Anchor Resources expands its exploration footprint further into Clarence River Catchment

Chinese-owned Anchor Resources Limited has lodged a further mining exploration application ELA 4731 which will extends its proposed gold/antimony mining projects further into the Nymboida River sub-catchment of the larger Clarence River Catchment.

The Clarence Valley and Coffs Harbour  local government areas primarily draw the drinking water for an estimated 120,000 people from the Nymboida River system.

ELA 4731 sits above and below EL 6465 – Anchor Resources’ Blicks Project which is targeting gold, copper and molybdenum.

Dexon Group Holdings of Hong Kong exploring for gold and antimony in the Kyogle region

 

Dexon Group Holdings Ltd of Kowloon, Hong Kong, through Dexon Resources No. 3 Pty Ltd (directors Peter Blair, Gennadii Nedria and Mark Levey) has reportedly approached twelve land owners in the Kyogle district concerning one of its mineral exploration leases where it is said to be looking to eventually mine gold and antimony.

 

Dexon Group Holdings’ three associated companies registered in Australia hold mineral exploration licenses EL 7935, EL 7936 and EL 7398 in New South Wales.

 

Gold and antimony mining on the NSW North Coast has a history of environmental damage and catastrophic water pollution:

 

Estimates of sediment migration rates and amounts of Sb and As transported in suspension and solution imply that the catchment contamination will be long-term (centuries to millennia)

 

Antimony contamination, Urunga 2011

Remember when the Australian coal seam gas industry admitted it would contaminate aquifers?

The Sydney Morning Herald 3 August 2011:

THE coal seam gas industry has conceded that extraction will inevitably contaminate aquifers.

The Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association told a fiery public meeting in Sydney that good management could minimise the risks of water contamination, but never eliminate them.

''Drilling will, to varying degrees, impact on adjoining aquifers,'' said the spokesman, Ross Dunn. ''The extent of impact and whether the impact can be managed is the question.''

Clarence Valley Council Votes For Halt To CSG Mining Activity

On Tuesday 19th March Clarence Valley Council voted on the coal seam gas (CSG) motion which had been introduced at the previous week's Environment, Economic and Community Committee.

The motion had called on Council to write to MPs and relevant state and federal ministers calling for a halt to "coal seam gas mining activity and all other forms of unconventional gas mining" until the impacts of this mining were properly assessed in studies currently being undertaken by various expert committees.  If that assessment indicated that CSG mining was safe, the community could be assured that there would be no detrimental health or environmental impacts and the mining activity could then proceed.

Cr Kingsley moved the motion with several brief amendments. He said that the motion was not about the pros and cons of CSG but was rather in response to the concerns of the local community, concerns which have been acknowledged by both State and Federal governments.  He added that as the risks appeared to be there, governments should go one step further than their inquiries and halt mining activities until the risks have been dealt with.

Other councillors who spoke to support the motion were Crs Hughes, Howe, McKenna and Williamson. 

Those who spoke against were Crs Toms and Baker. 

One of Cr Baker arguments was to dispute the need for a halt because the experts who were undertaking the studies had not seen fit to recommend a halt. 

Cr Baker is naïve in imagining that experts engaged by the government would take it upon themselves to call for a halt to mining while the studies were done. Obviously a precautionary approach would indicate that was desirable – but the governments would have to make that decision.  And there is no doubt that both the State and Federal Governments, both wholehearted supporters of CSG mining, would not make that call.

Cr Toms' main argument was that there was no point of writing the letters on this matter to government ministers, because nothing would happen as a result.  She also said that, while she understood people's concerns, the matter was outside Council's area of responsibility and that Council needed to wait to see what the experts said.  She added that the issue was about our energy security.

While it appears that Cr Toms has more understanding of the issue than Cr Baker, at least two of the reasons quoted above can be disputed. 

Though it is extremely unlikely that letters to Ministers will persuade them to halt mining until the studies are completed and assessed, these letters are yet another indication – and a strong one – that a local community is very concerned about the likely impacts of CSG mining.  They will be in addition to the increasing numbers of letters, phone calls, emails, marches, protests and deputations from individuals and organisations that ensure that the message gets through to decision-makers in their "ivory towers" in Sydney and Canberra.

Cr Toms has obviously accepted the pro-CSG lobby's claim that CSG mining in NSW is essential for our energy security because NSW is running out of gas.  It's interesting that while they talk of local energy security, the companies mining CSG are more interested in exporting it than in providing for the domestic market. In relation to the claimed shortage, it has been established that there are plentiful supplies of gas in other areas – for example the Bass Strait.  So the energy security claim is a furphy.

