State Significant Development
Wallarah 2 Coal Mine
Central Coast
Current Status: Determination
Interact with the stages for their names
- SEARs
- Prepare EIS
- Exhibition
- Collate Submissions
- Response to Submissions
- Assessment
- Recommendation
- Determination
Attachments & Resources
Application (2)
Request for DGRS (1)
DGRs (2)
EIS (29)
Submissions (23)
Public Hearing (13)
Response to Submissions (8)
Amendments (25)
Assessment (1)
Recommendation (29)
Determination (4)
Approved Documents
There are no post approval documents available
Note: Only documents approved by the Department after November 2019 will be published above. Any documents approved before this time can be viewed on the Applicant's website.
Complaints
Want to lodge a compliance complaint about this project?
Make a ComplaintEnforcements
There are no enforcements for this project.
Inspections
There are no inspections for this project.
Note: Only enforcements and inspections undertaken by the Department from March 2020 will be shown above.
Submissions
Name Withheld
Support
Name Withheld
Message
The project will inject money into the local communities, provide jobs and support businesses.
Alpine Air Compressors
Support
Alpine Air Compressors
Message
Lindsay Auston
Support
Lindsay Auston
Message
renee parker
Support
renee parker
Message
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Message
I strongly object to the proposal for Wallarah 2 coal mine
As a resident less than 4kms away from this site, I do not want the risks of coal dust on my health, or my family's health.
Coal dust particulates (tiny pieces of coal) are of particular concern because they contain heavy metals which are toxic at low concentrations.
They include lead, mercury, nickel, tin, cadmium, mercury, antimony, and arsenic, as well as radio isotopes of thorium and strontium.
Coal dust, especially fine coal dust, has been identified by health professionals and doctors around the world as causing a range of diseases and health problems.
Examples include an increased incidence of heart and respiratory diseases like asthma and lung cancer.
Fine invisible coal dust particles less than 2.5 microns long lodge in the lungs and are not naturally expelled, so long-term exposure increases the risk of health problems.
Min Park
Support
Min Park
Message
I support Wyong Coal and the Wallarah 2 Coal Project.
The development of the Wallarah 2 coal Project will provide significant economic benefits to the area and the state.
This EIS correctly addresses the concerns expressed by stakeholder. Thus, i strongly believe the project should receive the full support from the state government.
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Message
I am writing in opposition to the proposed Wallarah 2 Coal Mine.
I am vehemently opposed to this proposal for the following reasons:
1. The extraction of Fossil Fuels given our knowledge of climate change is outlandishly shortsighted
2. The Australian public is overwhelming in favour of action on climate change, with new mines being pushed only by business / lobby groups (see attached 350.org.au document "350_EMC_Coal_Poll_Final.pdf")
3. There is room for so much more economic development in this area of the Central Coast; tourism, food based economies, rural escapes, agriculture. To sully these opportunities for the short term gain of fossil fuel extraction is proposterous, and really a blatant theft from future generations.
4. The area in question is the site of an up and coming grass based, ethical farming practice run by Shannon & Kylie Kelly .
Ethical, grass based farming unequivocally holds some of the keys to quickly reversing the effects of climate change by using grazing management methods that remove huge amounts of carbon from the atmosphere, whilst growing amazing forage and producing healthy, nutrient dense food - surely a win-win! You can read more about this in many places, but a great place to start is http://savory.global/. See also attached document "The Science and Methodology of Holistic Planned Grazing.pdf"
Given the legitimate public concern around fossil fuels and climate change, and the points raised above, I submit that the proposed mine development should not be approved.
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Message
I am vehemently opposed to this proposal for the following reasons:
1. The extraction of Fossil Fuels given our knowledge of climate change is outlandishly shortsighted
2. The Australian public is overwhelming in favour of action on climate change, with new mines being pushed only by business / lobby groups (see attached 350.org.au document "350_EMC_Coal_Poll_Final.pdf")
3. There is room for so much more economic development in this area of the Central Coast; tourism, food based economies, rural escapes, agriculture. To sully these opportunities for the short term gain of fossil fuel extraction is proposterous, and really a blatant theft from future generations.
4. The area in question is the site of an up and coming grass based, ethical farming practice run by Shannon & Kylie Kelly .
