Edgar Dam Strengthening Project

If you have questions on dam safety and management, or how this project will help, please post a question below. We'll respond as soon as we can.


Project Update – July 2024

Flood inundation maps

Why were these maps produced and what do they show?

Hydro Tasmania created flood maps for the Huon Valley region as part of mandatory requirements set by the regulator, the Department of Natural Resources and Environment Tasmania. They show the worst-case scenario of flooding if the Edgar Dam was to fail suddenly and are part of standard emergency management preparations.

We shared the maps with the regulator in 2016 and with emergency services, Tasmania police, and the Huon Valley Council Emergency Management Committee.

What is the chance of these floods occurring?

The scenarios shown in the maps are extremely unlikely a 1 in 10,000 or 0.0001 chance in any year. The risk at Edgar Dam is associated with a major earthquake (6.8 magnitude or greater) on the Lake Edgar Fault.

The upcoming strengthening project will reduce the risk even further to one in 1 million or 0.000001 in any year. We have more information on what risk means in the context of dams here.

What do these maps mean?

The flood maps show the worst-case scenario of what might happen in the very unlikely event of Edgar Dam failing suddenly. They cannot be used to provide certainties because the models used to produce these maps were based on data that was available at the time of production as well as a range of variables that would alter through time, such as catchment and river inflows, tides and river channel shape.

The maps show expected peak flood height and time to reach 'peak' flood at Judbury, Huonville, Glen Huon, Franklin, and Port Huon. This information was produced specifically to inform the regulator and for emergency management preparations by the State Emergency Service, Tasmania Police and the Huon Valley Council.


HRD Inundation Mapping - Edgar Dam - Earthquake Failure - Sheet 2 of 2


Project Update – June 2024

EPBC Decision

The Federal assessment of the project is now complete and it has been determined to be not a controlled action – particular manner. This means that the works must be completed according to the particular manner in the decision notice and no further assessment is required. You can review the referral and associated documentation here(External link).

Quarry

Our final detailed investigation of Sunshine Quarry revealed that it was not suitable. We will progress with a Bridgewater quarry unless the successful contractor puts forward an alternative source that meets our technical and environmental requirements.

Tender

A tender process for the specialist construction services required to complete this work will start in June.

Project Update – February 2024

The project referral (2023/09714) is now open for public comment. For more information, visit Edgar Dam Strengthening Project(External link). Comments close 13 March.

Project Update – November 2023

EPBC referral submitted

The project was referred to the Department of Climate Change, Energy, Environment and Water (DCCEWW) for assessment under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 on 21 November 2023.

We will update this page as the project moves through the assessment process, including when it opens for public comment. You can also track this via the EPBC Act Public Portal.(External link)

For more information about the assessment process, including key steps and indicative timings, please take a look here(External link).

New Quarry selected

The newly licenced Sunshine Quarry (west of Maydena) contains plentiful durable rockfill, so we recently made the decision to go ahead with this quarry for the project. This is a great outcome as it will reduce truck traffic through Maydena and emissions.

Worker accommodation

We continue to work with PWS to explore the feasibility of refurbishing the PWS canteen. If a joint decision is made to progress with these works, a separate approval will be sought. If this idea is not progressed, workers will be based at Edgar Campground as initially scoped.

Project Update – July 2023

Dam Works Permit

Under the Water Management Act 1999, this project requires a dam works permit. Following assessment by NRE Tasmania’s Water Management and Assessment Branch, a permit was granted on 29 May 2023. A request to review this decision has been lodged. More information about the Dam Works Assessment Decision Framework can be found here(External link). An update on the status of this review is expected in August.

Project Schedule and timings

Dam works will not start until all relevant approvals are in place. The original project timeline (as outlined on this site) is no longer achievable given the dam works permit review. At this stage, we anticipate preparatory works on the washdown facility, staff quarters and road improvements will start late this year but works on site are unlikely. This means Edgar Dam campground is likely to remain open through this upcoming summer period. We will confirm this as soon as possible.

Project Update – May 2023

Edgar preparations continue and we’ve got a couple of interesting updates to share.

Quarry Choice

We recently confirmed that the bulk of hard dolerite materials needed to build the new rock buttresses can be sourced from Halls Quarry, just outside of Maydena. Selecting this nearby quarry is a great outcome as it significantly reduces truck traffic through community centres and reduces the project’s overall carbon footprint. We’ll need to continue to bring a smaller amount of specialised materials from Boral Quarry in Bridgewater.