The vote for the motion was six in favour (Kingsley, Howe, Hughes, McKenna, Simmons, Williamson) and three against (Baker, Challacombe, Toms).

Cr Challacombe did not speak in the debate and when the vote was taken indicated that he wished to abstain. The Mayor informed him that an abstention was recorded as a vote against.  Cr Challacombe reportedly informed the media later that his background in environmental science meant he thought the council was ill-qualified to assess the industry's impact. (The Daily Examiner, 20 March 2013, p. 4).  He has obviously missed the point that it was government experts, not the Council, who were going to assess the industry impacts.

Hildegard

Northern Rivers

21 March 2013

GuestSpeak is a feature of North Coast Voices allowing Northern Rivers residents to make satirical or serious comment on issues that concern them. Posts of 250-300 words or less can be submitted to ncvguestspeak AT gmail.com.au for consideration

Challenging the February 19 Coal Seam Gas media release by Premier Barry O’Farrell and Andrew Stoner MP

There is much to challenge in the February 19 media release by Premier Barry O’Farrell and Andrew Stoner MP.

Up until now The National Party have claimed that their Strategic Regional Land Use Policy would protect land and water in New South Wales. If this assertion were true, why is there any reason for new ‘measures’ to ‘strengthen’ regulations?

Mr Stoner would have us believe that we (the community) have been listened to. Let’s remember it was The NSW Greens’ Jeremy Buckingham MLC who successfully initiated the 2012 NSW Parliamentary Inquiry into Coal Seam Gas mining that brought to light the dangers of CSG. The Liberal/National NSW government needed to be dragged kicking and screaming to the inquiry before agreeing on these modest reforms to the rampant coal seam gas industry. Now they are rewriting history.

Andrew Stoner and Barry O’Farrell claim their government is not responsible for the exploration licences. “It was Labor that handed out CSG exploration licences… “ Perhaps they are just unaware that Liberal/National government also handed out licences. The application to drill for pilot production at Fullerton Cove was made to the O’Farrell Government in September 2011 and approved by DITRIS on 5 June 2012.

Premier O’ Farrell has claimed that if his government were to cancel petroleum exploration licences then the state would be liable for billions in compensation.  However, the Petroleum (Onshore) Act makes it clear that companies would not be paid any compensation for cancellation of licences if they breached ‘conditions’.   Surely this means that if the Lib/National government has got its new ‘measures’ and ‘controls’ correct then they won’t have to pay any compensation because all the companies will be complying with their ‘conditions’.

The O’Farrell/Stoner government is yet to legislate these new promises made under pressure. If the legislation is passed as proposed there is no protection for farming land, only for viticulture and horse studs. Does this mean that many farmers in New South Wales have less value than grapes and horses?

Existing licences and drilling such as we have seen at Glenugie and Doubtful Creek will proceed. No amount of payout would compensate for the loss in value of farmland because of its industrialisation. Picture many CSG wells 500m apart linked by roads and pipelines; the one small well in a pretty field is advertising hype by the CSG industry.

Luke Hartsuyker is quoted on March 8 as saying that coal seam gas is ‘very much an industry approved in the state jurisdiction’. The responsibility of this jurisdiction certainly appears to cause Mr Stoner some conflict when he can be quoted on ABC News February 22, as saying: “I wouldn’t want a CSG well five metres from my property. It’s going to affect my property value a hell of a lot. Nobody is going to want to buy that value, ah that piece of land rather, um, and there’s always the potential for something to go wrong, so I understand why people are concerned.” How does this fit with the bottom line of the same media release where Mr Stoner says: “We want a sustainable CSG Industry in NSW...”?  Sustainable? How? Renewable? No? Social Licence for this industry? None!

Carol Vernon

Fernmount

11/3/2013

GuestSpeak is a feature of North Coast Voices allowing Northern Rivers residents to make satirical or serious comment on issues that concern them. Posts of 250-300 words or less can be submitted to ncvguestspeak AT gmail.com.au for consideration.

Clarence Councillors Again Express Concerns About CSG Mining

Coal seam gas is very newsworthy at the moment with politicians at all levels of government anxious to demonstrate that they are (finally) listening to community concerns about this industry. Both the State and Federal Governments have recently announced new measures to address some of the issues identified by anti-CSG campaigners.   Whether these measures, most of which are directed to new rather than existing licences, will have any real effect is questionable.

