Jennifer Marohasy

a forum for the discussion of issues concerning the natural environment

jennifer

Pulp Mill Gets Australian Government Approval with More Conditions: A Note from Malcolm Turnbull

By

Dear Jennifer,

Last week I imposed the world’s most stringent environmental conditions on the Tamar Valley pulp mill project [in Tasmania]. My decision was based solely on science and implemented the recommendations of the Chief Scientist of Australia, Dr Jim Peacock who had reported on all of the scientific issues which fell under my jurisdiction.

Critics of the mill have claimed that I should have investigated and imposed conditions on matters outside the Commonwealth’s environmental jurisdiction.

They overlook the fact that I have to act within the law and as I have set at greater length on my website the Commonwealth’s environmental jurisdiction is limited to categories detailed in the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.

See below for a summary of the decision. Click here for the media release and links to the complete documentation.

Given the extraordinary degree of misinformation about this matter, I would like to set down a few facts about the mill.

The mill will not process any timber from old growth forests. The timber sources will come exclusively from plantation timber and regrowth forests, ie areas which have previously been logged and have regenerated. Within five years it is expected the mill will be using 80% timber from plantations. All timber sourced is covered by the Tasmanian Regional Forestry Agreement which mandates sustainable forestry practices.

There will be no additional logging needed to support the mill. The economics of the mill are based on adding value to woodchips which would otherwise be exported to overseas pulp mills (all of which would have less stringent environmental conditions than those I have imposed on the Tamar Valley pulp mill.)

The site of the pulp mill is not in a pristine wilderness, but in a precinct zoned “heavy industrial” which includes the Comalco aluminium smelter that has been operating there since 1955 as well as a power station and other industrial operations. Check it out on Google Earth if you don’t have time to visit.

The pulp mill will not add 2% to Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions. The Australian Greenhouse Office advises that because the mill will use renewable wood waste for energy it is likely to be either carbon neutral or have a low emission profile compared with the “business as usual” base case of woodchip production and export to pulp mills overseas. Remember power stations fuelled with renewable fuels (biomass) qualify under the MRET scheme in many circumstances. That is why ethanol and bio-diesel are regarded as green fuels.

As you know, I resolved back in August that I would refer the scientific issues central to my assessment of the proposal to the Chief Scientist of Australia, Dr Jim Peacock, who assembled a panel of scientists toadvise him, each of them an expert in the relevant fields.

The Chief Scientist presented me with his report last week and I have made a decision to approve the mill which, consistent with the recommendations of Dr Peacock, imposes the world’s toughest environmental safeguards.

In August, the draft recommendations of my Department proposed 24 conditions be imposed on the proposed pulp mill. The number of conditions has now doubled to 48. The conditions I have imposed are the toughest to be placed on any mill of this type in the world. My decision was based on a rigorous, accountable and transparent assessment process under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).

My decision, consistent with Dr Peacock’s recommendations, includes:

1. 16 conditions relating to the management of effluent from the pulp mill, including stringent levels which if exceeded will mean the mill must close until such time as an advanced (tertiary) effluent treatment process that produces high quality water is put in place.

2. maximum dioxin levels in the effluent discharged from the mill will be almost four times more stringent than world’s best practice and trigger levels (which will require immediate remedial action) will be more than six times more stringent.

3. the establishment of an Independent Expert Group, appointed by the Minister and drawn from leading national and international scientists to assist with the design, implementation, monitoring and approval of the pulp mill.

4. a requirement that Gunns prepare for the Minister’s approval an integrated Environmental Impact Management Plan, in consultation with the Independent Expert Group, to ensure no adverse impacts on Commonwealth environment matters. Some elements of the plan will be required to be approved before any construction begins and the final plan requires approval before the mill is commissioned.

5. the appointment by the Minister of an Independent Site Supervisor to monitor Gunns’ compliance with the conditions. The Independent Site Supervisor will have the full range of powers as an inspector under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 to ensure there are no impediments in terms of access to information or locations to the performance as supervisor.

6. 17 conditions relating to the protection of both listed threatened and migratory species, including measures to protect the Tasmanian Wedge-tailed Eagle, the Tasmanian Devil, fur seals, whales, dolphins and rare native vegetation.

7. requirements for around 400 hectares of protected reserve to be set aside for protected plants and animals.

8. a requirement for transparent and regular reporting by Gunns of compliance with the conditions, to be independently audited by an auditor agreed to by the Department. This report must be also be made available to the public.

My decision was based on the advice of the Chief Scientist, comprehensive advice from my Department, and over 36,000 public submissions received during the assessment process. To ensure as much transparency and accountability as possible in the decision-making process, I included three periods of public comment over the five month since the assessment commenced in April 2007.

The Australian Government’s assessment of the mill was restricted to a set of defined environmental matters, namely the marine environment under Commonwealth jurisdiction, and threatened and migratory species.

As has consistently been the case throughout this assessment, the majority of public concerns relate to issues beyond the Australian Government’s legal powers. The Tasmanian Government is responsible for many of the issues surrounding the pulp mill. These include emissions of odours, local air quality and impacts on Tasmanian waters. I should note the stringent conditions on effluent composition that I have imposed (in order to protect Commonwealth waters) will confer added protection to the marine environment within Tasmanian jurisdiction. .

Wood supply issues are not subject to assessment under the EPBC Act so long as the wood supply, as is the case here, is covered by a Regional Forestry Agreement.

I have been very critical of the Tasmanian assessment process. The decision of the Lennon Government to abandon the assessment by the RPDC unfortunately undermined the trust of the people of Tasmania. The RPDC was, as is the usual practice, considering both State and Commonwealth environmental issues in a bilateral process. When Mr Lennon abandoned that process, I had no choice but to consider the Commonwealth issues myself and I have run a transparent and consultative Commonwealth assessment. The outcome of that process ensures that the pulp mill meets world’s best practice in those areas protected under Commonwealth environment law.