In finalising our quarry choice, potential environmental impacts were a key consideration and our decision was informed by desktop, field and LIDAR surveys.

Washdown Facility

Robust environmental controls are an important feature in all our projects and were a particular focus in this case, given Edgar Dam’s location within Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area.

To stop the spread of weeds and Phytophthora, we will install (subject to final approvals and consent) a permanent biosecurity washdown station at the junction of Scotts Peak Road. The preliminary design for this facility has been finalised and will be included in the upcoming submission for assessment under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Act 1999. This facility will be made available to other organisations working in the TWWHA, including Parks and Wildlife Service (PWS) and Tasmanian Fire Service, providing an ongoing, positive impact on management of this unique area.

Upgrading critical infrastructure

In consultation with PWS, we plan to upgrade (subject to final approvals and consent) the original Hydro-Electric Corporation canteen and mess-hall which was built in the 1960s and now sits within the PWS operations base on Scotts Peak Road. It will be great to see a piece of Tasmania’s history restored and project staff will be glad to have kitchen facilities and sheltered lounge areas to enjoy during works. In the longer-term, it will provide a hub for workers accessing the south-west region, including track builders, maintenance crews and emergency services.


Project Background

Edgar Dam is one of three dams edging Lake Pedder. Built in 1972, it is part of the mighty Gordon-Pedder scheme, capturing 40% of the water that supplies Tasmania's largest hydro-power station, Gordon Power Station. This station can generate up to 432 MW of electricity or approximately 13 percent of Tasmania's annual energy needs.



Edgar Dam lies next to Lake Edgar fault (see map below from McCue et al., 2003), a crack in the earth's crust that was formed about 540 million years ago. When the dam was built, engineers knew about the fault but in the Australian context, earthquakes were poorly understood and the fault was deemed inactive. Several high-profile earthquakes, including the devastating 1989 event in Newcastle, changed perceptions around the risk of earthquakes and prompted new research at fault sites across Australia, allowing scientists to develop a much more detailed understanding of past and possible future behaviour.



From this new research, Lake Edgar fault was deemed active, although the chance of movement is extremely low. Scientists now believe the fault has had three significant movements in the past 48–61,000 years, triggered by earthquakes of a magnitude 6 and above. The last significant movement was thought to be 18,000 years ago (Swindon et al., 2007; Clark et al., 2011).

Many dams are built and perform safely in active earthquake areas. The key is to appropriately manage seismic risk. What the research highlighted was a new risk that needed additional management - until now, we've managed this risk using post-event controls (safety planning, in-situ monitoring) and this work will permanently improve the dam's seismic resistance. Learn more about managing dam risks in this section.


Project overview

The concrete face on the existing dam wall will be removed (in stages) and gravel filters and supporting rock added to strengthen the internal structure. Before construction, the toe pond (at the base of the dam wall) will be excavated down to the rock to ensure the new structures are built on a solid foundation which will improve stability and drainage. These features will improve the dam wall's capacity to withstand an earthquake. A wave barrier will be added along the top of the dam wall to deflect seiche waves which can form after an earthquake.

This simple, low-impact engineering solution will deliver immediate safety benefits for the community and environment and ensure we are meeting our responsibilities as owners and managers of this asset.

As we progress through to the approvals and construction phases, we'll publish regular updates on this page. Subscribe to get these straight to your inbox!


Questions?

We recognise that Lake Pedder holds significance for many Tasmanians. This project is about delivering immediate safety benefits and will not impact decisions about the future of Lake Pedder. For more information, please take a look here.

Check out the project FAQs or post a question below.

If you have questions on dam safety and management, or how this project will help, please post a question below. We'll respond as soon as we can.


Project Update – July 2024

Flood inundation maps

Why were these maps produced and what do they show?

Hydro Tasmania created flood maps for the Huon Valley region as part of mandatory requirements set by the regulator, the Department of Natural Resources and Environment Tasmania. They show the worst-case scenario of flooding if the Edgar Dam was to fail suddenly and are part of standard emergency management preparations.

We shared the maps with the regulator in 2016 and with emergency services, Tasmania police, and the Huon Valley Council Emergency Management Committee.

What is the chance of these floods occurring?

