MEMBER for Nicklin Peter Wellington is headed for a showdown in Parliament next week over Powerlink’s proposed high voltage powerlines through Eerwah Vale, Belli Park and Ridgewood.

 Mr Wellington has requested a meeting in Parliament with the general manager of the energy group appointed to assess Powerlink’s proposal, who will then make a recommendation to Minister for Energy and Water Utilities Stephen Robertson.

 Powerlink proposes to run power lines through picturesque property in areas such as Eerwah Vale.

Lobby group People Advocating Green Energy (PAGE) says the powerlines should run along the Cooroy to Curra highway corridor.

 Last week, Mr Wellington called for an independent review to be funded after he received conflicting information from PAGE.

Mr Wellington told The Journal he had received advice that the Cooroy to Curra route was not wide enough for the proposed powerlines.

However, a meeting between PAGE and a senior staff member working on the highway upgrade indicated the highway in fact was wide enough.

‘‘I have now received a commitment (from the general manager of the energy assessment group) that they will investigate the issue of the road corridor being able to accommodate the powerlines,’’ he said.

‘‘I want to see evidence where previous applications from Powerlink have not simply been rubber stamped.’’

PAGE president Jack Connolly said the group still wants an independent review.

‘‘Our option is 7km shorter, it’s cheaper and it meets all the objectives of Powerlink,’’ he said.

Jack Connolly with Peter Wellington and locals at proposed powerline site.

Source: www.questnews.com.au

The project outlines the transformation of a 50-hectare Valdora site into a state-of-the-art solar park sporting approximately 50,000 solar panels feeding power directly into the local grid for approximately 2500 Sunshine Coast homes.

EPA director Jason Hague believes the project will not only generate local employment opportunities and significant economic benefits for the Coast, but will elevate the region as a leader in the development of green power solutions.

“The Sunshine Coast has a real opportunity to become a leading hub for the production and use of clean-tech products and services,” says Jason, who is also a town planner. “If we want to change the way we operate and live up to the vision of being Australia’s most sustainable region, we need to embrace the technology and innovation available and do so on a scale that has real impact. There’s pressure on every level to deploy green-energy options that can cater for the ever-increasing energy needs of 21st century communities in Australia – politically, socially and environmentally. This solution can be rolled out on strategically located sites across the Coast and beyond to deliver solutions to high-demand locations.”

The solar panels will span across 20 hectares of the cane land site with the surrounding 30 hectares being rehabilitated as green space to minimise the impact on the local landscape.

The EPA model is based on identifying appropriate sites and building several centralised energy parks across the Sunshine Coast that provide large-scale photovoltaic (PV) deployments close to infrastructure and end-user demand.

“This solution goes a long way to meet council’s Energy Transition Plan endorsed in December 2010, which aspires for the Sunshine Coast to be a low-carbon economy,” says Jason. “The Valdora Energy Park will be a $40 million-plus venture and if successful in our application, we aim to develop local partnerships to deploy the technology on the site, thereby further delivering economic benefits for the region.”

EPA extensively researched the viability of the project and the range of benefits for the Coast, including ongoing discussions with the council.

“Energy Parks Australia has had several meetings with various departments within the council to discuss the project and to ensure its submission is of a high-quality, comprehensive in scope and addresses the wide range of issues required to be considered during the DA process,” says Michael Bismire, manager of Planning Assessment at the council.

Source: http://editorial.mypropertypreview.com.au/my-feature/coast-leads-the-solar-charge.html

Stuart Topp — Project Manager
Woolooga to Eerwah Vale Project
Powerlink Queensland
PO Box 1193
VIRGINIA QLD 4014

Delivered via Email: stopp@powerlink.com.au                                                                                    09 June 2010

CID – Woolooga to Cooroy Transmission Line and Eerwah Vale Substation Project

Powerlines Action Group Eumundi (PAGE) is a community group formed to ensure that the wider community interests are served when considering how to provide energy for sustainable development on the Sunshine Coast.

With this in mind, PAGE wish to work constructively with the Queensland Government and its agencies to deal with the issues facing the Sunshine Coast with respect to provision of energy. With this mind PAGE have commissioned an independent electrical engineering consultant to review the proposal and make an assessment of the Powerlink proposal and any feasible alternatives that meet the network requirements – the full report is attached with this submission.

