Residents protest Veolia's waste to energy proposal at Tarago

Members of Communities Against The Tarago Incinerator (CATTI) gathered outside the Tarago Hall where company representatives were holding an information session.

The forum was part of community consultation on Veolia's environmental impact statement for its proposed $600 million Advanced Recovery Centre at the nearby Woodlawn eco-precinct.

READ MORE: Veolia toxic spill at Tarago deepens burning opposition

The state significant 30 megawatt plant would burn up to 380,000 tonnes annually of residual waste feedstock, otherwise destined for the existing landfill. The associated power plant is expected to generate up to 240,000MW of energy each year, enough to power 40,000 homes, the company says.

On Saturday, a group of residents made their feelings known. 'No waste incinerator' and 'no big smoke for the small folk,' their placards stated.

CATTI member Paige Davis said people didn't believe Veolia's "gloss" that the facility wouldn't endanger human, animal and environmental health.

"We don't want it, the community doesn't want it and we don't know how many times we have to say it," she said.

Graziers Richard and Barbara Fairfax were also among the protestors. Their property lies 2km southwest of Veolia's bioreactor.

ALSO READ: More funding needed to fix 'impossible and dangerous' potholes in Queanbeyan-Palerang area

Mr Fairfax feared contamination from the incinerator would jeopardise the couple's merino wool/sheep and cattle grazing operation.

"When we sell stock we have to fill out a national vendor declaration form to say what chemicals have been used etc," he said.

"If we get any fallout from the incinerator, we have no control over it. Sheep drink the water and then there's what comes out of the air.

"If we get a contamination reading, we're gone. It could render this area useless."

Veolia's EIS concluded, based on modelling, that the facility met all regulations for human health, water quality and food production. This included rainwater tanks and the village bores. The document stated that this was based on highly conservative assumptions (70 years of exposure) and followed Commonwealth guidelines for human health risk assessment.

ALSO READ: Scamwatch: The impersonation scams to be on guard against

Mr Fairfax said he'd heard similar assurances before. He told The Post that a 2005 information session about the bioreactor, hosted by former owner, Collex, stated there would be no odour from the facility. Mr Fairfax said he'd lodged numerous complaints about odour over the years since.

However ARC project director Kathryn Whitfield previously said while Veolia acknowledged odour was a community concern, it had installed 36 new gas wells in the last six months to increase methane gas capture from the landfill.

"We've seen a significant reduction in the number of complaints received. We've also spoken to community members who said they hadn't noticed as much odour."

Veolia made available its experts on aspects of the ARC's operation, including human health and air quality at the information session.

The Goulburn version, a week earlier, was a quieter affair than Tarago's, with only a handful of people seeking more information.

Ms Whitfield said generally, people were still concerned about what the ARC would mean.

"We talk through those concerns," she said.

"The people who attended our information sessions had quite detailed and technical questions and had done their own research. That's a positive thing."

Community Voice for Hume convenor, Bob Philipson, said the group would lodge a submission on the EIS, opposing the waste to energy facility.

"We don't think it is in the short or long-term interests of the community, NSW or Australia," he said.

ALSO READ: Floodwaters tear through train lines with passengers left stranded

"We see it as a barrier to building the circular economy. We (also) see the emissions over the project's life as being a threat to NSW' 2030 emissions reduction targets and as a challenge for Australia's targets as well...We know there is a better alternative (than burning waste)."

But Ms Whitfield said the plant would create 50 per cent fewer greenhouse emissions than landfilling waste.

Cr Jason Shepherd also attended the forum. He reinforced Goulburn Mulwaree Council's opposition to the facility and said he wanted to ask questions of company representatives and the community.

The council will hold an extraordinary meeting on Tuesday, November 29 to finalise its response to the EIS. Already, more than 10 people have registered to speak in public forum. The meeting is open to the public and will be livestreamed on the council's website.

People can lodge a submission on the EIS, which is available on the NSW Planning portal until December 6.

Do you have something to say about this issue? Send a letter to the editor. Click here for the Goulburn Post

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can access our trusted content: