Showing posts with label mining. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mining. Show all posts
Thursday 15 August 2019
Adani Group's problems continue to make news in 2019
“The commerciality of Adani’s Carmichael mine remains challenging given the significant capital spend and low-quality thermal coal product expected from the mine,” said Brent Spalding, a principal analyst at Wood Mackenzie." [Financial Review, 9 July 2019]
"Adani allowed stormwater discharges from the port in March 2017 (to the marine environment and to the Caley Valley Wetlands) and again in February 2019 (to the wetlands) in excess of licence limits.....In February 2019, Adani announced it had again discharged stormwater into the Caley Valley Wetlands in excess of its EA limit. Government investigations also confirmed the exceedance, and Adani paid an infringement fine of $13,055 for the breach." [Environmental Defenders Office Qld, 23 May 2019]
"....Abbot Point Bulkcoal Pty Ltd, an Adani subsidiary, for a substantial exceedance of a license to pollute the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area with coal dust when Cyclone Debbie made landfall in 2017, even though the license was granted specifically to account for possibly increased emissions resulting from the cyclone. During the course of this prosecution, the DEHP discovered that Abbot Point Bulkcoal Pty Ltd may have submitted an altered laboratory report showing reduced levels of pollution." [Environmental Justice Australia, March 2019]
ABC News, 13 August 2019:
The announcement by Suncorp that it will no longer insure new thermal coal projects, along with a similar announcement by QBE Insurance a few months earlier, brings Australia into line with Europe where most major insurers have broken with coal.
US firms have been a little slower to move, but Chubb announced a divestment policy in July, and Liberty has confirmed it will not insure Australia's Adani project.
Other big firms such as America's AIG are coming under increasing pressure.
Even more than divestment of coal shares by banks and managed funds, the withdrawal of insurance has the potential to make coal mining and coal-fired power generation businesses unsustainable.
As the chairman and founder of Adani Group, Gautam Adani, has shown in Queensland's Galilee Basin, a sufficiently rich developer can use its own resources to finance a coal mine that banks won't touch.
But without insurance, mines can't operate.
(Adani claims to have insurers for the Carmichael project, but has declined to reveal their names.)
By the nature of their business, insurers cannot afford to indulge the denialist fantasies still popular in some sectors of industry.
Damage caused by climate disasters is one of their biggest expenses, and insurers are fully aware that damage is set to rise over time......
Labels:
Adani Group,
climate change,
coal,
environmental vandalism,
mining,
multinationals
Friday 2 August 2019
Sydney Uni Business School Professor Sandra van der Laan: Adani Group's Australia operations effectively insolvent
Image: BBC, 29.11.18 |
The Adani Carmichael coal mine set to be built in Queensland’s Galilee Basin has courted controversy like no other project in recent memory.
Central and northern Queenslanders and MPs alike have lauded the jobs and economic stimulus the project promises to provide. Elsewhere, others scratched their heads as to why the country needed to build a brand new coal mine right next to the iconic Great Barrier Reef. At the same time that Australia tries to meet its Paris climate targets, no less.
Despite battling for eight years to be approved, receiving the final environmental green light last month, the project finally looked to be going ahead.
But now, a forensic accountant has warned that the divisive Adani Carmichael coal mine could be on the brink of collapse before it even begins operation.
University of Sydney Professor Sandra van der Laan has sounded the alarm on the project after analysing Adani’s financial standing.
Central and northern Queenslanders and MPs alike have lauded the jobs and economic stimulus the project promises to provide. Elsewhere, others scratched their heads as to why the country needed to build a brand new coal mine right next to the iconic Great Barrier Reef. At the same time that Australia tries to meet its Paris climate targets, no less.
KEY POINTS
Adani’s Australian operations could be on
the brink of collapse before its Carmichael coalmine is ever built, a
forensic accountant has claimed to the ABC.
Professor Sandra van der Laan examined the
limited publicly-available financial statements from the private
company and concluded that the company was in “a very fragile, even
perilous, financial position”.
Adani was quick to reject the claims,
slamming them as “false and misleading” and the latest in a
series of attacks aimed to destroy the Australian project.
The Adani Carmichael coal mine set to be
built in Queensland’s Galilee Basin has courted controversy like no
other project in recent memory.
Despite battling for eight years to be approved, receiving the final environmental green light last month, the project finally looked to be going ahead.
But now, a forensic accountant has warned that the divisive Adani Carmichael coal mine could be on the brink of collapse before it even begins operation.
University of Sydney Professor Sandra van der Laan has sounded the alarm on the project after analysing Adani’s financial standing.
“It looks to me like a corporate collapse waiting to happen,” she told the ABC. “It has all the hallmarks of the big corporate failures we’ve seen over the last 20 to 30 years.”
She should know — van der Laan has a track record of picking corporate collapses. It was she and colleague Sue Newberry who warned in 2007 that ABC Learning, Australia’s biggest private childcare provider at the time and the world’s largest publically listed childcare company, was heading for disaster.....
“Adani Mining is in a very fragile, even perilous, financial position,” van der Laan told the ABC. “The gap between the current assets and liabilities is what’s really concerning.”
According to Adani’s most recent financial statements, provided to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) in March this year, that gap is enormous. The ABC reports that the business’ liabilities exceed its assets by more than half a billion dollars.
Moreover, the ABC reports that the company will have $1.8 billion in liabilities come due over the next 12 months, compared with just $30 million in assets. Those liabilities are largely made up by an internal loan from parent company Adani Global on which the van der Laan says the Australian operation is reliant. That’s because the Australian mine was forced to self-fund after banks and wealth funds turned their back on it.
“Effectively on paper, they are insolvent,” van der Laan said. "I wouldn’t be trading with them, as simple as that. I wouldn’t have anything to do with them."....
She should know — van der Laan has a track record of picking corporate collapses. It was she and colleague Sue Newberry who warned in 2007 that ABC Learning, Australia’s biggest private childcare provider at the time and the world’s largest publically listed childcare company, was heading for disaster.....
“Adani Mining is in a very fragile, even perilous, financial position,” van der Laan told the ABC. “The gap between the current assets and liabilities is what’s really concerning.”
According to Adani’s most recent financial statements, provided to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) in March this year, that gap is enormous. The ABC reports that the business’ liabilities exceed its assets by more than half a billion dollars.
Moreover, the ABC reports that the company will have $1.8 billion in liabilities come due over the next 12 months, compared with just $30 million in assets. Those liabilities are largely made up by an internal loan from parent company Adani Global on which the van der Laan says the Australian operation is reliant. That’s because the Australian mine was forced to self-fund after banks and wealth funds turned their back on it.
“Effectively on paper, they are insolvent,” van der Laan said. "I wouldn’t be trading with them, as simple as that. I wouldn’t have anything to do with them."....
Sunday 21 July 2019
Once more the Adani Group demonstrates that it acts in bad faith and cannot be trusted
ABC
News,
16 July 2019:
The
Queensland Government is prosecuting mining giant Adani for allegedly
providing false and misleading information to the Environment
Department over land clearing at the site of its proposed Carmichael
mine.
The
ABC understands the charge under the Environmental Protection Act
carries a fine that runs into the hundreds of thousands of dollars.
"The
prosecution relates to information contained in Adani's 2017/2018
annual return for its Carmichael mine," the department said in a
statement to the ABC.
"The annual return requires information about planned and actual disturbance of land at the mine.
"The
department alleges that Adani's annual return contained false and
misleading information about the disturbance already undertaken at
the mine during the annual return period."
Last
September, Adani notified the Department of "an administrative
paperwork error" in its annual return for the Carmichael mine.
The
company admitted that areas "that were disturbed during the
final three-and-a-half weeks of the annual return period should have
been included".
The
prosecution against Adani is listed for mention at the Brisbane
Magistrates Court on August 16......
Labels:
coal,
environmental vandalism,
foreign investment,
mining
Wednesday 26 June 2019
News Corp, Morrison Government & mining lobby groups in concerted attack on environmental lawyers
The Attack.....