This submission comprises documents (noted in the list of attachments below) which we have produced in response to your letter of 7 May 2010. In this covering letter we raise our general concerns with the proposed Powerlink project. These general concerns are drawn from our list of specific issues raised with the project to date and the supporting attachments. We expect you to respond to the matters raised in this covering letter and the specific issues in the attachments.

This document also addresses fundamental deficiencies in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process and the substandard final EIS produced. Core issues are addressed in an executive summary, with more detail and comments provided in the ensuing table, referenced for ease of use. We trust you will act on our comments and demonstrate that genuine community input into this proposal is possible at this late stage. We look forward to receiving the response to the CID submission in due course.

Yours faithfully,

Jack Connolly,
President,
Powerlines Action Group Eumundi Inc.

Executive summary

The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is a complex and lengthy document. In order to deliver a meaningful, community-centred reflection of impacted residents’ concerns, a substantial amount of time and effort was required, but not provided.

The main requirement of the EIS was to provide an assessment of the environmental (economic, social, cultural and physical) impacts from the construction, operation, maintenance and decommissioning of the proposed transmission line (TL) and substation, and to duly consider alternatives to the proposal carried forward. Ultimately this document is to be used to form the basis of a Ministerial designation of land for community infrastructure.

PAGE concludes that the proposal:

• Fails to assess the lowest cost and lowest impact solution
• Fails the Australian Energy Regulators (AER) lowest cost solution requirement
• Fails in its requirement to have adequately consulted with the community
• Fails to comprehensively address the issues raised by the community
• Fails the threatened iconic Koala
• Is not required in light of the alternatives proposed

The EIS cannot therefore form the basis of a credible assessment of the environmental impact of the proposal, which is intended to responsibly meet the future energy requirements of the northern Sunshine Coast and Gympie regions. The Woolooga – Eerwah Vale project is not required. It is incomprehensible from a system strategic assessment as to why the proposed 275kV injection with 800MW capacity would be fed into a 132kV bottle neck which is the 132kV system between Woolooga to Palmwoods given that the 132kV system limits the flows out of the 132kV system to the wider Sunshine Coast area to 200MW in its present and proposed configuration, while the wider Sunshine Coast area is seen to be the area which requires the new additional supply capacity.

There are several key issues that PAGE has identified within the EIS and project assessment process that lead us to this conclusion. These issues are outlined below and explored in greater detail in the attachments to this submission.

Fails to assess all viable options

Three alternatives have not been adequately considered by Powerlink and are documented in more detail in attachment A of this submission. The proposals have not previously been adequately assessed by PL or Parsons Brinckerhoff.  PAGE puts forward three cheaper and significantly lower impact solutions:

1. A single Bus Section Circuit breaker at Gympie (Cost estimated at $1.5M) deferring any augmentation requirement until at least 2027.
2. A Staged augmentation north of Cooroy (NPV estimated at $96.2m – savings of $14.4m )
3. Network augmentation Woolooga to Palmwoods at 275kV using the existing PL easement (NPV estimated at less than $60.5m – a saving of over $50m)

Options 2 and 3 were put forward in submissions to the draft EIS in May 2009. The solutions developed by PL from this information were incorrect and bore no relation to the actual solution being proposed. PL did not attempt to clarify or validate their understanding of the alternative solutions that they assessed and dismissed in the EIS. Options 1 and 3 have been put forward by an independent electrical engineering consultant, who has reviewed option 2 and concluded that this is also a feasible alternative to the Powerlink proposal.

The Eerwah Vale 275kV tee off line and substation is not required for the Energex 132kV Woolooga to Palmwoods system and the PL preferred solution is not the cheapest or lowest impact solution.

Consultation

PAGE considers the consultation process to be flawed and have consistently pointed this out to both Powerlink (PL) and Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) Australia during the past 18 months. The EIS displays lots of statistics about the volume of consultation, but no information regarding the quality or timeliness of the consultation. From a community perspective, the quality of consultation has been completely inadequate on a number of levels. They include:

• Refusal to provide relevant and timely information when requested
• Refusal to attend community organised public meetings
• Issuing misleading information and attempting to portray PAGE as deceitful and dishonest
• Treating this community with contempt, with no willingness to conduct an open and transparent consultation process
• Inadequate time provided to formulate a comprehensive response to a 1900-page document that it has taken PL/PB 19 months to compile
• The EIS either does not address satisfactorily or ignores the majority of issues raised in the PAGE submission on the draft terms of reference

The combination of these factors leads PAGE and its members to have little or no faith in consultation process undertaken to inform the EIS process or as a basis for the Minister to make an assessment regarding community infrastructure designation.

