Shoalhaven Hydro Expansion Project - Main Works

We have owned a property in Kangaroo Valley NSW for many years, and enjoy its quiet rural ambience and a delightfully quiet and welcoming village atmosphere.
Whilst there is much to admire in the aspiration to expand the current Bendeela (Shoalhaven) hydro facility I don't believe the current plans adequately address or manage the considerable disruption that expanding this facility will cause without prudent planning, communication and ongoing controls and monitoring.
Access to Kangaroo Valley is limited to but three roads, and over the last two years their vulnerability to weather events and limitations when used by heavy vehicles has been amply demonstrated and exposed, and limitations remain in place. The data of traffic movements used in the "desk top" assessment is out of date. As an example collection of mail at the KV post office by permanent residents has doubled since the last traffic data used in the report. I doubt the assertion that only 6% of vehicle movements are heavy vehicles, and believe that they account for over 50% of road damage and disruption. None of this is adequately addressed.
I suggest that traffic movements associated with this project need to be confined to discrete clearly communicated out of peak times, (excluding weekends) with constant monitoring to ensure compliance. Movements should be limited to two days a week for two hours duration in one direction, and limited to access from Fitzroy Falls to the drilling and construction sites along the Nowra Road, thus not crossing the Hampden Bridge or travelling through the village or through all of the valley. These disruptive movements need to be clearly communicated and monitored to allow all users to avoid disruption, as was the case during the recent extended repair periods and disruption.
These roads need to be upgraded and repaired in advance of any work commencing, and are in need of this right now.
I have serious concerns about vibration and noise abatement compliance, but am not able to adequately assess these issues.

The roads and Hampton Bridge are not built to handle the amount of transport needed to carry out this project. The geographics of Kangaroo Valley are vulnerable to landslips and the mountain roads too dangerous. There are endangered species here that need protecting and so does river ecology. No amount of money will fix the environment up when project is finished it will be too late. The bush fires have destroyed so much habitat, whats left must be protected for future generations. Kangaroo Valley is a very special place and must be protected.

The road transport requirements for construction of the project are unsustainable. The road from Fitzroy Falls to Nowra is subject to significant damage during severe weather events because of inadequate sub-base and base courses. The proposed use of heavy vehicles to transport excavation spoil 24/7 over a period of at least 5 years will significantly damage the road pavement further unless there is a significant rebuild of the road to full highway standards prior to project commencement AND its continuous maintenance during the construction period. This has not been proposed and is unlikely to happen.
The prospect of the weight restrictions on Hampden Bridge being exceeded are also a major concern. If the bridge is damaged, access from the Valley to Moss Vale, Bowral and beyond will be seriously impacted. We have already experienced this in 2022 over a period of more than 3 months when land slips on Barrengarry Mountain cut off access from the Valley.
Further concerns are the safety of residents in the Village, especially children when entering and leaving school, with heavy trucks passing through every few minutes.
Finally, one can expect the road kill of various species of native animals within the Valley to significantly increase, hardly an acceptable environmental outcome.