The scenarios shown in the maps are extremely unlikely a 1 in 10,000 or 0.0001 chance in any year. The risk at Edgar Dam is associated with a major earthquake (6.8 magnitude or greater) on the Lake Edgar Fault.

The upcoming strengthening project will reduce the risk even further to one in 1 million or 0.000001 in any year. We have more information on what risk means in the context of dams here.

What do these maps mean?

The flood maps show the worst-case scenario of what might happen in the very unlikely event of Edgar Dam failing suddenly. They cannot be used to provide certainties because the models used to produce these maps were based on data that was available at the time of production as well as a range of variables that would alter through time, such as catchment and river inflows, tides and river channel shape.

The maps show expected peak flood height and time to reach 'peak' flood at Judbury, Huonville, Glen Huon, Franklin, and Port Huon. This information was produced specifically to inform the regulator and for emergency management preparations by the State Emergency Service, Tasmania Police and the Huon Valley Council.


HRD Inundation Mapping - Edgar Dam - Earthquake Failure - Sheet 2 of 2


Project Update – June 2024

EPBC Decision

The Federal assessment of the project is now complete and it has been determined to be not a controlled action – particular manner. This means that the works must be completed according to the particular manner in the decision notice and no further assessment is required. You can review the referral and associated documentation here(External link).

Quarry

Our final detailed investigation of Sunshine Quarry revealed that it was not suitable. We will progress with a Bridgewater quarry unless the successful contractor puts forward an alternative source that meets our technical and environmental requirements.

Tender

A tender process for the specialist construction services required to complete this work will start in June.

Project Update – February 2024

The project referral (2023/09714) is now open for public comment. For more information, visit Edgar Dam Strengthening Project(External link). Comments close 13 March.

Project Update – November 2023

EPBC referral submitted

The project was referred to the Department of Climate Change, Energy, Environment and Water (DCCEWW) for assessment under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 on 21 November 2023.

We will update this page as the project moves through the assessment process, including when it opens for public comment. You can also track this via the EPBC Act Public Portal.(External link)

For more information about the assessment process, including key steps and indicative timings, please take a look here(External link).

New Quarry selected

The newly licenced Sunshine Quarry (west of Maydena) contains plentiful durable rockfill, so we recently made the decision to go ahead with this quarry for the project. This is a great outcome as it will reduce truck traffic through Maydena and emissions.

Worker accommodation

We continue to work with PWS to explore the feasibility of refurbishing the PWS canteen. If a joint decision is made to progress with these works, a separate approval will be sought. If this idea is not progressed, workers will be based at Edgar Campground as initially scoped.

Project Update – July 2023

Dam Works Permit

Under the Water Management Act 1999, this project requires a dam works permit. Following assessment by NRE Tasmania’s Water Management and Assessment Branch, a permit was granted on 29 May 2023. A request to review this decision has been lodged. More information about the Dam Works Assessment Decision Framework can be found here(External link). An update on the status of this review is expected in August.

Project Schedule and timings

Dam works will not start until all relevant approvals are in place. The original project timeline (as outlined on this site) is no longer achievable given the dam works permit review. At this stage, we anticipate preparatory works on the washdown facility, staff quarters and road improvements will start late this year but works on site are unlikely. This means Edgar Dam campground is likely to remain open through this upcoming summer period. We will confirm this as soon as possible.

Project Update – May 2023

Edgar preparations continue and we’ve got a couple of interesting updates to share.

Quarry Choice

We recently confirmed that the bulk of hard dolerite materials needed to build the new rock buttresses can be sourced from Halls Quarry, just outside of Maydena. Selecting this nearby quarry is a great outcome as it significantly reduces truck traffic through community centres and reduces the project’s overall carbon footprint. We’ll need to continue to bring a smaller amount of specialised materials from Boral Quarry in Bridgewater.

In finalising our quarry choice, potential environmental impacts were a key consideration and our decision was informed by desktop, field and LIDAR surveys.

Washdown Facility

Robust environmental controls are an important feature in all our projects and were a particular focus in this case, given Edgar Dam’s location within Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area.

To stop the spread of weeds and Phytophthora, we will install (subject to final approvals and consent) a permanent biosecurity washdown station at the junction of Scotts Peak Road. The preliminary design for this facility has been finalised and will be included in the upcoming submission for assessment under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Act 1999. This facility will be made available to other organisations working in the TWWHA, including Parks and Wildlife Service (PWS) and Tasmanian Fire Service, providing an ongoing, positive impact on management of this unique area.