The
Australian,
22 June 2019:
A taxpayer-funded
network of environmental lawyers has been handed more than $2.5 million by
state governments, helping the group to clog up courts and launch dozens of
cases against gas and mining projects, including Adani’s Carmichael mine.
Environmental Defenders Offices
in NSW and Queensland were awarded more than $1m from the Berejiklian
government and almost $400,000 from the Palaszczuk government in 2017-18….
Resources Minister Matt
Canavan yesterday called on the states to deprive the green lawyers’ groups of
any more taxpayer funds.
“These EDOs are not
defending the public interest but pursuing a political agenda,” he said.
“As such, they should
not be receiving taxpayer support to destroy people’s jobs.”….
Leading business groups accused
the EDOs of engaging in “vexatious litigation” which is delaying projects for
years, damaging job-creation efforts and hindering the flow of royalties to
states and territories.
“Frivolous and vexatious
legal challenges to environmental approvals delay projects and threaten jobs
in regional Australia,” Minerals Council chief executive Tania Constable said.
An Australian Petroleum
Production & Exploration Association spokesman said the EDOs’ advocacy on
climate change was out of step with their apparent role as a community legal
centre for environmental cases.
“We have for some time
questioned the role of the EDO and its public funding,” he said.
The Response.....
NSW Environmental Defenders
Office (EDO NSW),
22 June 2019:
EDOs stand firm against
attacks
We are a community legal
centre of expert lawyers, proudly and unapologetically helping the NSW
community to use the law to protect wildlife, people and our planet.
Environmental laws
should not be for the few. They affect us all. Yet once again we are forced to
defend the community's access to justice against attacks by a fossil fuel lobby
aggrieved by the power our work provides to communities who seek to challenge
the lawfulness and merit of their major projects.
EDO NSW's litigation
work on behalf of our clients plays an important role, ensuring that people
have access to justice and are able to exercise their rights under Australian
law. People have a right to use the law to protect their family, homes and
environment. To be clear, as public interest community legal centres, EDOs do
not litigate on our own behalf, but represent clients (community groups,
Aboriginal groups and individuals) who may otherwise be unable to have access
to the justice system.
It’s disappointing to
see, yet again, the Minerals Council and Australian Petroleum Production &
Exploration Association demonstrating their lack of understanding of, and
respect for, the rule of law. At their heart, these claims are an attack on our
democracy and we should all be very concerned.
The fossil fuel lobby
has a track record of making the unsubstantiated claim that EDOs engage in
vexatious litigation, and frankly it’s getting tired. Despite being
over-utilised, this claim remains a troubling proposition. EDO NSW lawyers, who
include some of the best in our field, take our professional responsibilities extremely
seriously. Our 30 year track record is evidence of that. Not once in our
history have our clients’ cases been found to be ‘frivolous or vexatious’.
Underpinning most of our
litigation work is a question about whether the law has been complied with.
That decision-makers apply the law is a fundamental feature of our democracy.
Ensuring the law is complied with should be uncontroversial.
In other instances, our
work interrogates whether approving a project is – considering all the
circumstances – the correct or preferable decision. These are not simple
questions. The answer lies in the weighting of a range of different factors.
Our important work ensures that evidence proffered in support of a project is
thoroughly tested.
In a number of
instances, including in the recent case concerning the proposed Rocky Hill coal
mine, the economic benefits of the mine put forward by the mining company were
found to be overstated, based on the evidence put forward by both the
Government’s expert and our client’s. Equally the economic negatives of
that project - including social impacts and impacts on Aboriginal cultural
heritage - were found to have been understated by the mining company.
Litigation is a small
component of the work this office does on behalf of clients. When we do so, it
is only after application of our casework guidelines and detailed analysis from
senior legal experts to ensure there are merits in bringing a case.
EDO NSW also provides
the community with free legal advice and education - work that does see us
receive some State government grants. Our office operates a daily advice line
providing free advice on matters of environmental and planning law.
The NSW Government has
provided EDO NSW with funding for decades, irrespective of which party is in
Government. This demonstrates a bipartisan understanding of our role and
corresponding support for the provision of access to justice in this space -
that is, allowing members of the community to understand and seek advice about
NSW environmental and planning laws.