Why are we adding on to a project that was originally designed over 60 years ago? I doubt that anybody even used the term GLOBAL WARMING back then. There were no mobile phones, no computers and no cures for many of the old diseases. One thing that people did realise back then was that large companies were responsible to their share-holders for making bigger profits. This project has found a perfect state-sponsored, so-called GREEN project behind which to disguise it's true motive.
Back when the original dam and hydro project were built, there would have been plenty of dairy farms in Kangaroo Valley with a few dozen of the original families. Local tourism and escape from Sydney was not a big thing. Then the beautiful Kangaroo Valley was "discovered" so that the permanent population can now be measured in the hundreds and grows to thousands at peak times. It is a thriving mixture of old values and sympathetic new ideas from the newer inhabitants. Why is the Shoalhaven and Kangaroo Valley such a popular place to live, to visit and to return to? We value and protect the beauty of which we are caretakers. For generations into the future it can remain for those who wish to simply "chill out"; go paddling on one of the most important flat-water locations in Australia (It is certainly the most pristine); go hiking in our national parks; and enjoy an experience of life the way many people wish they could have regularly. People just keep coming back and back again to Kangaroo Valley.
So what exactly is Origin offering us?
They promise us 5 to 7 years / 24 hours a day of noise and destruction. What is going to motivate our loyal visitors to KV while this destruction is taking place? What should our promotional slogan be? "Don't bother travelling to Australia's distant mining projects. Come and experience our very special version of destruction in Kangaroo Valley...just 2 hours drive from Sydney". I suppose a slogan will not be necessary as visitors will not be able to navigate the roads into KV anyway. Does anybody in State Government remember that we were cut off from driving in or out on our 2 (arguably 3) roads after the recent heavy rains? We still have a one-way traffic-light system in place over Cambewarra Mountain. Just what effect is thousands of heavily-laden trucks going to have on these roads? They were designed for light-weight primitive modes of transportation and struggle with the current load of heavy vehicles. Our landmark, heritage-protected Hampden Bridge is the beating heart of existing and even just passing through Kangaroo Valley. Just what are the plans to keep this safe and functional? I daresay some architect could look at a map and reply that it can always be replaced by a beautiful concrete one with far less maintenance. I understand Skybridge was closed in both directions this week. Was that part of their plan?
And there-in lies the problem with this entire farce of a plan. It appears to have been developed as though there was a blank piece of paper that was crying out for a hydro scheme. No thought appears to have been given to the existing delicate quality of our infrastructure. Does it matter if there is a lull in the tourist business? Does it matter if our main street and supply roads are turned into heavy vehicle highways? The answer to this is YES it does matter and if you think a town full of well educated, active inhabitants is going to let Origin and NSW State Government run over the top of us, I suggest you need a new think-tank leader.
Tourists would stop coming...businesses would feel the pinch and start closing...we would lose our Post Office...Young families that have moved to KV because they cannot believe the top quality of education our school provides, would stop coming and the school would close...there would be no critical mass to keep the Village vibrant and we would become a big retirement village, having to travel to Bomaderry for supplies. Sound far-fetched? Explain how this cannot happen down the track.
The blank piece of design paper certainly does not show the hard work dedicated locals do to protect private, public and national parks in the area from degradation of the flora and fauna so vital to a healthy environment. Relocating wildlife and replanting trees in another part of KV is the simple but totally unacceptable answer.
I daresay some smart person from Origin may be tempted to accuse KV property owners of mainly being concerned about property prices. The concept that "We all like development but Not In My Backyard. " Research will show that it is not the traditional and long-standing resident that pushed up the retail market, but Sydney people looking for that slice of what they observe is a better life.
Please stop coming up with inaccurate ideas that you hope will be swallowed by a bunch of country folk who do not know better.
Read and take note of all the adverse reports from the various bodies with expertise in all the areas of impact your plans will cross over. Please avoid telling your experts the outcome you want so that the wording matches your end plan.
Please do not forget that you are dealing with a town full of intelligent, passionate people, in it for the long haul.

While I understand the logic of the project and its objectives, the means to that end are clearly grossly disproportionate in terms of impact upon the local community. Alternatives should be thoroughly investigated.

This project reeks of greenwashing and would likely not proceed if government subsidies were withdrawn. The publicly listed organisation involved, Origin, would be unable to return a profit and consequentially be unable to financially appease its shareholders AND withstand the scrutiny of the market who would demand of its board, transparency of process, rigour of due diligence and completeness of ESG reporting. The reports contained in the submission from the government's own departments cast damning shadow on the project's viability - not to mention the impact on the environment, residents and community.

I support the project. The project will benefit local business despite some local community members belief, during construction and after. The area is suitable as it’s an expansion not a new build.