Upgrading critical infrastructure

In consultation with PWS, we plan to upgrade (subject to final approvals and consent) the original Hydro-Electric Corporation canteen and mess-hall which was built in the 1960s and now sits within the PWS operations base on Scotts Peak Road. It will be great to see a piece of Tasmania’s history restored and project staff will be glad to have kitchen facilities and sheltered lounge areas to enjoy during works. In the longer-term, it will provide a hub for workers accessing the south-west region, including track builders, maintenance crews and emergency services.


Project Background

Edgar Dam is one of three dams edging Lake Pedder. Built in 1972, it is part of the mighty Gordon-Pedder scheme, capturing 40% of the water that supplies Tasmania's largest hydro-power station, Gordon Power Station. This station can generate up to 432 MW of electricity or approximately 13 percent of Tasmania's annual energy needs.



Edgar Dam lies next to Lake Edgar fault (see map below from McCue et al., 2003), a crack in the earth's crust that was formed about 540 million years ago. When the dam was built, engineers knew about the fault but in the Australian context, earthquakes were poorly understood and the fault was deemed inactive. Several high-profile earthquakes, including the devastating 1989 event in Newcastle, changed perceptions around the risk of earthquakes and prompted new research at fault sites across Australia, allowing scientists to develop a much more detailed understanding of past and possible future behaviour.



From this new research, Lake Edgar fault was deemed active, although the chance of movement is extremely low. Scientists now believe the fault has had three significant movements in the past 48–61,000 years, triggered by earthquakes of a magnitude 6 and above. The last significant movement was thought to be 18,000 years ago (Swindon et al., 2007; Clark et al., 2011).

Many dams are built and perform safely in active earthquake areas. The key is to appropriately manage seismic risk. What the research highlighted was a new risk that needed additional management - until now, we've managed this risk using post-event controls (safety planning, in-situ monitoring) and this work will permanently improve the dam's seismic resistance. Learn more about managing dam risks in this section.


Project overview

The concrete face on the existing dam wall will be removed (in stages) and gravel filters and supporting rock added to strengthen the internal structure. Before construction, the toe pond (at the base of the dam wall) will be excavated down to the rock to ensure the new structures are built on a solid foundation which will improve stability and drainage. These features will improve the dam wall's capacity to withstand an earthquake. A wave barrier will be added along the top of the dam wall to deflect seiche waves which can form after an earthquake.

This simple, low-impact engineering solution will deliver immediate safety benefits for the community and environment and ensure we are meeting our responsibilities as owners and managers of this asset.

As we progress through to the approvals and construction phases, we'll publish regular updates on this page. Subscribe to get these straight to your inbox!


Questions?

We recognise that Lake Pedder holds significance for many Tasmanians. This project is about delivering immediate safety benefits and will not impact decisions about the future of Lake Pedder. For more information, please take a look here.

Check out the project FAQs or post a question below.

What's on your mind 🗣

loader image
Didn't receive confirmation?
  • Would blasting the dolerite hills/escarpment at Mt Nelson have any effect on the Edgar Dam Fault?

    Anne Burleigh asked about 1 month ago

    Hi Anne,

    Thanks for visiting the page and posting a question. 

    While we can’t provide specific comment on a particular operation, shock waves from quarry scale blasting operations are typically considered to be short, sharp and low in intensity, as compared with an earthquake scale ground movement. This means they impart significantly less energy to ground mass.

    For a more comprehensive answer, you’d need to contact the relevant contractor(s) directly. Modern blasting projects will have a blast management plan that should include consideration of any infrastructure (residential or public) impacts.

    Many thanks

    Jane

  • Ugh, I get tired of all the moaners on this page. I would like to acknowledge the Hydro and say thanks for access to these grounds, lakes and ramps and this country. (Theres an overload of the others acknowledging blah blah blah) Good to hear ramps will be open, other campgrounds available to use. Will the lake be lowered much for the dam strengthening project?? Thanks

    Phil Adams asked 29 days ago

    Morning Phil,

    Thanks for popping by and posting a question. The water levels of Lake Pedder or Edgar Pond won't be affected by the upgrade works. 

