Mount Piper Energy Recovery Project

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 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. 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,
Robert Skappel
20 Wills crescent
Daceyville New South Wales 2032
Thursday, February 6, 2020 - 01:28

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 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. 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,
Janene Theol
21 Carrington Ave
Mount Victoria New South Wales 2786
Thursday, February 6, 2020 - 03:06

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 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. 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,
Kuva Jacobs
91-99 Mount York Rd
Mount Victoria New South Wales 2786
Thursday, February 6, 2020 - 10:25

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 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. 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 am particularly concerned for the negative effects this proposal will have on the health of my daughter and her family who live in Lithgow.
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,
Ian Olsen
Ian Olsen
203 Burns Road
Springwood New South Wales 2777
Thursday, February 6, 2020 - 08:34

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 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. 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.
We must value our natural assets, the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage area and air quality for future generations of Sydney residents and for overseas guests.
Australia has been a valued tourist destination because of our beautiful scenery & clean air, this is becoming rare in many countries.
Look after these assets which are accessible & highly beneficial to Sydney residents & it's environs.
Yours Sincerely,
Elizabeth Saunders
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,
Elizabeth Saunders
11 Killara Crescent
Winmalee New South Wales 2777
Monday, February 10, 2020 - 11:12

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 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. 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,Sharon kinnison
Sharon Kinnison
1 Kevin Ave
Scotland Island New South Wales 2105
Sunday, February 9, 2020 - 08:46

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 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. 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,
Matthew Myles
3/39 Gipps Street
Concord New South Wales 2137
Friday, February 7, 2020 - 11:43

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 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. 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, Robin Murray
Robin Murray
48 Hawkesbury Road
Springwood New South Wales 2777
Tuesday, February 11, 2020 - 13:59

As the nearest residence/property to the east of this proposed project,I object to this proposal as I will be impacted by the construction and the operating of this facility.
After consultation with energy Australia and Re-Group at information sessions none of my concerns regarding noise,air pollution,road noise and property values were addressed adequately.With regards to this I have to much to lose in aspects of quality of life if this proposal proceeds.
As I am already being impacted by continuous operating noise and low frequency noise from conveyors from Springvale Coal Services any additional noise would have a devastating impact on my health and mental well being.
By the way lets not dress this up for PR advertising and call it what it is "burning of Waste Project".

I support this project for the benefits of the region.

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. 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.
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,
Steven Hare
118 395 Antill Street
Watson Australian Capital Territory 2602
Tuesday, January 28, 2020 - 18:07

Ms Sally Munk
Principal Environmental Planner
Industry Assessments
Department of Planning, Industry and Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001
Dear Ms Munk,
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 the reasons mentioned.
This proposal must not be approved.
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,
DEREK R FINTER
DEREK FINTER
114 ROBERTSON ST
MUDGEE New South Wales 2850
Tuesday, January 28, 2020 - 17:16

I would like to voice my concerns about the Mount Piper Energy Recovery Project. I am horrified to think that this project is going to sneak under the noses of Lithgow residents, while the community is picking up the pieces after the Gospers Mountain bushfire.
The Lithgow area desperately needs support to transition from coal to renewable energy. We don't need or want another source of pollution in our vicinity! The major source of the world's dioxins is from waste incinerators. This "Energy Recovery" proposal would have health impacts on our community, our children and our wildlife. Primary producers would also be impacted. And what would be the impact on Sydney's water supply?
We are a town with huge untapped potential for tourism. A "Waste to Energy" facility would negatively impact this fledgling industry. We have access to beautiful National Parks and wilderness areas right on our doorstep, just as impressive as the Blue Mountains. Can you imagine putting a "waste to energy" facility in the middle of that? You wouldn't put it in Katoomba. Why should we endure it?
The truck movements proposed would further clog up the highway, endangering the lives of residents and tourists, increasing the risk of road accidents, increasing CO2 emissions. The Great Western Highway can't cope with the current volume of traffic, especially through the Blue Mountains. The Bells Line of Road is not an alternative.
The old-style technology of burning waste is not a solution to the waste management problem our country currently faces, not when it comes with such health risks. The solution is waste minimisation - use less in the first place - and take responsibility for recycling the rest.
If Sydney has a waste problem, then Sydney needs to deal with it responsibly. Not palm it off, out of sight, onto a small community already facing challenges of its own.