Clarence Valley Councillors, like their state and federal counterparts, are well aware of community concerns. The previous Council passed two resolutions expressing concern about coal seam gas mining. And on Tuesday 12th March, with memories of the Glenugie vigil and blockade still fresh, another motion was put to the Environment, Economic and Community Committee of the Council.

Councillors Jason Kingsley, Craig Howe and Sue Hughes moved that Council write to State and Federal Ministers and local MPs calling for a halt to "CSG mining activity and all other forms of unconventional gas mining including testing in the Clarence Valley" until the release of findings of a number of inquiries relating to the industry's impacts on health, water catchments and other environmental matters could deliver a guarantee that there will be no detrimental impacts from this industry.

In their motion the Councillors stated: "In light of recent events there is increasing doubt as to the safety of CSG mining in both the areas of human health and the Environment. NSW Health recommended no more CSG expansion in Sydney until more studies can be undertaken into the effects on people’s health. The NSW Government recently tightened restrictions on CSG activity near dwellings, with the Deputy Premier stating that he would not like it in his backyard and that there was a possibility something could go wrong.

"If it is good enough for Sydney and the Deputy Premier, it is good enough for the residents and environment of the Clarence Valley."

Questions about the motion were asked by Councillors Challacombe and Baker. 

Councillor Challacombe stated that he had no problem with the motion "per se" but he wanted to establish that, if the five criteria were met, the motion indicated that CSG mining could go ahead. 

Councillor Baker stated that he did not believe that the motion indicated that this could happen and said that he would vote against it.  He spoke on a number of occasions during the debate and claimed that the effect of the motion would be to create uncertainty, that the level of community concern about the CSG industry has not really been tested, and that dealing with this issue was beyond the area of Council's responsibility.  In addition he referred to the inconsistency of the other levels of government which obtained benefits from CSG mining.

Councillor Howe stated that the effect of the motion would be to create certainty as there was uncertainty now.  He acknowledged that, while Local Government had limitations in this matter, Councils had a role in advocating for their communities.  He pointed out that the Department of Health concerns illustrated that there was doubt and a health risk and that we should be wary of taking risks in this matter.

The Committee voted four (Howe, Hughes, McKenna, Williamson) to one (Baker) for the motion.

It will be very interesting to see the vote at the full Council meeting on Tuesday 19^th March.  Of particular interest will be the vote of Councillor Challacombe, former President of the Grafton Chamber of Commerce.  Last year the Chamber came out in support of CSG mining in the Clarence after it had been lobbied (and reportedly wined and dined) by Metgasco, the CSG company involved in the test drill at Glenugie in January.

Hildegard

Northern Rivers

GuestSpeak is a feature of North Coast Voices allowing Northern Rivers residents to make satirical or serious comment on issues that concern them. Posts of 250-300 words or less can be submitted to ncvguestspeak AT gmail.com.au for consideration.

Coal Seam Gas: Saffin and Elliott deliver on water resources protection

 

Hopefully the foreshadowed amendments to the C’wealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 will give the level of water protection Northern Rivers communities hope for.

 

Saffin hails new water protection as a win for the community

 

The Federal Labor Government today moved to tighten controls over Coal Seam Gas activities on the North Coast.

 

Page MP Janelle Saffin today announced that the Federal Labor Government will amend the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act to provide greater environmental protection for water resources impacted by coal seam gas mining.

 

"This effectively means that Coal Seam Gas Mining could be stopped on the North Coast if it has the potential to adversely impact our precious water resources.

 

Currently there is no direct protection for water resources under our national environment law.

 

“I have said for years that we have to protect our water from the known risks of CSG mining.

 

“What I’ve said all along is that I wanted the Environment Minister, Tony Burke,  to find a way that we could draw water in the ambit of the EP and BC Act. And today he announced that he’s been able to do it.

 

“I’ve been working with the Minister and his advisors for some period of time on this.

 

“Last year we got the Independent Expert Scientific Committee that is undertaking bioregional assessments.

 

“I’ve told the minister that the community wanted us to find a way to have water included in the assessments for Coal Seam Gas.  And I thank the Minister for doing that.

 

"Without water there is no life and it's important we take steps to ensure our water systems are protected.

 

“I have been working with Justine Elliott locally and in Canberra, and at the Federal Government level we have done what we can.”

 

“With this amendment the Australian Labor Government is responding to community concern to ensure the long term health and viability of Australia’s water resources.