    Cheers

    Jane

  • My question is, Why is it that you have not provided any proper updates on this proposal, since May 2023, significantly more than a year ago? All that has been provided in that time is 2 lines, in February 2024: "The project referral (2023/09714) is now open for public comment. For more information, visit Edgar Dam Strengthening Project. Comments close 13 March." In fact, the comment period was extended because of overwhelming interest and demand, but you provided no advice to the public about this at the time. You also have not advised on progress since. Given that (1) both the Edgar and Scotts Peak Dams are vulnerable to seismic events (tremors and earthquakes) affecting the active Edgar Fault Line, and (2) both these dams sit astride or immediately adjacent to the active Edgar Fault LIne, and (3) any failure of the dams as a result of a seismic event would present a grave and immediate threat to the safety of the people of Huonville and other settlements downstream of Lake Pedder, and (4) Huonville itself has recently experienced a seismic event (an earth tremor), and (5) you have not publicly released the (apparently comprehensive) risk analysis you conducted into the likelihood and likely effects of a dam-failure catastrophe on these communities, and (6) such a catastrophe would happen so quickly that an adequate response in the time available would be impossible, and (7) your "strengthening" proposal to the Commonwealth EPBC Unit stated that no viable alternatives were available, when the obvious (and obviously far safer) alternative is the decommissioning of the 2 dams (coincidentally as intended and requested by both UNESCO and the IUCN for reasons of conservation and restoration), which would entirely remove the risk Hydro Tasmania created in building the dams on an active Fault Line in the late 1960s and early 1970s, ... I would have thought it prudent that you keep the public well informed and updated.

    Richard asked 7 months ago

    Dear Richard,

    Thank you for visiting the project page and posting your questions.

    One of the main purposes of this page is to share key updates, as that information becomes available. There has been little to report until last week, when a decision on the Federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 referral was announced. I shared an update on this outcome, along with news on the quarry investigation and upcoming tender process. You suggested that the public comment period for this referral was extended but this is not the case - the standard 10 business day period was applied.     

    While Lake Edgar Fault does influence dam risk, it is important to highlight that this risk is associated with a major earthquake, not minor or moderate earth tremors, and such a scenario is extremely unlikely to occur. Remote 24/7 monitoring, weekly in-person inspections and routine safety review processes are all important components of the monitoring program that applies to all Hydro Tasmania’s large dams (including Edgar and Scotts Peak dams) and help mitigate a range of risks. Regular dam maintenance and upgrades also play a critical role in reducing risk – in the case of Edgar Dam, the upcoming works will deliver a significant risk reduction. Relevant safety information is shared with the Department of Natural Resources and Envirornment Tasmania (the regulator) and key emergency agencies who would lead any response in the unlikely event it was needed, and we also conduct emergency response training with key organisations. 

    Together, these measures ensure that the Gordon Scheme (with Tasmania's highest capacity power station) can continue to operate safely and efficiently, contributing vital renewable energy for our state, especially through extended dry periods. It is in this role, as dam owners and operators, that we complete any approval documentation. The EPBC referral for the Edgar project reflects the comprehensive detailed design that was undertaken. Through this process, a range of solutions were considered before determining a downstream filter buttress design would deliver the most desirable outcomes.  Decommissioning any asset is a decision for the Tasmanian Government.

    Thank you again for sharing your views and we welcome your ongoing engagement in this important project.

    Jane

  • Is there an Evacuation Plan in place for the Huon Valley in case of dam failure, and some details would be appreciated.

    Andrew Burgess asked 10 months ago

    Hi Andrew,

    Thank you for visiting the project page and posting a question.

    First and foremost, I would like to reassure you that the risk of Edgar Dam failing is assessed as being extremely low. Nonetheless, in our role as dam managers, we complete extensive risk assessments and manage all identified risks accordingly. In this case, that includes a Dam Safety Emergency Plan and comprehensive monitoring system.

    The monitoring system is similar to those installed at our other dams and ensures Hydro Tasmania is notified as soon as any potential issues arise. For Huon Valley residents, this early-warning system would trigger an immediate notification of any seismic movement, providing a maximum response time for emergency personnel.    