Our work relates to
ensuring that laws are applied correctly, and ensuring that evidence put
forward by project proponents is tested in an appropriate and independent forum.
Any changes to the law that erode community opportunities to participate in
environmental decision-making would be very concerning. This could easily be
seen as a blatant attempt to further prioritise the rights of coal mining
companies over the rights of communities, including farmers, eco-tourism
operators and others.
David Morris
CEO - Solicitor
Labels:
environment,
funding,
law,
mining
Saturday 22 June 2019
Cartoon of the Week
Labels:
Adani Group,
coal,
endangered species,
mining
Friday 14 June 2019
The Fight for the Great Australian Bight continues
Fight For The Bight
Last month, Patagonia
Surf Ambassador Heath Joske joined an Australian delegation to Oslo,
Norway, taking the fight for the Bight directly to Equinor. The delegation was
led by Peter Owen from The Wilderness Society and included Aboriginal elder and
singer Bunna Lawrie and various local and international environmental groups.
The delegation met with Norwegian Indigenous Sami people to discuss their shared experiences in the fight to protect their oceans and lands from development by the oil industry.
The delegation also found support in the 500-strong crowd of local Norwegians who joined them for a paddle out in the harbour in front of the city’s Opera House. This peaceful protest was one of the largest paddle-out demonstrations held in the country's history and members of the delegation were buoyed by the camaraderie shown by the local community who braved near freezing water temperatures in support of the Great Australian Bight.
“Borders were smashed and countries were united,” said Heath. “Thank you to the people of Norway for supporting our pleas to save our southern seas! You turned up in hundreds and screamed “Fight for the Bight!” with me, and when I stopped, you kept screaming. That was incredibly moving and heartening.”
The delegation met with Norwegian Indigenous Sami people to discuss their shared experiences in the fight to protect their oceans and lands from development by the oil industry.
The delegation also found support in the 500-strong crowd of local Norwegians who joined them for a paddle out in the harbour in front of the city’s Opera House. This peaceful protest was one of the largest paddle-out demonstrations held in the country's history and members of the delegation were buoyed by the camaraderie shown by the local community who braved near freezing water temperatures in support of the Great Australian Bight.
“Borders were smashed and countries were united,” said Heath. “Thank you to the people of Norway for supporting our pleas to save our southern seas! You turned up in hundreds and screamed “Fight for the Bight!” with me, and when I stopped, you kept screaming. That was incredibly moving and heartening.”
Taking on Goliath
The delegation also
attended Equinor’s Annual General Meeting in Stavanger where they presented a
shareholder proposal that the company should refrain from oil and gas
exploration and production activities in frontier areas (such as the Great
Australian Bight), immature areas and particularly sensitive areas. Heath Joske
also spoke at the AGM, taking to the stage to explain his connection to the
Bight as both a surfer and fisherman. Following the meeting, he personally
delivered over 300 letters from concerned Australian citizens to Equinor’s CEO,
Eldar Saetre.
“For the campaign, the AGM is not an end-point in any way,” says Norwegian citizen and Great Australian Bight Alliance campaigner Rune Woldsnes. “It is a step on the way to getting Equinor out of the Bight. There is no question the Board got the message.”
“For the campaign, the AGM is not an end-point in any way,” says Norwegian citizen and Great Australian Bight Alliance campaigner Rune Woldsnes. “It is a step on the way to getting Equinor out of the Bight. There is no question the Board got the message.”
Heath Joske at the Equinor AGM from Patagonia Australia on Vimeo.
BACKGROUND
North Coast Voices:
17 April 2019, Norway
needs to withdraw its majority-owned petroleum mining company from the Great
Australian Bight
4 March 2019,From
September 2019 onwards underwater seismic blasts will rock the Great Australian
Bight around the clock over a 30,100 sq kilometre area
8 January
2019, Why
proposed offshore mining in the Great Australian Bight matters to all of
Australia
12 October
2016, Multinational
gas and petroleum giant BP withdraws from offshore exploration in the Great
Australian Bight - for now.