 

“This amendment means we have to take water into account for these kinds of projects, so I don’t see how they will be able to go ahead.

 

“The states however, still have the power immediately to give us an exclusion zone for the Northern Rivers.”

 

 

13 March, 2013

 

Media contact:  Lee Duncan 0448 158 150

 

Is this the future of Northern Rivers water if the O'Farrell Government, Metgasco and Dart prevail?

 

Enduring and sustainable river and ground water systems have long been a focus of community concern on the NSW North Coast.

 

Metgasco Limited has been exploring for coal seam gas in the region for a number of years and to date has drilled 50 wells of various types which tap into what the company describes as shallow aquifer water.

 

It does not specify how much carted-in domestic water and aquifer water it has used thus far, although its estimates for seven incomplete/new core, pilot and ‘conventional’ wells range from 200,000 litres through to 1 million litres per well by 2014.

 

Nor does it rule out produced waste water and/or treated water seeping into local aquifers.

 

Ultimately Metgasco intends to have an estimated 1,000 wells in commercial production in the Richmond Valley and, an as yet unspecified number in the Clarence Valley.

 

Dart Energy has only recently purchased an existing mining exploration tenement in the region and takes responsibility for the 15 exploration wells already sunk.

 

So what might this level of exploration phase and future production phase water extraction mean for North Coast rivers and aquifers?

 

Because Metgasco does not publicly broach this subject unless pressed on specifc issues by the media, one must look to the National Water Commission and Queensland for a sense of what may come to pass.

 

In June 2012 the Australian Water Commission published a CSG water management position paper which stated:
 

Potential risks to sustainable water management

• Extracting large volumes of low-quality water will impact on connected surface and groundwater systems, some of which may already be fully or overallocated, including the Great Artesian Basin and Murray-Darling Basin.

• Impacts on other water users and the environment may occur due to the dramatic depressurisation of the coal seam, including: - changes in pressures of adjacent aquifers with consequential changes in water availability - reductions in surface water flows in connected systems - land subsidence over large areas, affecting surface water systems, ecosystems, irrigation and grazing lands.

• The production of large volumes of treated waste water, if released to surface water systems, could alter natural flow patterns and have significant impacts on water quality, and river and wetland health. There is an associated risk that, if the water is overly treated, 'clean water' pollution of naturally turbid systems may occur.

• The practice of hydraulic fracturing, or fraccing, to increase gas output, has the potential to induce connection and cross-contamination between aquifers, with impacts on groundwater quality.

• The reinjection of treated waste water into other aquifers has the potential to change the beneficial use characteristics of those aquifers.

Also in 2012 the Queensland Government produced the Surat Underground Water Impact Report which predicts that petroleum tenure holders will extract approximately 95,000 megalitres of water per year over the life of the industry and this extraction will impact on water levels.

 

There are some 21,000 water bores within the Surat CMA with bore water used for grazing, irrigation, industry and urban consumption.
 

Of these, there are 528 bores which are expected to experience a decline in water level of more than the trigger threshold as a result of CSG water extraction.

 

The trigger threshold referred to is five metres for consolidated aquifers (such as sandstone) and two metres for unconsolidated aquifers (such as sands).

 

Eighty-five of the 528 bores are expected to decline by more than the trigger threshold within three years.

 

All 528 bores tap into geological formations involved in current or proposed coal seam gas exploration and production.

 

Note: The Walloon Coal Measures is a geologic formation of the Great Artesian Basin (GAB). The GAB includes aquifers of economic importance and which feed springs of high ecological and cultural significance. The Condamine Alluvium overlies the GAB and is also an aquifer of major economic importance.

 

Of the 71 spring complexes in the area, there are five where the predicted decline in water levels in the source aquifer for the spring is more than 0.2 metres at the location of the spring.

 

In 2013 it was reported in a peer-reviewed paper that fugitive gas emissions from a CSG gas field near Tara in Queensland may be higher than previously thought.

 

This paper hypothesizes that the lowering of the water table and the alteration of subsurface strata creates enhanced soil gas exchange, which results in higher radon concentrations near CSG wells.

 

A previous submission from the SCU Centre for Coastal Biogeochemistry Research also highlighted a possible relationship between CSG mining activity in the Tara region and the presence of higher than expected levels of the greenhouse gas methane in the air.