    The Dam Safety Emergency Plan sets out how we would respond if something unusual was detected via our early warning system. This plan is managed in accordance with the requirements of the Emergency Management Act 2006 and State Special Emergency Management Plan (Dam Safety Emergencies) June 2022. Both the Act and State plan emphasise the hierarchy of incident management – and our role is to ensure appropriate state and regional organisations at every management level are fully briefed, so they may in turn plan most effectively for such unlikely events.

    For the Huon Valley, the Huon Valley Emergency Management Committee plays this role, and includes representation from the Tasmanian Fire Service, Tasmania Police, Tasmanian State Emergency Service and Council. We undertake emergency preparedness scenario planning with members of this committee. In addition, all incident management documentation, including flood inundation maps, are provided to the State Control Centre and held securely on the Tasmanian Government’s Common Operating Platform which is accessible to all emergency services personnel.

    Cheers

    Jane

  • During the remedial works will I still have access to either of the camp grounds and be able to use my boat to fish?

    doris.ian asked over 1 year ago

    Thanks for getting in touch!

    Edgar campground will be closed during works but nearby Huon and Teds Beach campgrounds (owned and managed by Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife) will be open. All 5 boat ramps at Lake Pedder, including the ramp at Edgar, will remain open.

    Cheers

    Jane

  • I have an idea! Don't strengthen Edgar Dam. Throwing away $21m to fix a dam on a fault line? Really? How many more times will you need to throw away millions of dollars to strengthen it? We should be closely examining the restoration of Lake Pedder, which greatly underpins the values of the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area.

    Katie asked almost 2 years ago

    Hi Katie,

    Thanks for visiting the project site and sharing your views with us.

    Present-day Lake Pedder plays an important role in Tasmania’s energy security and the future of our nation’s transition to a renewable energy future. Lake Pedder is important because its catchment provides a significant 40 per cent of the water that flows through the Gordon Power Station which can generate up to 432 MW of electricity or approximately 13 per cent of Tasmania's annual energy needs. It is Tasmania’s largest power station in terms of both what it can power at any time, in any weather conditions and the total energy it provides in a typical year. More importantly, however, the Gordon-Pedder scheme is one of only two capable of operating during extended periods of dry and still weather, meaning that it is integral for energy security when other storages are low and wind farms cannot operate. This is particularly the case as we face a changing climate because this energy can be accessed quickly to provide critical firming (reliability) to an increasingly variable energy market. 

    Our responsibility at Hydro Tasmania is primarily to generate electricity and ensure our assets operate safely and efficiently. The upcoming work at Edgar Dam is about meeting those responsibilities and completing this project will not influence any government decision about Lake Pedder's future. 

    I hope this provides some context as to why we are undertaking this work. 

    Cheers

    Jane

  • Thanks for the opportunity to comment. Fifty years ago the HEC was advised of community concerns over the construction of an impoundment on top of a known tectonic fault. This project now admits that that risk was real and that substandard dams were built, at least one of which now requires a major reconstruction. The project, as presented, does not mention the other two dams, yet they are hydraulically connected to Edgar Dam, and any seismic shock will be transferred quickly and with little attenuation to both Scotts Peak and Serpentine Dams. HT must have modelled this, so where is the information? Neither does the project address which aspects of seismic perturbation the revised design ams to overcome. Is it the risk of structural damage from earthquake, or from the hydraulic shock, perhaps both? More information is needed. The project does not address the consequences of subverting the original design of the dam: a two-faced design because the dam impounds two water bodies. The fate of Edgar Pond is not mentioned. Will it be drained? or will the extant road bed be used as a coffer dam to contain it? Either of these outcomes will require approval. While the project is stated to be necessary for dam safety reasons, there is no mention of the other dam safety issues that are currently evident. The principal one is that none of the dams has a spillway, or any means of dealing with uncontrolled overfilling that may result from predicted effects of climate change. A secondary dam safety issue is the evident deformation of the Scotts Peak Dam wall and the upwelling that caused it. How will this respond to any seismic shock? In your response to Georgia, you characterise the impoundment as being 'integral for energy security during prolonged drought'. This was demonstrably not the case during the 2015-6 energy crisis. Even though nearly full, the impoundment could not supply water to the Gordon power station because only the top ~10% is physically able to be transferred. The drought-ending rainfall event of February 2016 also highlighted the inability of the transfer infrastructure to move the volume of incoming water to the Gordon impoundment, forcing the emergency opening of the release valve at Serpentine Dam. The value of the Huon-Serpentine impoundment's contribution to Tasmania's renewable energy generation capability is diffused by its cost. The impoundment consumes 240 square kilometres of high-value world heritage land to produce that potential. On the mainland, at Darlington Point NSW, one solar farm and its associated battery produces more power, reliably stored, and grid-formed on about 8 square kilometres of non-world heritage land. Need I use the phrase 'stranded asset'? The best way to mitigate the risk posed by potential seismic activity is to de-water and rehabilitate the impoundment, while taking advantage of the opportunities for modern renewable infrastructure within the Gordon impoundment (which is not part of the TWWHA).

