (SSD-8294). This proposal will have negative impacts upon people’s health, local communities and be a major emitter of greenhouse gases. Toxic ash and gasses produced from this incinerator are likely to poison the air and water ways, impacting both the Blue Mountains and Sydney. It is not a green energy project, as waste burning facilities produce far more carbon dioxide per unit of energy generated than coal, oil or gas fired power stations, in addition to destroying resources that should be reused, such as plastics and paper.
Incineration produces ash that contains toxins and dangerous gas emissions that have health risks. Ash from burning waste is toxic and must be disposed of as intractable waste, in this case in a lined cell. The location of the proposed plant next to Mt Piper Power Plant poses a risk to the Coxs River catchment and its use as a source of raw source of drinking water for Sydney.
The most energy-rich waste products, such as plastic and paper, should be recycled, not burnt. The establishment of waste incineration technologies will result in a reduction in Sydney’s recycling as plastic bags are burnt instead of not being produced at all or recycled. The proposal entrenches a wasteful society and is a step in the wrong direction if Australia is to adapt and thrive in the 21st century.
The proposal will be in contravention of the Stockholm Convention (which Australia is a signatory to) as it will generate air emissions that include highly toxic and carcinogenic persistent organic pollutants. The Stockholm Convention specifies those Persistent Organic Pollutants whose production should be avoided or terminated which includes the highly toxic compounds such as dioxins, furans and toxic metals that are by-products of the incineration process. They are carcinogenic in humans (Stockholm Convention, 2008). Persistent organic pollutants from this proposed facility will contaminate the airshed, which will drift over the Blue Mountains and, in some circumstances, reside in the Sydney Basin. These contaminants will also pollute Sydney’s water supply catchment and build up over an extended period.
A large fleet of rubbish trucks will be used to transport waste to this plant, which will cause great disruption and negatively impact the Blue Mountains community. Deliveries of smelly loads of rubbish, by large and noisy trucks, will likely occur during the early morning and afternoon (end of school day), causing maximum traffic disturbance. It will alter the atmosphere of the towns within the mountains and will impact negatively on the Great Western Highway and the Bells Line of Road.
I live in the blue Mountains, a world heritage listed area, an area visited by people from all over the world, who come to immerse themselves in the outstanding beauty of the wilderness. We should focus on expanding Eco tourism In the area, not polluting it and making it unattractive to visitors and unliveable for residents. This is not a proposal to benefit the residents of Lithgow and the Blue Mountains area, but yet another assault on our environment Intended to benefit the few.
I have not made political donations or gifts totalling $1,000 or more in the last two years.
This proposal must be rejected.
Yours sincerely,
Penelope Park
88 Govetts Leap Road
Blackheath New South Wales 2785
Tuesday, January 28, 2020 - 18:40
Ifeanna Tooth
Object
Woollahra , New South Wales
Message
Ms Sally Munk
Principal Environmental Planner
Industry Assessments
Department of Planning, Industry and Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001
Dear Ms Munk,
I object to the proposed “energy recovery project” (recyclable materials burning) at Mt Piper Power Plant, State Significant Development (SSD-8294). This proposal will have negative impacts upon people’s health, tourism, jobs, local communities and be a major emitter of greenhouse gases. Toxic ash and gases produced from this incinerator are likely to poison the air and water ways, impacting both the Blue Mountains and Sydney. It is not a green energy project, as waste burning facilities produce far more carbon dioxide per unit of energy generated than coal, oil or gas fired power stations, in addition to destroying resources that should be reused, such as plastics and paper. In this time of bush fire concern and smoke pollution, this proposal makes no sense and will cost the taxpayers of NSW a huge amount.
Incineration produces ash that contains toxins and dangerous gas emissions that have health risks. Ash from burning waste is toxic and must be disposed of as intractable waste, in this case in a lined cell. The location of the proposed plant next to Mt Piper Power Plant poses a risk to the Coxs River catchment and its use as a source of raw source of drinking water for Sydney. We do not need any more ash or smoke in the Blue Mountains!
The most energy-rich waste products, such as plastic and paper, should be recycled, not burnt. The establishment of waste incineration technologies will result in a reduction in Sydney’s and local recycling as plastic bags are burnt instead of not being produced at all or recycled. The proposal entrenches a wasteful society and is a step in the wrong direction if Australia is to adapt and thrive in the 21st century. It will cause many jobs to be lost.