Origin Energy’s Environmental Impact Statement lodged with NSW Planning is inadequate for such a major work. It does not provide enough community consultation for a project that will operate 24 hours a day 7 days a week for at least 5 years. there will be unacceptable levels of noise, air pollution, blasting and water pollution.
The proposal does not adequately address the changing economic, social and environmental landscape of energy production but proposes an antiquated approach that includes negative-sum energy generation with over 2350kw hours of coal-generated power energy to generate 1880 kw hours.
The bush and waterways around the project targa has already been significantly impacted by bushfire and this project will further impact 8-10 endangered species.
The proposal has already been rejected, and its shoddiness suggests a project that will be undertaken in the same way. Origin Energy needs to present a zero-impact proposal if they expect to profit from shared and essential community and environmental resources.

I am submitting on behalf of the Kangaroo Valley Environment Group who objects to the project on the grounds outlined in the attached document.

I object to Origin Energy’s proposed expansion of the pumped hydro scheme at Kangaroo Valley and Bendeela Power Stations which is being deceptively promoted as green, necessary and beneficial. Sustainable, renewable and commercially and environmentally sensible projects are critical to our future however this project is not any of these, despite Origin Energy and the NSW Government’s rhetoric. This is sadly an exercise in Government endorsed and taxpayer funded greenwashing which will have profoundly destructive immediate and long lasting negative impacts on our Valley, the community and our environment.
This project will provide negligible additional power generation at a great disproportionate cost and the government should carefully weigh the costs to the landscape, the community, the environment, businesses, lives and livelihoods against the small increase in power generation which, alarmingly, is also only viable with Government subsidies. This makes little sense given other greener, cheaper, more efficient options are available (but conveniently ignored by Origin in its EIS). Note also that pumped hydro ALWAYS uses more energy than it generates. This project is powered by fossil fuels, using approx.230MW to produce approx. 180MW – not efficient and NOT GREEN. Battery technology trumps this 50 year old wasteful and outdated project.
Origin’s incomplete and inaccurate Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) deceptively uses out of date or incorrect data, fails to provide analysis or assessments about important “context specific” facts and presents an incomplete, inaccurate and misleading picture. Serious concerns about a plethora of critical environmental issues (including geology, water, flora, fauna), the devastation of important Aboriginal cultural heritage and sites, the quality of life for the community including danger of further environmental destruction following recent fires, floods and landslides, negative impacts on tourism and business, impacts on infrastructure (particularly roads and bridges) are not adequately addressed in the EIS.
Serious objections about these issues have been raised by Government agencies (Agencies) including WaterNSW, Transport for NSW, the EPA and others. The damage and destruction to the environment, protected and endangered species, wildlife, businesses, the amenity of the Valley and to lives and livelihoods in pursuit of an economically unviable project, using old technology (that will be well and truly superseded by the time of its completion) does not make this a genuinely green nor sustainable project. Presenting it otherwise, is a cynical exercise of greenwashing.
I object to this project. It is not the green solution it purports to be. Pumping water takes energy that is coal fired and not green. If the government were serious about the environment it would not be considering such a destructive project with questionable outcomes and would be focusing on genuinely environmentally sustainable solutions using alternative power such as wind and solar.
The Valley is a national treasure. It is valued by many Australian and international travellers as a destination of natural splendour and peaceful recreation. This proposal is short sighted. The proposed project means visitors will avoid the Valley in favour of peaceful, tranquil and picturesque options elsewhere – causing businesses to fail, livelihoods to be affected and subjecting people and families in the Valley to severe emotional stress and mental health problems. I object to the disruption and devastation that will impact on our small community. Kangaroo Valley residents, along with many other Australian and NSW voters have had first-hand experience of the effects of climate change enduring recent drought, fire, flood. Add the impacts of COVID. These events have imposed serious ongoing economic and social hardship in the Valley and recovery from these is still fragile for many. We value the environment we live in and will defend and protect it from further devasation.