NSW Farmers asks O'Farrell to protect all strategic agricultural land, water resources and lots zoned residential from CSG and coal mining

NSW Farmers on 19 February 2013 as reported in the RuralWeekly:

The following motion was passed at this morning's executive council meeting:

NSW Farmers supports Premier O'Farrell's decision to take a tougher stand on CSG compliance, and extraction near iconic agricultural industries. We call on the NSW Government to improve this policy by taking the following steps:

1.   apply the 2km buffer to Strategic Agricultural Land and water resources, as identified in Strategic Regional Land Use Plans;

2.    apply the buffer to minerals exploration and extraction (including coal) - not just coal seam gas;

3.    apply this policy to all projects which have not yet received approval, or release legal advice detailing why this step cannot be taken; and,

4.    apply the 2km buffer to all areas zoned as residential (as opposed to setting a population-based definition).

Truth in advertising and the coal seam gas industry

 

So confident is the coal seam gas industry of widespread political support across all three tiers of government and  so certain of the fickle attention span of the mainstream media, that its spokespeople knowingly utter falsehoods as easily as they breathe in and out.

 

They film an industry employee on land they don't have permission to enter in an effort to mislead the general public into believing that the employee is a farmer standing on his own land extolling the virtues of coal seam gas.

 

They make a blatantly false statement in print that has to be rebutted by CSIRO scientists:

 

CSIRO rejects claims made by APPEA regarding groundwater and coal seam gas

 

CSIRO rejects the claim made in a television commercial aired on Sunday 2 September that ‘CSIRO [and government studies] have shown that groundwater is safe with coal seam gas’.

• 4 September 2012

At no time has CSIRO made such a statement, and nor do the results of CSIRO research support such a statement.

CSIRO continues to undertake research to better understand the impacts of coal seam gas extraction on groundwater quality and quantity.

CSIRO has stated on the public record that coal seam gas extraction is likely to pose a ‘low risk’ to groundwater quality through contamination. CSIRO has also indicated that groundwater levels will fall as a consequence of coal seam gas extraction. In some places this could see aquifer levels subside by tens of metres for tens of years; in others it is likely to reduce aquifer levels by several metres for several hundred years.

CSIRO continues to undertake research to better understand the impacts of coal seam gas extraction on groundwater quality and quantity.

CSIRO became aware of the advertisement produced by Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association (APPEA) via a scan of social media on Friday 31 August and requested for the commercial to not be aired.

 

Because of this whatever-it-takes business culture which is loose with the truth, one has to question copies of print advertising the industry has displayed on one of its websites www.wewantcsg.com.au.

 

Who is this woman pictured below? Does she really come from Casino on the NSW North Coast? Is she a genuine school teacher or is she an industry employee or even a paid advertsing model? Is she related to someone who works for a mining company? Is she on the staff of a politician who is pro-coal seam gas?
Does she really want CSG?

Perhaps an NCV reader can answer these questions.

 

The Nannas gently chide Clarence MP Chris Gulaptis over his tacit support of coal seam gas mining

Clarence Valley Review 30 January 2013

The body language is telling. NSW Nationals MP for Clarence, Chris Gulaptis, is obviously not comfortable with the message. Which is unfortunate.

Given that the alleged $1.4 billion in direct expenditure Metgasco claims it will be contributing to the Northern Rivers economy over 20 years pales in comparison with the more than $1 billion tourism contributes each year to the region and, an initial 1,000 well wide gas field will inevitably have a negative impact on this section of the regional economy.

Metgasco starts to drill at Glenugie in the Clarence Valley

 

Metgasco appears to be leading a charmed life when it comes to government support as the coal seam gas industry appears to have the NSW Energy and Resources Minister Chris Hartcher and the O’Farrell Government in its corner.

 

The Managing Director's Presentation to the 13 November 2012 Annual General Meeting supplied to the Australian Stock Exchange is littered with favourable quotes from government and Chairman Nicolas Heath told this meeting that the political cloud over coal seam gas in NSW has been removed.

 

As I write Metgasco is said to be clearing land at Glenugie on the NSW North Coast so that yet more exploratory drilling can commence in the face of widespread community opposition.

 

South Grafton firm McLennans Earth Moving is said to be preparing the site and embattled construction company AJ Lucas contracted to undertake the drilling.

 

According to The Daily Examiner  today:

 

COAL seam gas miner Metgasco has downplayed the significance of activity at a site at Glenugie where it is preparing to take rock samples.

A neighbour, George Oxenbridge, was alarmed when he saw trucks and an excavator on the site on Avenue Rd at Glenugie yesterday.