Financial assessment

The proposal is not the lowest cost alternative and the augmentation is not required urgently as stated by Powerlink. The table below highlights the alternatives, their cost and the timing:

Alternatives    NPV    Timing
Powerlink Woolooga – Eerwah Vale Project    $110.6m    2014 / 22
PAGE – Option 1 – Bus Switch (Gympie)    $1.5m    2014
PAGE – Option 2 – A Staged augmentation north of Cooroy    $96.2m    2014 / 27
PAGE – Option 3 – Woolooga to Palmwoods    $60.5m    2027
PAGE Preferred Option – Combine Option 1 and 3    $62.0m    2014 / 27

The PAGE preferred option is not only the cheapest, but provides a staged solution, requires investment when it is demonstrated that demand requires it and provides the best long term security of supply for the whole of the Sunshine Coast Region.

Impact on Koala and other species

Powerlink’s proposed route is planned to go through pristine koala habitat, which is home to a healthy population of Koalas. The koala habitat mapping commissioned in 2009 by the Queensland Government, the very mapping relied upon by Parsons Brinckerhoff, as the basis for their assessment of the Woolooga to Eerwah Vale area, has been found to be flawed and has drawn scathing criticism from a wide circle of stakeholders – including conservation groups, local government authorities and landowners throughout South East Queensland. Chief among their criticisms has been the methodology employed in this mapping project – which relied on the remote digital analysis of aerial image pixels (pertaining to tree colour). The consultants responsible for the delivery of the mapping to DERM (GHD), recommended comprehensive ground truthing (field verification of koala habitation), and that this was not conducted to the extent required.

Other key species including the northern most colony of the Richmond Birdwing Butterfly will be adversely impacted by Powerlink’s proposal with the easement planned to go directly through the habitat of the butterfly. Generally survey methods undertaken were not considered adequate, despite the community putting forward detailed proposals at the ToR stage of the project that would have ensured that detailed and best practice flora and fauna surveys were conducted. These proposals were ignored through the EIS process. Consequently the community has little faith in the veracity or accuracy of the conclusions relating to environmental impacts based upon the actual studies undertaken.

Conclusion

The dismissive approach taken to the alternative technologies and sustainable strategies aimed at meeting the energy needs of the region is extremely disappointing, particularly as it counters major policy reforms of the Bligh Government, namely Towards Q2.

Not only does it counter the Towards Q2 target of protecting more land for conservation as it rips through hectares dedicated as Land for Wildlife, it also highlights that Powerlink, a Queensland Government agency, is not serious about introducing its own policies and measures to cut carbon omissions. The government’s Towards Q2 – Tomorrow’s Queensland green vision is made to appear as nothing more than that; a vision.

Therefore, based on the innumerable flaws in the EIS, many highlighted in this document, this Project and the proposed alignment cannot be recommended to the Minister for designation and should be stopped now. This EIS fails to fulfil the ToR and lacks critical detail, providing the Minister with inferior and insufficient information on which to base a decision regarding the designation of land for community purposes.

This Project also cannot be recommended with integrity, based on the inappropriate EIS process deployed, including poor community consultation and engagement practices. The process for Ministerial designation regarding this Project is therefore flawed to a potentially devastating extent, based upon the current analysis completed.

Recommendation

Based on the above considerations, the PL preferred option cannot be endorsed and Community Infrastructure Designation (CID) should not be granted. The EIS has failed to address all of the relevant and cheaper options. The PL preferred option is clearly not the cheapest option and will not pass the regulatory test as required by the Australian Energy Regulator. The CID should be refused and PAGE asks that an independent and transparent assessment be made of the options proposed in this document and that the lowest impact and cheapest option be selected that meets the network requirements.

PAGE further recommends that should an alternative option be considered a more appropriate alternative that the Community Infrastructure Designation process be abandoned for the Powerlink proposal and the cheaper options outlined in this submission be assessed with a view to eventual designation when actually required in 2027 at the earliest.

Full Submission Document Link

The full submission can be downloaded from this link (967kB):

PAGE CID Submission – Alternative Proposal

The LCP approach recognises that energy services can be provided either by increasing the supply of electricity through new power stations and transmission infrastructure, or, by increasing the efficiency of electricity use. Electricity can be used more efficiently in a number of ways including, for example: replacing existing electrical equipment with more efficient types of equipment, reducing wasteful usage, including street lighting, public education programs, regulation, building code changes and distributed renewable power generation. By following this approach the optimal mix of investment is made before expensive and long-term infrastructure projects are undertaken.