Construction will require above ground and underground blasting that will take place 24 hours a day 7 days a week and cause material noise, vibrations and disturbances across the project life ( 5- 7+) years with over-size, over-mass deliveries noted as being able to occur at any time. Noise, vibration, pollution, damage, destruction is proposed to be continuous for 5 - 7+ years 24 hours per day. There will be traffic chaos, further road damage, risk of landslides and road closures. Thousands of large, heavy, polluting and noisy trucks and vehicles will be required running down Cambewarra and Barrengarry mountains- including oversized and over mass (OSOM) vehicles that will require regular closures to access the Valley. Modelling used with the objections has indicated a truck every minute. Imposing 5 - 7+ years of 24 hours a day seven days a week damage, disruption and further hardship is immoral and unnecessary especially when there are better, greener, cheaper options to support our transition to a sustainable future.
Origins plan does not even address fundamental access issues. Transport for NSW notes: it may not even be possible for the OSOM to even safely enter the Valley and even if it were possible there would be significant issues for the community and road infrastructure and systems (and therefore have insisted that a geotechnical and structural assessment be undertaken). Grave concerns are also expressed about the vital infrastructure and historically significant Hampden Bridge.
I am concerned about the disposal of dangerous debris: 420,000m3 of spoil (from tunnelling and excavation) containing harmful acidic content. Plans to dump this near the site by clearing and destroying over 30 hectares of critically important vegetation – risking ground and underground water systems, including giving rise to serious risk from contamination.
I concur with WaterNSW’s detailed concerns opposing the use of the land adjacent to Bendeela Pondage to haul and dump the spoil as this is also the water supply for the Valley. The water impacts will also affect sensitive and endangered species such as platypus, fish, water dragons. If there is no option for disposal within the Valley it will need to be transported out by hundreds of trucks day and night rolling through the Valley and up Cambewarra and Barrengarry mountains. There will negative aquatic biodiversity impacts resulting from increased changes in water level. Essentially a tidal zone will be created impacting on breeding cycles of aquatic species and macroinvertebrates. The Project operations will impact negatively on fish, fish eggs and hence fish populations that are pumped up/pumped down the dams. Essentially a tidal zone will be created impacting on breeding cycles of aquatic species and macroinvertebrates.
There are other noise, dust and pollution risks. A concrete batching plant will be utilised in the lower scheme laydown area (Bendeela). The EIS indicates that processing of spoil may be required as part of construction. It is unclear what this processing would include (blending, crushing, screening) – and the consequences of this.
Despite the employment of many workers there will be no benefit to businesses or the community. Up to 370 workers will be bussed in and out several times daily to suit work shifts, not supporting or contributing to businesses but causing traffic chaos and noise pollution in and around the work sites 24/ 7 over 5 - 7+ years.
Endangered and protected species will die. The surveys reported in the EIS identify likely impacts on several threatened flora: Rhodamnia rubescens (Scrub Turpentine), Hibbertia puberula and Genoplesium baueri (Bauer’s Midge Orchid); and threatened fauna: Gang-gang Cockatoo, Greater Glider, Eastern Pygmy Possum, Southern Myotis, Large-eared Pied Bat, Giant Burrowing Frog, Littlejohn’s Tree Frog, Fitzroy Falls Spiny Crayfish. The EIS includes ambiguous references to “offset credits” to make up for the loss of these species. The value and benefit of offsets are highly questionable and will provide no protection to the species actually lost and killed by the project, rendering the Valley worse off by irreparably damaging our unique environment.
I am extremely concerned about the impacts of the project on wildlife. In particular the destruction of habitat adjacent to areas destroyed by the 2020 Currowan fire. The burnt areas have still not recovered and research shows despite flora returning fauna have not returned making intact habitat fringes very valuable. The bush below Bendeela Pondage (planned to be destroyed again for dumping spoil) has been growing for 45 years – nearly an old growth forest. Roadkill at Fitzroy Falls (Promised Land Trail to intersection with Moss Vale Road) and Bendeela Road is likely to be very high. Vehicle strikes already have a major impact on wildlife. The EIS has no adequate measure to counter these deaths. Our Kangaroos, Wallabies, Wombats and Echidnas are precious.
I oppose this proposal. I support the objections which have been raised by government agencies and others. Before such a project is approved to proceed a detailed, independent and high quality EIS is required, as well as answers to the significant questions which have been raised. Adequate and detailed consultation with the community and local government is also required.

