Tag Archives: coal

PLEA Network

15 October 2015, Carbon Pulse, Australia reapproves gigantic Adani coal mine, Indian CO2 emissions to soar. Environment Minister Greg Hunt on Thursday reapproved the construction of Adani’s Carmichael coal mine in Queensland, Australia’s biggest ever which will see around 60 million tonnes of coal exported to India annually. Hunt first approved the mine last year, but a court annulled the approval earlier this year as the government had failed to take into account the mine’s impact on two threatened species. There has also been strong public opposition against the project amid suspicions it would damage the Great Barrier Reef. The minister said on Thursday the mine had now been “approved in accordance with national environment law subject to 36 of the strictest conditions in Australian history”. Coal from the mine will cause annual CO2 emissions of around 128 million tonnes – roughly similar to the combined GHG emissions of Norway and Sweden – although those emissions will take place in India, where the coal will be exported to. Indian owner Adani has estimated coal from the mine will create 3 billion tonnes of CO2 emissions over its 60-year lifespan. “With regard to the impacts of the emissions caused by the use of the coal from the mine, recipient nations will need to meet their obligations under the United Nations Convention on Climate Change,” Australia’s Environment Ministry said. Read More here

 

PLEA Network

16 September 2015, The Guardian, Stopping fracking won’t stop climate change. I am neither pro nor anti-fracking, but green campaigners must look beyond future threats and tackle the present impacts of fossil fuels if we are to combat climate change…. My concern with the current debate about fracking stems not from any love of the technology but from the fact that it is currently absorbing people’s time and energy fighting potential future impacts, when all around us are far worse existing activities, such as burning Russian coal in 1960s’ power stations. It seems some in the green movement work on the basis that their best chances of making a difference lie in stopping threats that have yet to happen, rather than the impacts that are already with us. Anti new road protests, anti GM, anti incinerators, anti biofuel, anti new nuclear, even stopping the building of the new Kingsnorth coal fired power station – all are examples of this brand of campaigning. Done well they can penetrate the political discourse and change the debate. The problem, however, with whipping up fear of future threats is that it can also lead to fixed ideological positions being adopted in the absence of any actual evidence of harm, and, unless we start blocking the things that are already happening, we risk locking ourselves into the flawed and damaging system we have today. This is of particular concern because it is not just the green movement that has learned the game of how to stop new things from happening. Stoking nimbyism can carry risks for all who seek action on global issues. Read More here

PLEA Network

August 2015, The Australia Institute, Key administration statistics – 3rd Party Appeals and the EPBC Act. Details from a forthcoming Australia Institute Report 

  • Since the EPBC Act commenced in July 2000, there have been approximately 5500 projects referred to the Minister under the environmental impact assessment provisions.
  • Of the 5500 referred, around 1500 have been assessed as requiring formal assessment and approval.
  • 12 projects have been refused approval.
  • 9 projects have been deemed to be ‘clearly unacceptable’ (i.e. rejected prior to proceeding to formal assessment and approval).

Key 3rd party litigation statistics. Read More here 

PLEA Network

28 August 2015, The Conversation, Newcastle’s ‘divestment’ is a chance for the world’s largest coal port to consider its future. The City of Newcastle council’s Tuesday night endorsement of an “environmentally and socially responsible” investment policy threw more mud than a pig wrestling competition at the country show. The controversy thickened this morning as stories emerged that the council also recently accepted an A$12-million offer to expand coal terminals at its port, the world’s largest in terms of coal exports. Amid jeers of hypocrisy and cheers of climate leadership, what can we really say about this policy move in one of New South Wales’ historic coal towns? Investment, not divestment. The council’s unprecedented move to adopt an investment policy which applies traditional investment criteria but also adds a “preference for environmentally and socially responsible investment (if criteria are met)” might rate a media mention, given the recent fossil fuel divestment move by certain universities and governments. But Newcastle’s historical dependence on coal means that the council’s decision sparked a media frenzy and councillors have been in overdrive explaining the policy and their position towards the region’s major industry. Defending both the nuance and intention of the Investment Policy, Newcastle Lord Mayor Nuatali Nelmes explained to ABC Newcastle that “it is not at all and never will be about undermining the coal industry”. Similar statements have been made by the councillor who moved the climate-friendly policy motion, 23-year-old Declan Clausen. Prime Minister Tony Abbott has come out against the policy. Read More here