23 May 2016, Australian
Federal Election 2016: which major political party is likely to put brakes on
the petroluem industry's risky commercial ambitions in the Great Australian
Bight?
Monday 10 June 2019
Did ABC Radio bow to pressure from the Adani Group?
One of the worst kept secrets in Australia is that the multinational Adani mining group, for reasons known only to its company board in India, wants to build a mine in the Galilee Basin but has no intention of building a financially viable mine.
And Adani really dislikes the media mentioning this fact......
ABC, Media Watch, transcript
excerpt, 3 June 2019:
But now let’s come back
closer to home to Adani, whose controversial Carmichael mine in Queensland’s
Galilee Basin gets ever closer to construction, despite this scathing piece in
The Sydney Morning Herald by Bloomberg columnist David Fickling:
The
numbers on Adani simply don't add up
Comparable
projects like Glencore's Wandoan have been mothballed for years.
-
The Sydney Morning Herald, 24 May, 2019
Fickling’s op-ed 10 days
ago argued that the Adani mine may never be built — even if it does get final
approval — because it’s currently much cheaper to buy coal than dig it out of a
brand-new coal mine.
And over at ABC Radio,
Saturday AM thought that was worth a story.
But after being worked
on by Isobel Roe, a young award-winning journalist in Brisbane, it never made
it to air.
So, why was that? Well,
Media Watch can reveal that Adani complained to the ABC in advance. And the
story was spiked.
So how did this all
unfold?
Bloomberg has confirmed
to Media Watch that David Fickling was interviewed by the ABC on the afternoon
of Friday, 24th of May.
And just over an hour
later, at 4.20pm, Adani say Roe contacted them for comment.
And not long after that,
at 5.50pm, the producer of Saturday AM, Thomas Oriti, told ABC staff he was
killing the story.
Now, newsrooms at the
ABC are open plan and not very private and four witnesses tell Media Watch that
Oriti made it clear Adani had complained.
Indeed, one claims he
told Roe:
‘Sorry.
It’s nothing to do with you, but we’re not going to be able to run this’.
-
Phone interview, ABC staffer, 31 May, 2019
While another claims he
said:
‘It’s
not my decision, it’s come from on high.’
-
Phone interview, ABC staffer, 31 May, 2019
The ABC denies this and
maintains his decision was taken entirely on editorial merit, because the story
didn’t stack up.
So what can we be sure
of?
Well, there’s no doubt
Adani did complain, both to the reporter when she rang and, shortly after, to
her bosses. A company spokesperson told us:
…
we raised concerns with ABC management when approached to comment on a story
that contained inaccuracies and was potentially biased ...
-
Email, Adani spokesperson, 31 May, 2019
Adani says it told the
reporter she should talk to an analyst more friendly to the mining sector.
And when she asked them
to suggest someone, Adani’s PR team cracked it and went over her head to ABC
management:
Adani
complained that it was not reasonable that the onus for ensuring that ABC news
coverage was fair and balanced should fall back onto the company and not onto
the ABC’s well-resourced newsrooms.
-
Email, Adani spokesperson, 31 May, 2019
A key feature of Adani’s
complaint was that the ABC had not given it enough time to respond.
But in fact by Friday
afternoon Fickling’s work had been up for more than 36 hours.
And Adani was
able to send a statement to the ABC almost immediately.
So, who at the ABC dealt
with the company’s complaint?
We’re told Adani went
straight to the top — ABC News boss Gaven Morris — who we understand is the
person they normally contact.
So to clarify what
happened, we asked Morris a series of questions, which included:
Did
Adani contact you last Friday afternoon to complain about the story?
What
was the nature of the complaint, and how did you respond?
Why
was the story pulled, given that it had been commissioned for Saturday AM only
hours beforehand?
Was
the decision to pull the story taken after Adani’s complaint?
Why
was this complaint handled personally by you?
-
Email, Media Watch to Gaven Morris, 31 May, 2019
We did not get a
response from Gaven Morris or answers to most of those questions.
Instead, an ABC
spokesperson told us:
There
was no complaint.