I strongly support renewable green energy but in the case of this proposal as described in the EIS and accompanying documents I oppose the proposed development on the grounds that its size, and likely impact on the community of Kangaroo Valley and Morton National Park far outweighs any negligible benefit. The EIS is deficient in a number of aspects, and relevant agency comments are negative across a range of issues from water quality, impact on biodiversity of high conservation value and completely disproportionate traffic volumes on roads and across bridges into a deep valley. If it were not for the taxpayer subsidy that attaches to the proposal it would not be tenable, and there are any number of alternatives.

My two main objections to this project (aside from the disruption it will cause for our community during construction) are:

1. It will have a negative impact on the total amount of electricity resources available to the community at large (it takes more energy to pump the water uphill than is created by letting it back down). It's major purpose is to make more money for Origin Energy (along with the Governmet subsidies!), The only possible benefit to the community at large is as an energy storage facility and there are surely better ways to do this without causing such upheaval.

2. The damage to the very fragile road system around Kangaroo Valley which will inevitably be caused by the trucks hauling the spoil out of the Valley. Assuming they will exceed the load limit on Hampden Bridge (itself fairly fragile, requiring regular closure for repair) then the only way out of the Valley is over Cambewarra Mountain. This road is already reduced to one lane only with drivers taking turns each way via a traffic light system. This has been the case for many months since heavy rainfall caused road slippage, which is testament to both the fragility of the road itself and also the lack of resources available to Roads & Maritime to undertake repair. I note that Tallowa Dam Road has still not been properly repaired since it was damaged by trucks during the raising of the Tallowa Dam wall several YEARS ago (and note also that Tallowa Dam Rd has also suffered a significant slippage after the recent rain - perhaps weakened by the trucks removing spoilage from that project???

Kangaroo Valley has recently experienced the disruption that road damage and subsequent closure can cause, with helicopters being used in some cases to evacuate residents. To let such a project (which will only benefit Origin Energy and which has a high risk of causing a repeat of this disruption) proceed is reprehensible. Who will be held accountable???
Copies to:
Gareth Ward, independent MP for Kiama.
Amanda Findley, Shoalhaven Mayor

I strongly object to this planned expansion of the Shoalhaven Hydro project. The negative impact on the pristine Tourist town of Kangaroo Valley is as large as the scale of this project is large. The engineering works will take place in Morton National park on steep incline, and the EIS goes nowhere to addressing impact from blasting, i.e. natural faults which may trigger slips and slides, causing road closures etc.
WaterNSW in its response, points to the impact on drinking water destined for Sydney, and Roads and Transport are equally concerned as to the capability of our roads to withstand the heavy vehicle movements.
In January 2020, this exact area suffered Catastrophic fire damage from the Currawan fire, and it's only now that Fauna and Flora are beginning to recover, let alone those who suffered damage and loss of property. Local surveys indicate that with current traffic flows, and the subsequent roadkill, our wildlife is struggling to maintain population. We can reasonably surmise that this proposed expansion will devastate our wildlife yet again.
In March 2022, roads were so badly damaged in heavy rain, that Mossvale road, on Barrengarry mountain, was closed for 8 months for major work and there are still more than 20 slips on access roads in Kangaroo Valley, only now being readied for repair.
The only Suspension bridge of its kind in Australia, Hampden Bridge, is not approved for the vehicle size required by this project. Hampden Bridge divides the town of Kangaroo Valley and is a major thoroughfare from the Coast to the Hume Hwy. Should Hampden Bridge be damaged, the livelihood of our town would grind to a halt, this includes Dairy farmers, Tourism and ancillary businesses. Who would fund the compensation payments?
This Expansion, which sounds like 'Greenwashing', given Origin has not bothered to cost the construction, being that it is underwritten by us the taxpayers of NSW, requires more fossil fuel energy than the renewable energy it will generate, and the ultimate cost will be worn by the pristine Kangaroo Valley community. The residents of Kangaroo Valley are very supportive of the move to sensible renewable energy, where other environmental concerns are given equal weighting. This is no such project!
By its own admission, the project would be 5 years, not including any delays, of 24/7 Noise and Traffic, this is unacceptable in any built up area, and certainly not in Kangaroo Valley a thriving tourism destination and gateway to the South Coast.

