Executive Summary
Chapter 1 -
The Eastlink Proposal
The Eastlink proposal would connect the Queensland electricity grid with that of the south eastern
states via a high voltage dual transmission line from Springdale near Gatton in Queensland, to Armidale in northern NSW. The line
would be a 330kV double circuit steel tower transmission line having a length
of about 380-400kin and capable of carrying 500mw in either direction
Chapter 2 -
Health and Electromagnetic Fields
Of all
aspects of the Committee's inquiry into the Eastlink proposal, the issue of
potential health effects of EMFs far outweighed any other subject. Many people
hold genuine reservations about the impact that a high voltage powerline may
have on their health, and the health of their families.
In attempting to resolve this issue from a scientific
point of view, it became clear to the Committee that reputable scientists have
taken strong stands both in support of and against the proposition that high
voltage power lines may cause health effects in people living near them.
In the light of such conflicting evidence, and because
it is not possible scientifically to prove a negative, the Committee is unable
to totally dismiss the possibility that there may be adverse effects.
Similarly, the Committee is unable to conclude that a definite link between
high voltage power lines and adverse effects on human health exists and thus
that any new policy recommendations need to be made. (Paragraph 2.66).
However, the Committee is able to conclude that simply
the fear of detrimental health effects, whether real or imaginary, is in itself
having an impact on the lives of some individuals affected by the Eastlink
proposal. In acknowledging these community concerns, the Committee takes a
similar stand to that of the Gibbs report.
The Committee agrees that, as a minimum policy
or until evidence suggests otherwise, the concept of 'prudent avoidance' should
continue to be practiced by government and power authorities. (Paragraph 2.67j.
However, in supporting this concept, the Committee
also acknowledges that there are some difficulties with it as a policy with
practical application. Firstly, people who own land through which high voltage
power lines traverse may have difficulty in 'prudently avoiding' those lines
while carrying out the normal activities that their farming enterprise
requires. Secondly, there are currently no guidelines for what 'prudent
avoidance' means. There are safety standards for exposure to ENTs but these do
not readily translate to people living or working near high voltage power
lines.
The Committee therefore concludes that, in the case of
Eastlink, 'prudent avoidance' should mean siting the line as far as possible
from houses, outbuildings and other farm facilities. (Paragraph 2.70).
As with human health, the Committee accepts that
evidence line impact on the health of stock and crops grown within the vicinity
of the line is equivocal. In the absence of extensive field studies on
livestock, the Committee is not able to conclude that high voltage power lines
affect the health of livestock and crops, nor is it able to conclude that they
do not. The Committee therefore recommends that scientific studies should be
carried out in Australia on the possible effects of high voltage powerlines
on stock and crops. (Paragraph 2.72).
Regardless of whether there is an actual effect or
not, public perception that there might be an effect can have an impact on the
market value of stock and crops produced in areas through which high voltage
power lines pass. The Committee therefore concludes that compensation by
power authorities should be extended to those property owners who suffer an
economic loss as a result of the construction of Eastlink, regardless of how
that loss is brought about. (Paragraph 2.74).
Chapter 3 -
Environmental Impact
The Committee accepts that there will be some direct
environmental impact associated with the construction of this high voltage powerline.
The primary impact will be loss of trees through clearing of casement and resultant
fragmentation of habitat. Other potential environmental impacts include soil
erosion, the introduction of noxious weeds during construction and maintenance
activities, the use of herbicides to control vegetation regrowth along
casements, the unfavourable visual impact of the line, and impact on special
heritage areas.
Of greater concern to the Committee is, however, the
actions of the power authorities in determining the preferred corridor, then
carrying out the Environmental Impact Statement. While the final impact
statement is not due to be completed until mid-1996, it is clear that the
power authorities have already chosen a specific route.
The Committee questions the practice of carrying out an
environmental impact assessment of a proposal when alternatives have not been
included in the detailed Environmental Impact Statement and when siting of the
line is clearly going ahead before the Environmental Impact Statement is
complete. (Paragraph 3.75).
Chapter 4 -
Social and Local Economic Impact
The Eastlink proposal, perhaps more than any other
high voltage power line in Australia's history, has resulted in high levels of
community opposition. The large number of critical submissions received was a
strong indication to the Committee that the communities affected do not want Eastlink
to proceed.
Impact on
Agricultural Land
Property owners were concerned that the position of
the line would have a detrimental impact on the efficient operation of their
businesses through interference with facilities and with aerial agriculture. The
Committee recommends that any detrimental impact on farm operations should be
the subject of compensation. (Paragraph 4.97).
Local Economic
Impact
Eastlink has already had an impact on the real estate
market for properties along the Western corridor. In addition, the value of
properties along the corridor may well be reduced by the advent of the powerline.
It is clear that some people are currently being economically disadvantaged by
the proposal.
Regional economics may feel a flow-on effect
from the stagnation of the rural real estate market and the unwillingness of
property owners in general to make any further capital investment in the
properties. The visual impact of the power line may also affect regional
tourism.
The power authorities involved have noted that real
estate devaluations sometimes occur when a power line is first proposed, but
suggested that the market will regain its previous level at some stage after
the power line has been completed. The Committee notes, however, that this
information does not help property owners who want to sell now. or who are
planning to sell in the near future.