The proposal will be in contravention of the Stockholm Convention (which Australia is a signatory to) as it will generate air emissions that include highly toxic and carcinogenic persistent organic pollutants. The Stockholm Convention specifies those Persistent Organic Pollutants whose production should be avoided or terminated which includes the highly toxic compounds such as dioxins, furans and toxic metals that are by-products of the incineration process. They are carcinogenic in humans (Stockholm Convention, 2008). Persistent organic pollutants from this proposed facility will contaminate the airshed, which will drift over the Blue Mountains and, in some circumstances, reside in the Sydney Basin. These contaminants will also pollute Sydney’s water supply catchment and build up over an extended period.
A large fleet of rubbish trucks will be used to transport waste to this plant, which will cause great disruption and negatively impact the Blue Mountains community and tourists. Deliveries of smelly loads of rubbish, by large and noisy trucks, will likely occur during the early morning and afternoon (end of school day), causing maximum traffic disturbance and safety issues. It will alter the atmosphere of the towns within the mountains and will impact negatively on the Great Western Highway and the Bells Line of Road.
I have not made political donations or gifts totalling $1,000 or more in the last two years.
This proposal must be rejected.
Yours sincerely,
Ifeanna Tooth
108 Jersey Rd
Woollahra New South Wales 2025
Tuesday, January 28, 2020 - 17:56
Patrick Given-Wilson
Object
MANLY , New South Wales
Message
Ms Sally Munk
Principal Environmental Planner
Industry Assessments
Department of Planning, Industry and Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001
Dear Ms Munk,
I object to the proposed “energy recovery project” (recyclable materials burning) at Mt Piper Power Plant, State Significant Development (SSD-8294). This proposal will have negative impacts upon people’s health, local communities and be a major emitter of greenhouse gases. Toxic ash and gasses produced from this incinerator are likely to poison the air and water ways, impacting both the Blue Mountains and Sydney. It is not a green energy project, as waste burning facilities produce far more carbon dioxide per unit of energy generated than coal, oil or gas fired power stations, in addition to destroying resources that should be reused, such as plastics and paper.
Incineration produces ash that contains toxins and dangerous gas emissions that have health risks. Ash from burning waste is toxic and must be disposed of as intractable waste, in this case in a lined cell. The location of the proposed plant next to Mt Piper Power Plant poses a risk to the Coxs River catchment and its use as a source of raw source of drinking water for Sydney.
The most energy-rich waste products, such as plastic and paper, should be recycled, not burnt. The establishment of waste incineration technologies will result in a reduction in Sydney’s recycling as plastic bags are burnt instead of not being produced at all or recycled. The proposal entrenches a wasteful society and is a step in the wrong direction if Australia is to adapt and thrive in the 21st century.
The proposal will be in contravention of the Stockholm Convention (which Australia is a signatory to) as it will generate air emissions that include highly toxic and carcinogenic persistent organic pollutants. The Stockholm Convention specifies those Persistent Organic Pollutants whose production should be avoided or terminated which includes the highly toxic compounds such as dioxins, furans and toxic metals that are by-products of the incineration process. They are carcinogenic in humans (Stockholm Convention, 2008). Persistent organic pollutants from this proposed facility will contaminate the airshed, which will drift over the Blue Mountains and, in some circumstances, reside in the Sydney Basin. These contaminants will also pollute Sydney’s water supply catchment and build up over an extended period.
A large fleet of rubbish trucks will be used to transport waste to this plant, which will cause great disruption and negatively impact the Blue Mountains community. Deliveries of smelly loads of rubbish, by large and noisy trucks, will likely occur during the early morning and afternoon (end of school day), causing maximum traffic disturbance. It will alter the atmosphere of the towns within the mountains and will impact negatively on the Great Western Highway and the Bells Line of Road.
Please reject this proposal.
Yours sincerely,
Patrick Given-Wilson
Patrick Given-Wilson
2/22 Carey Street
Manly New South Wales 2095
Tuesday, January 28, 2020 - 17:43

Pagination

Project Details

Application Number
SSD-8294
Assessment Type
State Significant Development
Development Type
Electricity Generation - Other
Local Government Areas
Lithgow City

Contact Planner

Name
Sally Munk