Negative Impact on local community and environment far outweighs any benefit from this project. Roads are not up to the standard required. This is a very small community without infrastructure to handle impacts of construction. In an area where wildlife populations are just recovering after bushfires.

The EIS for this project is significantly flawed. The project is proposed in an area of significant natural beauty and cultural heritage within one of only seven enclosed valleys of the world and parallel to defined areas of Morton National Park. There has been a gross under representation of the damage that this project could have have to the wellbeing of community, landscape, fauna and flora. The noise, traffic and air pollution, along with the probable landscape degradation that this project would cause are insurmountable and on the back of the 2020 Currowan fire which caused extreme damage and destabilisation of the environment completely intolerable. Such a project purports an outrageous amount of additional heavy road traffic on a base of poor roads, significant wildlife, narrow egress, and potentially across the iconic and historic Hampden Bridge through the Fitzroy Falls National Park. This, after recent history of major landslips on already pressured mountain roads to the west and east of Kangaroo Valley with prevailing road closures almost a year after the occurrence. Additionally there are economic impacts that would be associated with this wholesale degradation relating to impacts on both the local tourism and event industries as well as the mental health of the existing residents which would ultimately impact on the viability of the Kangaroo Valley community. Do not progress.

While I am a strong supporter of renewable energy generally, and pumped hydro in the right location, this project fails on multiple grounds. As stated in the proponents own executive summary of their May 2020 knowledge sharing report "the expansion of the scheme is not commercially feasible". This conclusion was arrived at because "the capital costs of the Project were significantly higher than predicted" and "revenue generated by PHES projects in the NEM is likely to be significantly impacted by the development of Snowy 2.0 alongside the impact of batteries in the FCAS markets".

In the two years since this study was conducted, capital costs have only increased due to interest rates and general construction price rises, while the cost of alternative forms of storage have continued to decline. Moreover, with the huge uptake in utility scale batteries, by the time this facility was constructed over five years it will be totally outbid by batteries in the FCAS and increasingly arbitrage market. This project is too risky, too slow, too expensive and completely unnecessary.

Set against this uncertain to negative financial return, are the certain and significant adverse impacts to the local community, roads, and environment.

Kangaroo Valley is a thriving community of local farmers, residents and nature tourism. In the last twelve months all of the access roads into Kangaroo Valley have been forced to close due to subsidence and damage, with some of them closed for months. As noted by the Department of Transport, these roads are simply not suitable for the proposed volume and weight of vehicles proposed. There are 99 bridges along the proposed routes that have not been assessed for adequacy, including the single lane Hampden Bridge that is not approved for over-mass vehicles and is the only entry in the village for many residents and tourists. Furthermore the proposed route includes a mountain traverse that is currently on a one-way traffic control due to road subsidence. Adding thousands of heavy vehicles to these roads is simply madness.

Secondly, the community is a small village with a primary school, pre-school and local business. All of the heavy vehicles are proposed to traverse through this single lane village, creating significant community impacts, noise and safety for the residents and visitors for a FIVE year period of construction. The adverse impact on the community would be extensive and prolonged. And all for a highly dubious project that is simply not required to meet our 82% by 2030 renewable energy target.

