Transpower, Aurora Energy and PowerNet recently proposed four options to urgently cater to Queenstown’s growth once existing capacity is reached in about 2032.
As part of its Energising Queenstown consultation, three options involved a second line through Gibbston, connected to a new substation at Arrow Junction, near Arrowtown.
A fourth, far more expensive option is for a 105km line between Roxburgh and Queenstown’s Jack’s Point, via the Remarkables Range.
In her submission, Gibbston Community Association’s (GCA) Sophie Timmermans-Delves said putting another "industrial-scale" transmission corridor through Gibbston "undermines the ‘Gibbston character zone’ (GCZ) and would cause undue damage to valued landscapes, recreational settings and visual amenity in a valley that already receives significant public use".
"GCZ is scenic, with vineyards, rivers, hillsides, walking trails and open vistas.
"Another high-voltage transmission corridor would impose large towers, wires and access tracks that degrade visual amenity and character.
"Because the valley is already relatively narrow in spots, there is limited opportunity for screening.
"The visual burden to residents, tourists, walkers, vineyard visitors and valley users will be high."
The only information they had had was the new line would follow a similar route to the existing one, Ms Timmermans-Delves said.
That was a problem because the current one runs near Bluff Lane and below Mt Rosa Wines’ cellar door in one of Gibbston’s densest pockets.
"The last thing anyone wants is any of their land being taken from them.
"I shouldn’t think Mt Rosa will want any of their vineyard being taken away."
She asked the power consortium for the exact route, only to be told it would be too expensive to do a feasibility study.
If a second line had to go through the valley, it should go on the uninhabited side of the Kawarau River — "visually, it would be kind of camouflaged somewhat by being against the mountain".
GCA’s other argument against Gibbston hosting the second transmission link was the risk it could be blocked off for months, if not years, if the predicted Alpine Fault (AF8) strikes, or any other, as Gibbston was also host to the Wakatipu Basin’s main active fault, the Nevis Cardrona Fault.
"Gibbston is not particularly going to fare too well because it’ll be cut off at the gorge end and the bridge end," Ms Timmermans-Delves said.
"If the worst happens, Queenstown will want its power back up and running as soon as possible.
"So, is it smart to have all your power going through one corridor that’s vulnerable in the event of an AF8 or even a big earthquake?"
The GCA submission pushed for the Roxburgh alignment instead.
"Although the Roxburgh route has higher upfront costs, its lower exposure to hazard risk, especially under extreme events such as AF8, means it may be more cost-effective [or less risky] over decades."
The submission suggested the more expensive Roxburgh option was, in fact, better value if Gibbston’s risk factor was weighed up.
It requested extra means of funding for that option to be explored "so that local customers do not bear the full premium".