    David Bluhdorn asked over 2 years ago

    Dear David,

    Thanks for sharing your perspective and posing some interesting questions. There was community concern at the time of the initial impoundment, and we recognise the importance of this event in Tasmania’s history. While we can and do reflect on how to do things differently in the future, we can’t change the past. 

    Safety is our number one priority and it is incorrect to claim our dams are substandard – we operate a rolling program of safety review and risk reduction that ensures all our assets meet evolving and increasingly more demanding safety standards. Scotts Peak Dam encountered some cracking, leakage, and settlement at first fill: this was resolved soon after. The other two dams that impound present-day Lake Pedder are in as-built condition and like all our assets, they are subject to safety and risk review, drawing on a range of information, site data and expert advice, including future climate modelling. Edgar Dam is considered our highest risk asset and addressing this safety issue is the driver for this project.

    As you correctly point out, the fault was known at the time of construction – what has changed are evolving safety standards and our understanding of seismicity in Tasmania, the likelihood of fault movement and the potential implications for Edgar Dam. Drawing on this information, we now understand that with a simple, low-impact engineering modification, we can almost entirely remove the seismic risk. 

    You ask about the fate of Edgar Pond – while we will drain, excavate, then refill the small toe pond to complete this work, Edgar Pond will not be drained or otherwise impacted. Like all other aspects of this project, any potential for impacts to Edgar Pond will be reviewed under Federal environmental legislation. 

    Tasmania has a bright renewable energy future that depends on our existing hydropower assets to provide critical firming load, plus increasing wind and solar and exciting emerging technologies. The Gordon-Pedder scheme will play an intrinsic role in this future and this project will ensure we can continue to operate safely.

    Thank you again for sharing your views and we look forward to your ongoing engagement in this project.

    Jane

  • (Oops, I got a bit carried away and forgot to ask the question. See my question at the bottom.) I appreciate the opportunity to comment and the fact you have published some of the questions here for all to see. I contend your point that this work is not a politically influencing factor in the future of Lake Pedder. If we spend millions of dollars of public funds on strengthening the dams now, this is going to make it much more difficult to convince the public to restore Lake Pedder down the track. It is interesting that it is now, when the Restore Pedder movement is gaining momentum, and in fact only shortly after the federal state of the environment report has highlighted Lake Pedder as a potential restoration project that Hydro decides to undertake these works. I understand that Lake Pedder is an important renewable energy asset to Hydro, and therefore to Tasmanians. My understanding is that it provides roughly 4% of the state's power needs. But it’s worth noting that Hydro can only use the top one metre of Lake Pedder's waters for power generation, because of limitations set by UNESCO. After all, the current impoundment is within an internationally recognised world heritage area! I acknowledge that Hydro's responsibility is in providing renewable power. While I agree with this premise, I do ask that Hydro extend their horizon and acknowledge that the flooding of Lake Pedder fifty years ago was a terrible mistake. And now, when there is an opportunity to correct that mistake, Hydro wishes to maintain the status quo and reinforce the dam at a politically crucial moment, in order to defeat the Restore Pedder movement before it's had a chance to really take hold of the world's imagination. I would like to see Hydro Tasmania negotiate with state and federal government on the possibility of restoring Lake Pedder. While the loss of the renewable power from the draining of the lake would be an impact on our power needs, the benefits of restarting the beating heart of the South-West by restoring Lake Pedder would establish Hydro Tas as a world leader in environmental custodianship. It would also awaken hope in the collective subconscious, and demonstrate that it is possible to heal previously degraded natural areas and turn them from economical 'assets' to fully functioning eco-systems once more. What will it take for Hydro to take responsibility for a mistake of the past and to restore what was previously lost?