Ethical, grass based farming unequivocally holds some of the keys to quickly reversing the effects of climate change by using grazing management methods that remove huge amounts of carbon from the atmosphere, whilst growing amazing forage and producing healthy, nutrient dense food - surely a win-win! You can read more about this in many places, but a great place to start is http://savory.global/. See also attached document "The Science and Methodology of Holistic Planned Grazing.pdf"
Given the legitimate public concern around fossil fuels and climate change, and the points raised above, I submit that the proposed mine development should not be approved.
margaret auston
Support
margaret auston
Message
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Message
Kevin Reed
Support
Kevin Reed
Message
David Cleaver
Support
David Cleaver
Message
Wallarah 2 coal mine has gone above and beyond the very strict criteria that is required by the EPA to commence operation.
I absolutely 100% support the approval of this mine.
Megan Benson
Object
Megan Benson
Message
As we all know, this project has previously been rejected by government. It beggars belief that Kores continues to force their proposal on the community and that today's government is accommodating the process.
We remember the (then) Premier's statement to the community that there was to be no mining in water catchments and that Wallarah 2 would not go ahead.
We remember too, the Independent Member for Lake Macquarie, Greg Piper, stating in Parliament (around 2007) that benefits from mining projects like the proposed Wallarah 2, should flow to the residents of NSW, not to foreign governments - especially in light of the fact that it is the people of NSW who carry the risks and consequences of mining in water catchments as well as the risks associated with the other myriad of environmental and social impacts. He clearly stated that this mining project in particular was simply "not worth it". In other words, this proposal did not have the social license to operate.
It is worth noting both Gosford and Wyong Councils continue to hold grave concerns and oppose the proposal.
The "revised" Wallarah 2 Coal Project still remains the same, with only minor amendments that have seen to the removal of the requirement for access consent from the Darkinjung Aboriginal Lands Council. But now the risks posed by the project are perhaps greater.
For one, the commercial logistics of the project clearly don't stand up - especially when one considers recent announcements about Kores withdrawing from international resource projects and the perilous state of the global export coal industry.
Any major mining project should, in the first instance, improve the amenity and outcomes for the general community; however this proposal can be seen as a stranded asset in the making - with the likelihood of serious external risks and costs to the community.
There is no justification for the Wallarah 2 Coal Project, the proposal should be rejected.
Megan Benson
Bundeena NSW 2300
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Message
Coal is an outdated energy source. It's extraction, transport and use damages the environment and peoples health. This project's geographic impact spans from the valleys of the Central Coast to the open car rail route past Lake Macquarie to Newcastle. It risks water resources that supply over 300,000 people. Any assessment needs to take account of the cost to our health, our environment and the security of our water.
Does NSW need more coalmines? There are already mothballed mines across the Hunter Valley. Why not re-open these mines? If they can't operate profitably at current coal prices, how will the W2 mine be viable? The project's forecasts rely on optimistically high coal prices and unrealistically low production costs. There is a serious risk the project does its damage, loses viability and closes. The `Economist at Large' report describes the project's economic assessment as `not suitable for decision making in its current form...It fails to clearly demonstrate the economic benefits to Australia, let along NSW and the local community'. If economics is the basis on which this project is still alive, the community deserves an independently verified economic viability report.
Jilliby Conservation Area is ruggedly beautiful. It teems with wildlife. It is enjoyed by many types of recreational users. And it is at the epicenter of this project. The terrain is challenging with steep valleys and rocky ridgelines. And it is predicted to drop over two metres. How does that happen? If you drop this type of topography by such an extent, how can you not have rockfalls and landslides? Average rainfall in this area is 1250mm pa, compounding the impacts of subsidence with flooding and erosion. It is inconceivable that recreation in this conservation area wouldn't become hazardous and enormous damage done to the terrain and wildlife habitat.
We bought our property for its natural beauty, two thirds of it is bushland. We are very concerned about the impact of a subsidence of over two metres. How does the land cope with this? Our house is amongst a stand of red gums, over 100 years old. Will they withstand this movement? Do we need to fell them for the safety of our family? We have a large billabong supporting a diversity of water birds, mammals, frogs. We are concerned this habitat will be drained and disappear. Wombats inhabit the banks of our gullies. What happens to them and their burrows when the ground shifts and sinks?
The proposer says there will be recompense for damage to our home and property. How do they know in what fashion two metres of subsidence occurs? Why is there not danger from sudden shifts in terrain? What about our underground water tanks? How stable are the high voltage cables suspended above our valley? How will they compensate for being flood prone where our land was previously safe? Or being cut off by flooding in an emergency? What other unintended consequences should we fear?
We have lots of questions but unfortunately no answers. We have had no contact from the proposer. They seem dismissive of concerns regarding the conservation area and the local community most affected.
Please balance the impact on environment, health and community against the dubious economics justifying this project and reject the proposal.