Mr Oxenbridge said Metgasco had promised to notify people in the region before any activity took place, but nothing had been provided.

Late yesterday CSG protesters were considering a blockade of the site.

What is fascinating about this mining company’s relentless drive is that it is already operating at a considerable loss in a period when even it admits that it has been unable to attract a major player to farm in to its project and in a market which it told its shareholders is currently oversupplied with gas on the east coast of Australia.

 

In July 2012 The Australian reported that; UBS analyst Gordon Ramsay said the whole LNG industry was building projects in a high-cost environment. "The issue for the (CSG) industry is that when you get out of the sweet spots, the wells aren't as productive and that means you have to drill more wells or use more technology to drill more horizontal ones or you fracture stimulate and that means higher costs to get the gas out," he said.

By September analysts were downgrading Australian energy company valuations because of expected supply-based pressure on LNG prices and worries over the prospect that LNG export prices may drop dramatically.

 

While in October James Baulderstone, Santos Vice-president for Eastern Australia, in his turn admitted that the return to coal seam gas producers is not growing; The reality is that the price of natural gas has remained essentially flat for the past 10 years.

 

Metgasco’s monthly listed share price has reflected this overall situation – going from above 1.100 in 2008 to below 0.200 in 2012.

 

Despite its rhetoric for media and local government consumption, the company does not appear to have prospective customers knocking down its door and is hardly likely to find a ready market for residential customers given the impact of CSG industry costs on price are predicted to keep network and retailer charges rising.

 

The demand for domestic gas generally will remain relatively flat to slow growing through to 2027 according to the ACCC in its State Of The Energy Market 2009 report.

 

It would appear that Metgasco is likely to join other suppliers in finding that, even in a highly competitive and volatile international market, exporting its product overseas is the more attractive option.

 

That may create yet another headache for the Northern Rivers region as the company is still keeping its options open with regard to a floating LNG facility off the coast.

 

One thing which does stand out is that Metgasco is a small-time player in the Australian gas industry and one has a strong suspicion that local communities will see little benefit from its activities – now or in the future.

 

Metgasco might believe that politics no longer plays a part in its wildly optimistic plans, but all three tiers of government may find that this company’s activities will cause them considerable pain at the ballot box over the next decade.

Renison Consolidated Mines exploring within the Clarence River catchment in 2012

 

From A Clarence Valley Protest 24 October 2012: 

 

RENISON CONSOLIDATED MINES (formerly known as Sirocco Resources NL, Kakadu Resources Ltd, Gerrod Ltd and Avillion No 4 Ltd) a Brisbane-based corporation first registered in 1986 and primarily involved in gold and coal exploration, has been granted an exploration license in the Timbarra Plateau region on the NSW North Coast.

 

According to the Colong Foundation for Wilderness:

 

The plateau is detached from the Great Dividing Range, apart from a narrow connecting ridge in the north, and has hence been able to provide a significant refuge for wildlife from human impacts and feral predation. The plateau falls away steeply into the valleys of the Timbarra River and Demon Creek.

The area is a biodiversity hot spot. In the forests of the western sector of the nominated area, 29 endangered species are known to occur. These include: mammals (Hastings River Mouse, Yellow-bellied Glider, Tiger Quoll, Rufous Bettong, Golden-tipped Bat, Greater Broad-nosed Bat and Brush-tailed Rock Wallaby); birds (Glossy Black Cockatoo, Powerful Owl and Sooty Owl); and amphibians (Stuttering Frog, Glandular Frog and recently discovered Peppered Frog). The wilderness contains a major overlap of biogoegraphic zones, with faunal representations of coastal, inland, temperate and sub tropical regions converging. The area is the only single site able to provide key habitat for the threatened Hastings River Mouse, Eastern Chestnut Mouse and Brush-tailed Rock Wallaby.

 

The 98 blocks in this license surround the old Timbarra Gold Mine which was permanently closed in 2001-02 due to persistent cyanide contamination from mine tailing dams which overflowed after rain.

 

The licence also covers part of the Timbarra River catchment which falls within the larger Clarence River Catchment Area.

 

In 2011 the Clarence River catchment supplied fresh water to an estimated 52,816 residents living in the Clarence Valley local government area and, to another 73, 296 residents in the Coffs Harbour local government area which is located outside the catchment and historically is provided with a significant measure of water security by the Clarence Valley [Clarence Valley Council,Clarence Valley Economic Monitor,June 2012 and Coffs Harbour City Council,Community Profile,June 2011].