    Andy Szollosi asked over 2 years ago

    Hi Andy,

    Thanks for getting in touch and sharing your views. 

    We recognise that Lake Pedder holds significance for many Tasmanians and, if presented with the same set of facts in today’s world, the outcome might have been a different one. While we can’t change the past, we are committed to learning and growing as we help forge a new renewable energy future for Tasmania.

    Looking after a large asset portfolio such as Hydro Tasmania’s calls for considerable forward planning – even a small maintenance job can require several years to design, source materials and arrange an appropriately skilled workforce. On top of managing these project logistics, we must also consider the outcomes of our rolling dam safety review program and commitment to continually reduce risk across our business. Given these complexities, we take a 10-year forward plan to scheduling projects, and review and adjust that schedule annually to ensure we’re always addressing the highest priority issues. The Edgar Dam Strengthening Project has been in design and preparation for more than 3 years and now we’re ready to get on and deliver this critical safety improvement. As I’ve highlighted to others on this page, this will not influence future decisions about Lake Pedder. 

    With regards your comments about the management of Lake Pedder, and in particular the water level. Lake Pedder cannot be viewed in isolation from Lake Gordon – together, the two storages play a critical role in our energy market. Lake Pedder is a significant catchment and the 1.5 metres that we use represents an enormous volume of water. The operating rules for Lake Pedder that outline our minimum operating level are self-imposed by Hydro Tasmania, not UNESCO, for operational, environmental and aesthetic reasons. These rules are set out in the Electricity Supply Industry Restructuring (Savings and Transitional Provisions) Act 1995. We could opt to go below this lower level if required – but the benefit of doing so must be considered amongst a range of other factors. In the case of the 2016 energy crisis, it was considered but for various reasons, deemed not to be the best course of action.  

    Thank you again for your feedback – we look forward to your ongoing engagement in this project.

    Cheers

    Jane

  • Could you please publish the cost-benefit analysis? Have you included in your cost estimate all the road repairs and upgrades that will be required for this amount of heavy loads to travel to the site. The damage done by trucks to roads is proportional to the weight of the truck X 2 to the power of 8. Are your estimates based on predicted fuel prices between now and 2025? What will be the greenhouse gas emissions from quarrying, transporting and placing this amount of rock and the manufacture, transport and pouring of new concrete for these works? It may be way more cost effective to drain the impoundment and remove the risk.

    Peter B asked over 2 years ago

    Hi Peter, 

    Thanks for getting in touch. Completing this project will achieve important benefits – for more information, please refer to our new FAQ

    You ask some important questions about the sustainability of the project. Across all our operations, our aim is to minimise our impacts and where possible, repurpose or reuse materials. 

    As I explained in my response to Lindsay (on this page), the materials needed in this project must meet very technical specifications which influence quarry selection. In addition, we excluded quarries that may potentially increase project impacts, for example, sites within the TWWHA or those with biosecurity concerns. While these decisions may increase overall transport costs, they also ensure we avoid impacts which is a priority consideration.   

    Across the project more broadly, we’re exploring a range of opportunities to make the works more sustainable, from recycling the concrete we remove from the dam and using pond sediments to help rehabilitate local areas, to investing in infrastructure that can be repurposed for visitor facilities once the work is done.

    Thanks again for sharing your views. We look forward to your ongoing engagement in the project.

    Jane

  • Why are you destroying bushland and millions of trees when with the climate crisis we need all the trees we can get. Instead of decimating the bush, focus on renewable energy like solar and wind - do not dam rivers/lakes

    123 asked over 2 years ago

    Thank you for your comment. 

    Please be assured we're not creating new dams or lakes through this work, nor will it result in the destruction of millions of trees. 

    This project focuses on an existing dam that already contributes renewable energy to our system. The works will be largely completed within a footprint of already-disturbed land and we will only clear minimal areas of regrowth vegetation that was recently surveyed to confirm the absence of threatened species. Any vegetation that is removed will be replanted (unless it creates a safety hazard) and in addition, we will look for opportunities to use the sediment removed from the toe pond to rehabilitate damaged areas that still remain from the original construction of Scotts Peak dam. 

    We’ve taken a precautionary approach to managing potential project impacts through careful design and a commitment to sustainability – you can read more about these considerations here https://connect.hydro.com.au/planning-phase

    Cheers

    Jane