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 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. 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 wish to add further comments on the above standard submission on the above project being the Mt Piper Energy recovery project.
[Note: I am primarily using the H.3.3 FACT SHEETS AND FLYERS as located on the https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/major-projects/project/11541 website. To locate I needed to contact the NSW Dept of Planning 1300 305 695 helpline as this item is a new website apparently. Project not mentioned on the standard/old website http://www.majorprojects.planning.nsw.gov.au/. All somewhat confusing to a member of the public.] I am an individual who hasn't the resources to utilise the other barrage of info on the website.
Questionable statements made in the above:
@ Planning doc stmt: Reducing greenhouse gas emissions by the equivalent of more than 200,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide per year.
This statement seems to contradict the suggestion above that '....as waste burning facilities produce far more carbon dioxide per unit of energy generated than coal, oil or gas fired power stations'.
CONCLUSION: Independent World Organisation opinions need to be sought with regard to this apparent disagreement of views before this project is considered.as viable.
@ Planning doc stmt: Recycling some 200,000 tonnes of material a year that would otherwise go to landfill.
This statement does not seem to consider the above letter para that ''the most energy-rich waste products, such as plastic and paper, should be recycled, not burnt''
CONCLUSION: Incinerating materials seems to be a short term fix with no longer consideration that merely burning materials is not addressing the evr mounting quantities of waste that humans are producing.
@ Planning doc stmt: CIRCULAR ECONOMY diagram
CONCLUSION: This method of treatment threatens to undermine our transition to a circular economy by locking local councils into long-term contracts
with the same unsustainable linear model of resource extraction, single use and disposal that has failed us (the world) for decades (sourced from several online environmental websites).
@ Planning doc stmt: ''The RDF production process / unrecyclable material separated schema'' (bubble 2)
Question: No statistics located to identify quanties of such materials.
Already the Blue Mountains is prone to scores of B-Doubles hiking their materials throughout the GWH (Great Western Highway) - allowing even further saturation of this arterial and local byway is not acceptable.
We have not made political donations or gifts totalling $1,000 or more in the last two years.
This proposal must be rejected.
Yours sincerely, Brian & Dawn Hart
Brian & Dawn Hart
34 Kangaroo Street
Lawson New South Wales 2783
Monday, February 17, 2020 - 13:40

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 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. 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,
Terry O'Leary
PO Box 956
Queanbeyan New South Wales 2620
Friday, February 14, 2020 - 14:49

I object to the burning of rubbish to generate power at Mt Piper near Lithgow, on the grounds of health and because of the insignificant amount of power to be generated.
"Garbage in, garbage out" - there is no way that the burning of plastics, etc. would not generate toxic pollution, no matter what the power company says.
The people of the Lithgow region are already being subjected to air pollution from the 2 million tons of coal a year being burnt at Mt Piper. Even more toxic pollution....give us a break!
Burning waste to generate 30mw of extra power at Mt Piper power station is nothing compared to the 2gw that it is already rated to generate by burning coal.
Is there a hidden agenda to burn even more rubbish in the near future? More trucks on the road... great.
The recent plan to fit a new more efficient turbine (for a cost of 80 million dollars) at Mt Piper is the better way to go rather than burning more stuff.
I would rather see more efficiency and less fuel being burnt.

Mount piper power station is going to be burning Sydney’s rubbish. This is in Lidsdale / Lithgow. I want to dispute this. I will not live near Sydney’s rubbish been burnt. Burn it in your own regions or near the water.

I object to this project on the stand that it a waste of energy transporting waste from Sydney to Portland NSW. Why is Energy Australia and Re-Group not firstly looking at utilizing the waste that is generated in the Central Tablelands Region and Mid-West Region such as Lithgow, Bathurst, Oberon and Mudgee. Why are they looking to transport waste 3.5 hours by truck, wasting time and making the entire project costly to run in the end and then the Electricity would also be expensive int he end. The idea is good but the execution is poor. Also there is talk of a new project of the Waste to Energy Program that is being developed in Western Sydney. That makes sense for them to use the waste from Sydney. As such I am against this project until the company can look at things in a much simpler view and engage the community aspects and utilize the resources that are local.
Local is best. We have a lot of garbage here. Use that first. Clean the landfills here before you think of the landfills from Sydney. Understand that by transporting the garbage big distances it will be adding to the Global Climate pollution and not reducing it. Small but efficient transportation would be effective. Energy Australia is not looking at the alternative approach.
100% Against this Project as it stands . Re-think and become Locally aware of what youa re doing before you want to be the savior of Sydney's garbage and landfill.

This is a 100% destructive project - instead of investing in renewable energy and leading the way - following like a mindless zombie using 3rd world technology from the 1980s, and creating extra traffic congestion/pollution on an already over used road.
Great proposal - if u want to continue to destroy the planet and killing your grandchildren and great grand children as the environment worsens.
When will a government and the Premier provide genuine leadership to look after current and future generations?