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 “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,
Joanne Moffitt

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 proposed waste incinerator at Eastern Creek, in Western Sydney, was rejected by the Independent Planning Commission in July 2018.
The reasons for rejection being -
the applicant’s predicted modelling was based on data that is not representative of the actual waste streams proposed to be treated at the energy from waste facility;
there is insufficient evidence that the pollution control technologies are capable of appropriately managing emissions from the project and would be agnostic to the composition of the project’s waste stream;
there is uncertainty in relation to the air quality, and the relationship between air quality impacts and water quality impacts in the locality;
as a result, there is uncertainty in relation to the human health risks and site suitability;
it is not satisfied that the project is consistent with certain objects of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979; and
the project is not in the public interest
I cannot see this proposal being any different other than being out of sight, out of mind in regard to it's location away from the Sydney metropolitan area.
This proposal must be rejected.
Yours sincerely,
Joe Burns
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,
Joe Burns

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,
Dr Neil Liddle

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,
Sylvia Florin

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.

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,
Martin Oliver

No further comment, please refer to Council's original/previous letter as the final comment

Thanks

Please see attached

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,
David ---

Winmalee New South Wales 2777
Tuesday, January 28, 2020 - 17:34

The Department of Planning Industry and Environment.
Ms Sally Munk
Principal Environmental Planner
Industry Assessments
GPO Box 39
SYDNEY NSW 2001

Dear Ms Munk,

Re: Objection to the proposed “energy recovery project” (recyclable materials burning) at Mt Piper Power Plant,State Significant Development (SSD-8294)

Please see attached my submission, objection to this above proposed project.

This project will lead to complacency within communities "Well if they can burn it we don't need to worry". Across the state, the nation and the world are leading the way currently with a circular economy policy with education to reduce/recycle. This method is not a form of clean renewable energy and does not align with the current world to reduce emissions. This is not a form of renewable energy given the emissions that will present if burnt on location at Mt Piper Power Station Blackmans Flat.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide a submission to this project.

Yours truly

Lithgow

TfNSW response to the exhibition of SSD Mount Piper Energy Recovery Project. See attachment below.