7 July 2009
Section: Opinion http://www.northernleader.com.au/article/coal_transport_approval_raises_questions
RE – Port Kembla Coal Terminal Major Projects consent, June 26, 2009:
The consent issued by NSW Planning Minister Keneally and announced on June 23, with its initial 50 per cent potential increase of the coal tonnages on road plus the lifting of a curfew going back to 1982, raises many questions.
The first is how the consent accords with the official 2006-2031 Illawarra Regional Strategy of the NSW Department of Planning to (p4) “maximise the efficiency of freight transport” [and] “increase the proportion of freight transported by rail”.
The Minister’s consent given to increasing road haulage of coal to the Port Kembla Coal Terminal from the present high levels of about 5 million tonnes a year to 7.5 million tonnes and an offer to later consider 10 million tonnes has the marked potential to reduce “the efficiency of freight transport” (from increased road congestion, increased road wear and tear and increased energy usage).
More coal on road would also reduce “the proportion of freight transported by rail”.
The second question is, what conditions of consent will uphold the former conditions required by Wollongong City Council in 1979 and agreed to by the NSW Government in 1982 with State Environmental Planning Policy 7 that requires coal from all western mines and Tahmoor Mine to be moved to Port Kembla by rail?
The third question is, why cannot a Maldon-Dombarton railway be used to move coal from a transfer point near the Appin Mine complex to Port Kembla?
Port Kembla is the only coal export terminal in Australia that receives coal by road (all coal for export from Queensland and Port Waratah at Newcastle arrives at the respective ports by rail).
The present 5 million tones a year on road is more than enough and cap of 6 million tonnes on road receival of coal by the PKCT would have been generous.
In addition, among the 121 submissions, plus a petition signed by 55 people, to the Dept of Planning objecting to plans to lift tonnages of coal on road, were requests for the retention of some form of curfew for certain coal trucks on Mt Ousley (to include final day of long weekends) and a code of coal truck standards (regarding the maximum age and noise levels of the trucks, and a requirement for tachographs) to complement a code of coal truck driver conduct.
Given problems in the assessment process, including significant deficiencies in the 2008 Environmental Assessment report and the December 2008 Submissions Report, a public hearing would have been appropriate. The consent stands in need of review.
– Dr Philip Laird
University of Wollongong
No comments:
Post a Comment