• Installation of smart meters and variable pricing for different times of day (estimated 10-15% saving) [note 9]
• In California, the peak period pricing reduced peak period demand on critical days by more than 13%. [note 10]
• Different tariffs for air conditioners (user pays approach)
• User education on wasteful energy practices
• Provision of energy efficient light bulbs
• Provision of energy efficient appliances / phasing out of energy intensive appliances
• Minimum appliance standards
• Provision of incentives (rebates / feed in tariffs) for uptake of solar photovoltaic (PV) and solar hot water
• Improving the thermal ratings of buildings

Previous implementations by governments of the programs listed above, advice from energy auditors and independent analysis suggest that many businesses and households can save 10–30% on their energy costs without reducing productivity or comfort levels. [note 11]

In the Brisbane area consumption of water has been slashed by 56% by a combination of public awareness campaign and regulation. Why are the power companies so reluctant to save the end consumers money and start taking proactive action now?

• Wind power
• Solar hot water
• Solar electrcity (PV)
• Hydro
• Wave power (immature)
• Geothermal (immature)

Wind power

Wind power is the cheapest of the alternative energy sources at present. “Over the past 20 years or so, wind power has been the fastest growing energy technology in the world, growing at over 25% per year on average.” [note 12] Germany has the highest wind power capacity in the world with 18,428 MW. The UK has recently announced a project to build 7,000 offshore wind turbines to provide power for the bulk of domestic households by 2020. In Australia there are a few wind turbines in operation (for example, Albany / Esperance / Atherton Tablelands). Wind farms also provide more local employment than coal fired power stations. Wind farms in Australia in 2002 had 40-50% Australian content and created 2-3 times as many local jobs per KWh generated as coal power. [note 13]

Wind farms are more efficient than coal-fired power stations and are the cleanest source of energy. Communities must, however, contend with the fact that large wind turbines will change the nature of the landscape. The potential for wind power in Queensland is significant, but is better suited to the southern states of Australia.

Solar hot water

Did you know? There are more solar hot water systems in sun-starved Austria than in our own sun-lavished country. [note 14] Solar hot water systems use very mature technology, are relatively inexpensive to install at a household level and are economically viable over their useful life; “Solar water heaters save up to $2,000 in energy bills and 25 tonnes of greenhouse gas over a 10-year lifetime.” [note 15]

Hot water accounts for 27% of residential energy use, however solar hot water unit sales are only 5% of total hot water unit sales within Australia. Clearly, there is a significant increase in installations that could be made to reduce electricity demand in the short term with meaningful least cost planning being applied to the assessment. The phasing out of standard electric water heaters in Queensland should reduce future demand for energy. Energex state that “It is anticipated that the impact on the 2007/08 year will be negligible. The future impact will be assessed in 2007/08.” [note 16] Once again regrettably, future contributions to reducing energy demand have been ignored in the forecasts put forward by Powerlink and Energex.

Solar electricity

Solar electricity is one of the more expensive technologies at present when compared to coal-generated power. It is again, however one of the cleanest and will incur little in the way of carbon emissions penalties under the emissions trading scheme due to be introduced in 2010. There are two primary types of solar electricity:

• Solar Thermal Electricity (STE) concentrates sunlight using an array of collectors. The concentrated sunlight heats water to steam which then drives a turbine to generate electricity. STE is more suited to larger scale power station use and power generation in more remote and arid environments;
• Solar PV uses wafers of crystalline silicon strung together behind glass, to form a solar panel. PV panels are very reliable with lifetimes of 25 years plus and have a capacity factor rated at 15.8% along the eastern seaboard of Australia. The estimated future cost of electricity using solar PV is in the range of per kilowatt-hour (kWh). [note 17] This needs to compete with current prices in the range of 14c/kWh (without a carbon price). This is more suited to the higher density grid connected urban and rural residential areas of Australia, of which the Sunshine Coast is a prime example. Regulation and Government incentives will need to change to make solar more economically viable. Additional incentives (currently up to $8,000 rebate, now means tested and available only to households earning less than $100,000) such as premium feed-in tariffs and a price on carbon will make solar PV more competitive with conventional energy. With more than 50,000 residential properties in the northern Sunshine Coast, the available roof space would allow a significant number of PV cells to be installed and thereby a reduction in the power required from the traditional grid.