ERARING SAYS:
* Eraring Energy is investing over $300 million over the next three years to increase the capacity of Eraring Power Station.
* The upgrade will make Eraring Power Station one of the most efficient coal fired power stations in Australia.
* As a direct result of the upgrade, there will be a reduction of 200,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions per year. * As a part of the upgrade, $40 million will be spent on the installation of Low Nox Burners, resulting in a 45% reduction in Nox emissions.
* The upgrade will create 500 full-time contractor jobs for two years in the Central Coast area.
* Eraring Energy is conducting carbon offset activity in mallee tree planting, having spent approximately $5 million on 1600 hectares of tree planting (approximately 1.2 million trees), reducing 1 million tonnes of CO2 emissions over the life of the project.
-------
URGE president Peter Morris comments:
Eraring Power station is at the end of its design life and can only keep operating with significant upgrades.
It will now be one of the world's biggest power stations and will concentrate a lot of environmental impacts into one location.
A mallee plantation might offset a little carbon, but it won't offset damage to Lake Macquarie.
The lake has already paid a high price for having this power station, with impacts on fish, turtles, sea-grass and water quality. It's a shame to increase use of water from Lake Macquarie for cooling the power station at a time when other countries have changed to using man-made lakes.
Eraring Power station can use up over 450,000 cubic metres of lake water per hour for its cooling system. This means that a lot of marine life is killed an injured and a lot of thermal pollution is added to the lake.
Construction jobs are short-lived and long term there will be more power produced with no increase in jobs.
A recent report by the University of Newcastle shows that there would be an increase of at least 3,900 jobs if the Hunter/Wyong area changed from coal-fired power to renewable energy.
If local manufacturing industries for renewable energy were established there would be up to 7,100 extra jobs, many of which would come to Lake Macquarie and Newcastle. These changes will need to come in response to climate change and NSW shouldn’t “miss the boat” on the job opportunities it will create.
If the $300 million was invested in renewable energy instead it would lead to increased benefits for the region, particularly in employment in renewable energy industries.
It’s a shame to see Eraring Energy giving an extreme makeover to a dinosaur when there are better options for our lake and for employment.
It also leaves the area open to further impacts from coal mining, such as loss of vegetation, disruption of creeks and pollution of waterways.
URGE reminds people that they don't need to be dependent on power stations like Eraring. For about $5 per week extra you can buy 100% accredited Green Power that isn't sourced from coal.
With the new feed-in-tariff for domestic photovoltaic systems a lot more people can afford to make their own power and be well-paid for any excess they produce.
Lake Macquarie is an identified hotspot for nitrous oxide pollution, so a 45% reduction still leaves us with a serious problem.
---------
ERAR ING Power Station general manager Wayne Winterbine responds:
"There are a few factual omissions in the text [above] including the one that Eraring Power Station has reliably met the energy demands of over 22% of NSW electricity consumers for the past 25 years.
There is no mention on the impact of recreation users of the Lake have on the Lakes aquatic species. Eraring Energy has commissioned detailed scientific studies on thermal plumes exiting the power station and the results indicate minimal impact on fauna and seagrasses.
The extent of the station's real impact on Lake aquatic species will be the subject of a future detailed independent scientific study.
The figures quoted from the university report are purely speculative.
The majority of electricity consumers in NSW are dependent on the energy from coal fired power stations because there are simply not sufficient quantities of energy available from renewable sources to meet the demand.It is worth noting that the output factor of wind farms varies between 25 and 35% -- that means that coal fired power stations must back up this 65 to 75% shortfall PLUS 100% backup when the wind is not blowing."
Email a friend