 

Renison’s current chair, Stephen Grant Bissell, is also a director of Bizzell Capital Partners, Renaissance Uranium, Armour Energy Ltd, Titan Energy Services Ltd, Dart Energy, Diversa Ltd, Stanmore Coal, Hot Rock Ltd, Bow Energy, Celamin Limited, Apollo Gas Limited, a former director of Arrow Energy and a member of the Queensland Coal Seam Gas forum.

 

ELA 4513 (1992) 28-Mar-2012 98 UNITS About 51km WSW of GRAFTON RENISON CONSOLIDATED MINES NL Group: GROUP 1

Click on map to enlarge

Can our Northern Rivers cope with the amount of water extraction required by foreshadowed mining ventures?

 

NSW Coal, Mineral & Petroleum Mining Titles October 2012

Click to enlarge

 

Perhaps questions should be asked about the average number of dams per operational mining license, as envisaged by the NSW Government, and tally them up across each Northern Rivers catchment as to expected total dam volume and estimated megalitres of extracted river water required over the life of each mining venture.

Can highly variable and environmentally sensitive river systems cope with this additional water extraction?

 

NSW Legislative Council 2012 Adequacy of water storages in NSW (Inquiry):
 

Given the historical long term and recent increasing trends (as noted above), the DSC expects that the number of prescribed dams will continue to grow – particularly for the following reasons:

 

The current on-going significant activity and development in the mining industry, involving the continued evolution of mine tailings and storage dams.

 

Investigation and development of coal seam gas extraction – which will require some holding reservoirs for the water that is obtained as part of the extraction process……..

 

http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/committee.nsf/0/2a2ecc1c47e1a218ca257a7d0018f77f/$FILE/AQO-Dams%20Safety%20Committee.pdf

 

Want to tell Chris Gulaptis MP how strongly you feel about keeping coal seam gas exploration & mining out of the Page electorate?

Then gather outside his electoral office at 10.30-11am 2 pm tomorrow Tuesday 25 September 2012, when likeminded residents will be holding a peaceful protest at 11 Prince Street, Grafton, NSW. Opposite Clarence Valley Council’s main building.

Metgasco's claims regarding its CSG wastewater disputed

A Clarence Valley Protest July 26, 2012:

Metgasco CSG waste water contaminated with salt and heavy metals
Coal Seam Gas News 26 July 2012

Lock the Gate Northern Rivers has today revealed that a sample of wastewater from a Metgasco coal seam gas wastewater storage pond has been found to contain high levels of a range of heavy metals toxic to humans and wildlife. The sample was analysed at the NATA accredited EAL laboratory in Lismore (sample results and comparison with Drinking Water and ANZECC Environmental Guidelines attached).

This finding follows on from repeated claims by Metgasco that their CSG produced water is just ‘salty’ and the release of company data last week suggesting that, apart from the salt levels, the water meets drinking water standards.

‘These pond sample results confirm that there are indeed a range of toxic substances in addition to salts in the wastewater produced in Metgasco’s coal seam gas operations and stored in ponds around Casino,’ said Boudicca Cerese, spokesperson for Lock the Gate Northern Rivers.

‘The tests found 13 elements present in the sample at levels above the Drinking Water Standards, the majority of them heavy metals. Ten of these substances were also above the allowable limits for maintenance of healthy freshwater ecosystems.’

‘Many of these substances are well known for their toxicity and their release into local waterways via the sewage treatment plant or onto agricultural lands poses a serious threat to humans, domestic stock and wildlife.’

‘Aluminium, a neurotoxic linked with the onset of dementia and Alzheimers, was detected at 440 times drinking water standards and 800 times the allowable environmental limits. At elevated concentrations aluminium can be lethal to fish and other aquatic organisms and the animals that consume them,’ said Ms. Cerese.

‘Lead, a cumulative poison that can severely affect the central nervous system, was measured at 7 times drinking water standards and 20 times the safe environmental limit. Lead is renowned for its effects on children’s development and has been shown to cause cancer in animals.’

‘The sampling found levels of hexavalent chromium 50 times the guideline level required to protect waterways. Hexavalent chromium is known to cause lung cancer in humans and also adversely affects aquatic and marine life,’ she said.

‘The sample results clearly show that the community cannot rely on the water quality results provided by Metgasco and that there is an urgent need for state government authorities to undertake rigorous independent testing of all Metgasco’s ponds prior to any further actions regarding treatment and disposal of this wastewater,’ said Ms. Cerese.