-
Email, ABC spokesperson, 31 May, 2019
Which is remarkable,
because Adani says there was…..
Full
transcript here.
BACKGROUND
“The numbers on Adani
simply don't add up”,
The Sydney Morning Herald, 24 May
2019
at https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/the-numbers-on-adani-simply-don-t-add-up-20190524-p51qoy.html.
Labels:
ABC radio,
coal,
media,
mining,
self-censorship
Thursday 6 June 2019
Climate change litigation and Australia
Pointing out the potential risks to business and government of ignoring or denying the reality of climate change.....
The
Canberra Times,
29 May 2019:
Since the late 1990s,
Australian politics on climate change has been divisive.
Although Australia
signed the Kyoto Protocol in 1998, it did not ratify it until 2007.
Then, in
2011, the Clean Energy Act purporting to reduce greenhouse emissions was passed,
only to be repealed in 2014.
In 2016, Australia
ratified the Paris Agreement and the Doha Amendment to the Kyoto Protocol;
however, any serious action on climate change remains to be seen.
At the same time, some
states and territories also have emissions reduction targets.
The uncoordinated
approach is a problem for at least two important reasons.
First, climate change is
an ever-increasing phenomenon, with tremendous impact on corporate, social and
political discourse. Any meaningful legal framework to govern climate change
requires the development of a legal consensus at the federal level, in line
with international commitments.
Second, there is a
rising wave of climate change-related litigation globally which is headed for
Australia. Climate change litigation 2.0 (targeting companies) and climate
change litigation 3.0 (targeting governments) will sink Australia, unless
drastic measures are implemented.
Under the current legal
regime, company directors may only be liable if found to be in breach of their
duty of care or for failing to address a foreseeable risk. However, guidance
from case law suggests that it is difficult to establish that the actions or
omissions of a particular entity or director caused or contributed harm to be
suffered by another. With the arrival of climate change litigation 2.0, this
will all change.
For one, litigation 2.0
will force companies to assess and report on the risks of climate change and
potentially set out plans for mitigating those risks. The recent tide of
comments from the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, the
Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority and the Reserve Bank of Australia
are a testament to this.
Companies and their
directors could soon face liability (including personal liability) if they fail
to assess and address risks relating to climate change. Investors, shareholders
and even communities will be able to recover losses and seek damages from
companies and their directors, auditors and advisors, for failing to assess and
mitigate risks.
As major climate change
attribution studies emerge to assist in tracing particular weather events with
greenhouse gasses, causation will be easier to establish. It is likely that in
the future, courts will rely on such studies to conclude that a particular
entity has contributed, at least in some proportion, to a particular harm……
Although unprecedented
and unheard of in Australia, climate change litigation 3.0 will be the next
phase. It will allow Australians to bring action against the government for
failing to mitigate risks.
Claims of this nature
around the world are already proving to be quite successful.
The Urgenda
litigation in the Netherlands is the leading example. In that case, a Dutch NGO
argued that the Netherlands Government had breached its duty of care to the
Dutch people by failing to mitigate the risks of climate change and reducing
greenhouse gases. The remedy ordered by the court was that the Netherlands
Government reduce emissions by at least 25 per cent by the end of 2020….. [my yellow highlighting]
It should be
noted that on 8 February 2019 the NSW
Land and Environment Court in its judgment Gloucester
Resources Limited v Minister for Planning [2019] NSWLEC 7 accepted
that climate change formed part of critical reasons to reject a mine
development.
Gloucester Resources
decided not to appeal this decision and the proposed 830ha Rocky
Hill Coal Mine in the Hunter Valley region will not proceed.
Labels:
climate change,
coal,
Gloucester,
Land and Environment Court,
law,
mining
Saturday 1 June 2019
Photoshop of the Week
Labels:
#ScottMorrisonFAIL,
coal,
mining
Tuesday 28 May 2019
Coal Seam Gas: Queensland supplies a timely lesson for the rest of Australia
ABC
News, 26 May
2016:
The risk of spreading
toxic groundwater from one of Queensland's worst environmental contaminations
has prompted a ban on coal seam gas drilling in an area where companies are
already extracting gas.