Finally, the proposed construction activities occur within a high conservation biodiversity area in and around Morton National Park. The area of construction is highly susceptible geologically, as has been demonstrated with all of the recent road closures due to slippage. Conducting industrial construction activities is simply incompatible with high conservation wilderness, regardless of any potential mitigation activities. The EIS does not adequately address these concerns or how they would be managed, and has been conducted as a conceptual study with insufficient substituted evidence or in-depth and longitudinal studies.

In summary, this project cannot be justified on economic, environmental, or social grounds and must be rejected in its entirety.

The proposed expansion of power station will adversely impact the quiet environment of the valley which is already subject to inappropriate numbers of heavy vehicles, to the detriment of the tourism industry which is so vital for the ongoing health and safety of the valley community.

I am writing to list my concerns regarding this proposal. Firstly, I’m concerned about the impact on our local wildlife - specifically reptiles, mammals; birds. The project will generate 24 h/Day noise; ongoing vehicle movements threatening the safety of animals on roads; damage to habitat/nesting and food sources involved in land clearing and dumping of waste.
Secondly there is the impact on the amenity of those living nearby (with constant noise and vibration for upwards of 5 years) ; the safety of residents with ongoing truck and machine movements, and the damage and degradation of the local environment with further clearing proposed and dumping of potentially acidic waste material. This is a Valley known for its quiet, beautiful spaces and which supports numerous tourist initiatives /accommodations (promoting retreats and celebrations) which are fundamental to the economy and survival of the Kangaroo Valley community.
Thirdly- it doesn’t add significant energy to the grid and uses more power to pump it uphill than it will be generating.
It will require significant government investment to make it viable and will contribute little of benefit when weighed against the obvious downsides to the people of this area.

I do not agree with Origins proposed Hyro expansion in Kangaroo Valley. My reasons are listed in my attached document

I object to this project.

It will be hugely destructive to the environment and to the local community with no benefit for either.

It has been portrayed as a green project resulting in green energy, yet the detrimental environmental impacts from the project cancel overwhelmingly any benefit that could be argued. Additionally, the promise of green energy and increased power generation - the hoped for outcome of five years of disruption to our precious valley and devastation for our community - is nothing but a big destructive pipe dream. There is a huge amount of evidence showing that pumped hydro power generates less power than it takes to pump it up the hill, so nil gain there; and the technology that is being used and the data that is being relied upon, is outdated and incorrect.

Humans have to stop destroying, drilling, blasting the earth. There is more than enough solar and wind power, both which tread lightly up on our earth, and hydro power in locations that do not require drilling through ancient rock, to create the clean green future that we need to. This project does not. This project is ill conceived. This project is neither green or sustainable.

This project will destroy a community that has just survived bushfires and covid and massive landslides and road drops, yet this project proposes to blast this fragile earth more and send massive trucks down our country roads and mountains. It will drive away the tourists and with it our livelihoods, which are intrinsically connected to Kangaroo Valley being a serene and peaceful and quiet place to visit.

Furthermore the Environmental Impact Statement that was lodged by Origin Energy is misleading, inaccurate and incorrect and authored to be favourable to the proposal. One only needs to read the objections and responses on this portal to see that.

It is outrageous that one person can green light this project without any reference to or consultation with our elected representatives and local council. Not to mention the complete lack of community consultation. Why were sessions run by Origin Energy conducted at the private golf course several kilometres from our village when we have a community hall in the middle of the town?

This is not good enough NSW state government. We are in a climate emergency. We have to act NOW. There are much cheaper and greener and quicker ways to a clean green sustainable future and we have no time to lose.

Please do not assume that the people of Kangaroo Valley will be greenwashed and brainwashed and rushed into accepting this proposed project. We will use our voices and our collective power to stop this proceeding.