‘In addition, these results sound a warning bell for the future, as the treatment and disposal of the vast quantities of water extracted in future CSG production will mean the accumulation of thousands of tonnes of chemical laden salts, potentially severely impacting ground and surface water quality, and putting at risk public, livestock and wildlife health.

‘Plans to use this water in agriculture or to reinject produced water back into the ground are a dangerous notion, one which will backfire on future generations,’ she said

Coal Seam Gas Mining: "The NSW Government intends to allow widespread use of wastewater 'holding ponds' across NSW and the Northern Rivers"

Clarence Valley Conservation Coalition 24 June 2012:

Last year in July the NSW Government banned construction of CSG evaporation ponds in response to community concerns about the danger of overflows and leakage of toxic chemicals from these structures.

In response to the Casino protest, NSW Minister for Resources and Energy, Chris Hartcher, stated on 21 June that the government had not approved any evaporation ponds since its July 2011 ban, and that the Metgasco pond was a "holding pond" approved by Richmond Valley Council.

Boudicca Cerese, spokesperson for Lock the Gate Northern Rivers, said, "The Minister tried to split hairs about the difference between an evaporation pond and a holding pond, but no-one is buying it - a toxic pond is a toxic pond and we don't want them.

"Management of coal seam gas wastewater in the region is a ticking time bomb that represents a real risk to our floodplains, waterways and farmland.
"It is clear from the Ministers' statement … that the NSW Government intends to allow widespread use of wastewater 'holding ponds' across NSW and the Northern Rivers."

The protesters have announced that they intend to continue their action against Metgasco's "holding pond".

The Northern Star on the subject of holding ponds.

23 June 2012:

THE State Government has found coal seam gas company Metgasco did not provide adequate freeboard in its wastewater holding ponds and has directed the company to draw down the levels.

"Freeboard" refers to the allowance between the top of the water in a pond and the point at which water would overflow.

On June 18 the government directed the company draw down the levels to accommodate "more than a one in 100 year rainfall event".

The finding comes on the back of breaches of the company's petroleum exploration licenses (PEL) revealed by the Northern Star last week.

In those cases in May the company was fined $5000 for failing to provide information about its wastewater disposal plans.

It was also directed to report water quality and management details.

The latest direction related to PEL16 which covers Casino and includes Shannon Brook where protesters have begun a vigil at a pond under construction.

They provided the Northern Star with video footage showing water lapping the edge of a pond.

"If the ponds at Shannon Brook, which is very low flat country, were to overflow or leak you have a situation where salty polluted water could potentially disperse across a large part of the landscape onto prime cropping and pasture lands and eventually into sensitive wetland areas in the Ellangowan area," Boudicca Cerese of Lock the Gate Northern Rivers said.

"The latest breaches really highlight the fact that across the board, Metgasco's wastewater management is a complete debacle.

25 June 2012:

PROTESTERS are continuing to stop the construction of a CSG wastewater holding pond at Shannon Brook near Casino through an ongoing blockade.

As many as 30 protesters held the line at the weekend by blocking the entrance to the site.

A call has been put out to help maintain a vigil to prevent any further works and protesters say they have no plans to leave any time soon.

The activists say a Metgasco ute was seen arriving at the site about 6.40am yesterday, stopping about 100m from the protesters before turning and driving away.

Spokesman for the Richmond Valley Group Against Gas Dean Draper said there had been a groundswell of support for the blockade.

"We want to make sure we respect the farmers and keep this place operating as a farming area, so we are asking people to book with us if they want to come down," said Mr Draper.

26 June 2012:

METGASCO did not tell a parliamentary inquiry the company was disposing of coal seam gas wastewater at the Casino sewage treatment plant.
The Northern Star on June 13, revealed the company disposed of more than 1.3 million litres at the plant in the 10 months to March......
But Metgasco chief operating officer Michael O'Brien made no mention of the disposal when giving evidence to the NSW Government inquiry into coal seam gas on December 8.
Under questioning from Greens MLC Jeremy Buckingham, Mr O'Brien explained the company disposed of water in "above-ground holding ponds".
"The only way you deal with produced water and drilling fluids is to hold them in these ponds?" Mr Buckingham asked.
Mr O'Brien responded: "Currently, for our production pilots, that is the case, but when we go into production we will look for a beneficial use for the water."

* Photograph of protester chained to mining equipment from Lock The Gate.