The Committee holds the view that, if the power
authorities are so sure that the property market will return to normal after Eastlink
is completed, they should buy now, at pre-Eastlink valuation, any
property that has been on the market and that has not achieved a sale because
of speculation about Eastlink. (Paragraph 4.101).
Compensation
It is the usual practice of power authorities to offer
compensation for the use of easements and to offset any losses associated with
reduced amenity of facilities on individual farms. However, there is a general
community belief that in the case of Eastlink, the level of compensation would
be inadequate.
The Committee is concerned that the practise of
negotiating compensation arrangements on a one-by-one basis,
without any requirement for public disclosure of the total amount, or the
factors included in the summation, favours the power authorities and enables
them to achieve minimum levels of compensation. Were public disclosure
compulsory and if landowners had access to a simpler and cheaper avenue of
conciliation than the courts, the level of compensation paid may appear more
equitable to those seeking compensation for the intrusion of Eastlink.
The Committee
recommends wider and more comprehensive compensation provisions, which may
include provision for an independent conciliation process for individuals or
groups affected. (Paragraph 4.105).
Community
Consultation & Social Impact
While the power authorities made every effort to
consult the people directly affected by the proposal, both those individuals
and the broader community have rejected the consultation process as completely
inadequate. People believe that because they were never given the choice of 'no
Eastlink' the consultation process was intrinsically flawed.
It appears to the Committee that a significant cause
of community disharmony and rancour has been the practice of holding
discussions with individual property owners who were disadvantaged by the fact
that they were ignorant of what had been said to neighbouring property owners,
while the power authority officers had the advantage of knowing what offers had
been made to other landholders.
More
significantly the fact that the power authorities made changes to the proposed
route led to suspicion that improper influence had been brought to bear. This
created antagonism between neighbours and in some instances rifts have formed
within rural areas that will take a long time to heal.
The Committee concludes that while the power
authorities put a large effort into public consultation, the methods used were
not accepted by many of those people affected by the proposed power line. The
cumulative effect has been considerable social disquiet and stress. (Paragraph
4.108).
State
Parliamentary Review Procedures
This Committee and its predecessor, the Standing
Committee on Industry, Science and Technology, has over the last few years
noted a lack of informed and detailed debate on matters relating to power
generation developments. In particular, the Committee has noted that state governments could play a stronger role in
meshing policy with community needs and opinions.
The Committee suggests to all state governments that
there would be merit is establishing a process whereby communities and professionals
could be more directly involved in debate on energy matters. Through such a
process, parliaments could monitor community reaction to energy projects, as
well as provide a more accessible and flexible grievance mechanism. (Paragraph
4.111)
Chapter 5 -
Economic Considerations
The Senate Standing Committee on Industry Science and
Technology recommended in its report on Gas and Electricity that any
interconnection between NSW and Queensland should not go ahead until it was proven to
be economic. While opponents of Eastlink have argued that this has still not
been proven, the fact that two State Governments, with the support of the Federal
Government, are going ahead indicates that it is considered b them to be
economic.
The Committee accepts that the analysis carried out by
the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics examined the general
economics of interconnection through a high voltage power line, and was not
sufficiently detailed to draw conclusions about the specific case of Eastlink.
The Committee further accepts that the model demonstrated, in general terms,
that electricity interconnection through a high voltage power line would be
economic. (Paragraph 5.20).
However, because a specific cost/benefit analysis for Eastlink
was not available, the Committee is unable to ermment on the specific case of
this proposal. (Paragraph 5.21).
The total cost of Eastlink has been stated by the
power authorities to be in the region of $300 million. However, information
given by the authorities does not include a breakdown of what expenses have
been included. Lack of detailed information has contributed to public confusion
and misunderstanding about the relative costs and benefits of Eastlink and
therefore to a lack of understanding of the full economic impact.
The Committee believes that, in the interests of good
public relations, the power authorities involved should make available to the
public a more detailed cost/benefit analysis of Eostlink. (Paragraph 2.23).
Chapter 6 -
Electricity Consumption and Greenhouse
The question of impact on greenhouse gas emissions
hinges on whether Eastlink will increase the use of coal fired power stations.
Because there is almost no data available which relates specifically to Eastlink,
the Committee is unable to make a decision as to which is the more likely
outcome. However, the Committee notes that the potential does exist for greenhouse
gas emissions to increase. The Committee therefore recommends that the
Commonwealth Government investigate in detail the likely impact of Eastlink on
coal consumption and the implications of any change in that consumption for
greenhouse gas emissions having regard to its international obligations. (Paragraph
6.29).
Chapter 7 -
Renewable Alternatives
Throughout the current inquiry, the Committee was
impressed by the knowledge and enthusiasm that community groups and individuals
hold for alternative renewable forms of electricity generation.
The Senate Standing Committee on Industry, Science and
Technology in its 1992 report, Gas & Electricity - Combining Efficiency and Greenhouse, stated that Queensland would be an ideal place to further research on renewables and
recommended that the development of a national grid must not preclude the
further development of options such as demand management, co-generation
and new technologies.
Despite the
outcome of the Eastlink interconnection, the Committee reiterates the opinion
expressed in the Report on Gas and Electricity that Queensland would be an ideal place for
increased research and development of renewable energy options. (Paragraph
7.33).
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page