The State Government
quietly created a no-go zone for gas extraction 10 kilometres around the former Linc Energy site in the Southern Inland,
at Hopeland, burying the decision in an environmental approval issued to Arrow
Energy in December.
Despite the ban, Arrow
and QGC still have permission to extract gas within the zone.
On a separate, neighbouring
mining lease — approved in August — Arrow gained approval to ramp up six
existing "pilot" wells for commercial production.
Farmers said they were
alarmed by the revelation and want state officials to come clean about the
risks of groundwater contamination spreading under prime grazing and cropping
land.
The ban is the first
public admission that a burgeoning CSG industry could aggravate the Linc
contamination, where toxic gases were released into groundwater by a
now-illegal process called underground coal gasification.
Cotton grower Brian
Bender's Hopeland property is split by the two Arrow tenements — where CSG
extraction is banned on one side but not the other.
"I think it's a bit
of a joke, really — there are no lines underground," Mr Bender said….
The ABC understands
tests on groundwater contamination were being examined by a trio of experts who
would be called as state witnesses in a criminal prosecution of five former
Linc executives next month.
The failed company
was convicted and fined a record $4.5 million last May for
causing serious environmental harm through its underground coal gasification (UCG) plant.
The District Court heard
in that trial that it could take up to 20 years for groundwater to recover from
Linc's attempts at the now-illegal UCG process, which allowed toxic gases to
escape through fractured rock.
At the time, the state's
then-environment minister described the contamination as "the biggest
pollution event probably in Queensland's history".
A week before Christmas,
Arrow gained approval for 70 wells on a gas tenement to the north-east of the
former Linc site.
It is part of its $10
billion Surat Gas Project, which Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk promoted in a
February media release as Queensland's "biggest resources project since
2011".
Ms Palaszczuk's release
made no mention of the gas extraction no-go zone.
But the state's
Department of Environment and Science approval said Arrow "must not locate
any [CSG] production wells within 10 kilometres [of the Linc site]".
"The extraction of
groundwater as part of the petroleum activity(ies) from underground aquifers
must not directly or indirectly influence the mobilisation of existing
groundwater contamination on [the Linc site]," the environmental authority
said.
It said the department
may force Arrow to model CSG impacts on "groundwater contamination around
[the Linc site] at any time" and present its findings within a month.
But there were no such
conditions for gas drilling in the neighbouring Arrow tenement that surrounds
the former Linc site, where six wells were approved in August…..
But will the Morrison federal government or the remaining seven state and territory governments learn from Queensland's disasterous mistakes?
Apparently not.........
But will the Morrison federal government or the remaining seven state and territory governments learn from Queensland's disasterous mistakes?
Apparently not.........
2GB
Radio, 24 May
2019:
The Minister for
Resources is urging the New South Wales government to approve the state’s
biggest gas project.
Santos Narrabri Gas
Project is aiming to develop gas reserves in northwest New South Wales that
could supply half of the state’s gas needs.
The Resources Minister
Matt Canavan tells Ray Hadley almost all of NSW’s gas comes from other states.
“The problem with that
is, of course, it costs a lot of money to transport gas long distances, so that
has pushed the price up for Sydney based users of gas.
“Things have changed and
we need to reflect that.”
The
Canberra Times,
18 April 2019:
Federal Resources and
Northern Australia Minister Matt Canavan was in Darwin on April 17 to publicise
an April 2 federal budget announcement of $8.4 million in funding to fast-track
development of gas reserves in the Northern Territory's Beetaloo Basin.
"We want to get on
with the job. We want to get the gas up out of the ground and into people's
homes and businesses as quickly as we can," Senator Canavan said in a
statement….
The Beetaloo Basin is
about 500km south-east of Darwin in the Sturt Plateau region between the towns
of Katherine and Elliott and includes pastoral land and indigenous communities.
Around 70 per cent of the Territory's shale gas resources are estimated to lie
in the Beetaloo Basin, reserves that could potentially raise Australia's global
ranking of gas resources from seventh to sixth. Farmers, businesses and
industry are divided over whether fracking should be permitted because of the
risk of pollution to rivers and bores. Pro-fracking advocates argue it will be
a boon for jobs and economic growth.
Labels:
Coal Seam Gas,
environmental vandalism,
mining,
Queensland
Tuesday 30 April 2019
Morrison Government signed off on a controversial uranium mine one day before calling the federal election
ABC
News, 26
April 2019:
The Morrison Government
signed off on a controversial uranium mine one day before calling the federal
election, and did not publicly announce the move until the environment
department uploaded the approval document the day before Anzac Day.
The Yeelirrie Uranium
mine, located 500 kilometres north of Kalgoorlie in Western Australia, requires
both federal and state approval.
The state approval of
the proposed mine is still being fought in the state's Supreme Court by members
of the Tjiwarl traditional owners.
In 2016, the West Australian Environment Protection Agency advised
the mine not be approved, concluding it posed too great a risk of
extinction to some native animals.
The former Liberal
Barnett government controversially approved the mine in 2017, just weeks before
it lost the West Australian election.
Canadian company Cameco,
the world's largest uranium producer, is seeking to develop the uranium mine,
which would cover an area 9km long and 1.5km wide.
It would involve the
clearing of up to 2,422 hectares of native vegetation.
It is also approved to
cause groundwater levels to drop by 50cm, and they would not completely recover
for 200 years, according to Cameco's environmental reports.
A spokesperson for
Environment Minister Melissa Price said the approval was subject to 32 strict
conditions to avoid and mitigate potential environmental impacts.
Traditional owner of the
area, Tjiwarl woman Vicky Abdullah, said she was surprised by the announcement,
and was hoping for the project to be rejected.
"It's a very
precious place for all of us. For me and my two aunties, who have been walking
on country," she said.
Mine approval a
controversial move ahead of caretaker mode
Simon Williamson,
General Manager of Cameco Australia, told the ABC he was pleased Ms Price had
approved the mine before calling the election.
"Yeah, that's
likely to raise questions about rushed decision and all that stuff, but the
state [government] made their decision in January 2017," he said.
"The timing was
such that all of [the assessment] was completed to allow her to sign off before
the election. I think it's quite appropriate and I think the minster would want
to sign off on projects on her plate before she goes to an election……
Dave Sweeney, an
anti-nuclear campaigner at the Australian Conservation Foundation said the
timing suggested the decision was political.
"We need decisions
that are based on evidence and the national interest, not a company's interest
or not a particular senator's or a particular government's interest," he
said.
"This reeks of
political interference rather than a legal consideration or due process."
The approval is one of
several controversial moves the Government made before entering caretaker mode,
where such decisions would be impossible, including approving Adani's two groundwater management
plans for it's proposed Carmichael coal mine.....
The
Guardian, 27
April 2019:
A multinational uranium
miner persuaded the federal government to drop a requirement forcing it to show
that a mine in outback Western
Australia would not make any species extinct before it could go ahead.
Canadian-based Cameco
argued in November 2017 the condition proposed by the government for the
Yeelirrie uranium mine, in goldfields north of Kalgoorlie, would be too
difficult to meet.
The mine was approved on
10 April, the
day before the federal election was called, with a different set of
conditions relating to protecting species.
Environmental groups say
the approval was politically timed and at odds with a 2016 recommendation
by the WA Environmental Protection Authoritythat the mine be blocked due to
the risk to about 140 subterranean stygofauna and troglofauna species – tiny
animals that live in groundwater and air pockets above the water table.
A Cameco presentation to
the department, released to the Greens through Senate estimates, shows the
government proposed approving the mine with a condition the company must first
demonstrate that no species would be made extinct during the works.
Cameco Australia said
this did not recognise “inherent difficulties associated with sampling for and
describing species”, including the inadequacy of techniques to sample
microscopic species that live underground and challenges in determining whether
animals were of the same species. It said the condition was “not realistic and
unlikely to be achieved – ever”.
The condition did not
appear in the final
approval signed by the environment minister, Melissa Price, which was
made public after being posted on the environment department’s website on 24
April…..
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)