Please visit my Department’s website for more information on my decision, the conditions and a copy of the Chief Scientist’s report.

Yours sincerely
Malcolm Turnbull
Minister for the Environment and Water Resources

Exxon Mobile Saves Tigers? A Note from Ann Novek

By

Brendan Moyle has previously provided us with alternative ways to save tigers from extinction.

Now the World Federation of Chinese Medicine Societies states that tiger parts are not necessary for traditional medicines, and alternatives are available and effective. Can this statement from the organisation save tigers?

Excerpts from an opinion letter to the Los Angeles Times , by Vinod Thomas, director general of the Independent Evaluation Group at the World Bank states :

“How has the tiger’s fate come to this? The foremost reason is poaching to meet demand for tiger products used in traditional medicines in China and other parts of East Asia. The other crucial factor is the continuous loss of tiger habitat, which is down by about 40% across India in the last decade, along with which has disappeared much of its prey.

“To make matters worse, there now is relentless pressure from tiger farmers in East Asia to legalize the trade in the bones, fur, paws, penis and teeth of their animals. On the surface, the case made for legalizing the sale of tiger parts is beguiling. By flooding the market with parts from farm-raised tigers, it’s argued, prices will plummet, reducing the profitability of poaching. A cited analogy: People don’t hunt wild turkeys for Thanksgiving when supermarkets overflow with farmed supplies.

“But to reduce poaching, those who raise tigers in captivity would need to undercut the cost of supplying the parts from wild tigers. That’s improbable. Poaching in India, by poisoning or with simple steel traps, costs less than $100 a tiger (plus transport and other costs). Raising one in captivity — even three or more to a cage — costs about $3,000.

“Conservationists warn that legalizing the tiger trade would be the death knell for tigers in the wild. That’s because it will always be cheaper to hunt tigers, and poaching will be less risky if poached parts can be easily laundered — that is, passed off as coming from captive-bred animals”.

“What now?

“It is essential to deal with poaching and the demand for tiger parts in traditional medicine immediately. The World Federation of Chinese Medicine Societies states that tiger parts are not necessary for traditional medicines, and alternatives are available and effective. So there are solid reasons to strongly enforce the international ban on the tiger trade, and for China to keep its 1993 domestic ban securely in place.”

“As the symbol of countries, teams and corporations, the tiger has helped sell beer, sports goods and breakfast cereal. Now it could use some high-profile reciprocity. Support from private corporations — such as Exxon Mobil’s Save the Tiger Fund — as well as the Asian business diaspora and international agencies could prove decisive. But the moment for action is now. Without immediate financial and political commitments, it will be too late to save this mesmerizing animal”

So can the tigers survive with the help of Exxon Mobile , that Greenpeace has proclaimed as the “Criminal # 1 of the Planet”?

Ann Novek
Sweden

The Macquarie Marshes: An Ecological History

By

I was at Burrima in the Macquarie Marshes yesterday for the launch of an important piece of research by Gillian Hogendyk:

The Macquarie Marshes: An Ecological History, published as an Occasional Paper by the Institute of Public Affairs, September 2007.

Speakers included Don Burke (Australian Environment Foundation), Professor David Mitchell (Charles Stuart University) and Bertie Bartholomew an elder from the Wailwan people. It was the closing remarks from Gillian Hogendyk that I found most inspiring:

“I hope this paper brings about a moving on from past disputes, and that all groups in the Macquarie Valley can begin to work cooperatively towards our common goal: a healthy, viable Macquarie Marshes, and healthy, viable Macquarie Valley communities.

The time is right to achieve something really worthwhile for the Marshes. Currently there is a total of almost $206 million dollars of both State and Federal money on the table for the recovery of threatened wetlands in NSW. Surely the Macquarie Marshes, recognised both nationally and internationally, can benefit from this commitment.

However the right decisions for the Marshes must be based on the right information. This is where I hope my paper can be part of the solution. If I could put the message of my paper in a nutshell it would be this:

The Macquarie Marshes are in trouble, and have been for a very long time. We have been told that the solution is simply to buy more environmental water and send it down here. This solution completely ignores some fundamental problems. We now know that a significant part of the environmental water is regularly diverted, and doesn’t reach the Nature Reserves. We know too that large levee banks have been built upstream of both Nature Reserves. We know that the South Marsh has serious erosion problems and the North Marsh has salinity problems.

The good news is that solutions are possible. Like everyone here today, I would like to think that in the future my children and grandchildren will be able to visit and enjoy the Marshes.

Many of those present today have given me great encouragement and have added significantly to the content of my paper. In 2005 thirty Macquarie River Food and Fibre members dug into their own pockets to finance the purchase of this property ‘Burrima’. This was a pivotal moment in the whole marsh debate, as we can now lead by example and show people the results of our rehabilitation efforts here.

Thank you to all the owners of Burrima, to Don, Jennifer, and David for giving your support today, and to everyone who has worked so hard to make this day such a success. Thank you also to Bertie for welcoming us to the country of his ancestors, the Wailwan people.”

Macquarie Marshes grazed and ungrazed.jpg
This photograph taken by Jennifer Marohasy yesterday (September 26, 2007) shows a grazed area within the Macquarie Marshes adjacent to the northern nature reserve in the north marsh. To the east of the fence line (within the ungrazed northern nature reserve) are reed beds.

Failed Wheat Crops and a Note from Bill Kininmonth

By

When somebody is down on their luck they are fair game for getting a cheap swipe. Drought continues [in Australia] and so the rural community are in the gunsights. It is the farmer’s environmentally unfriendly land management practices that are contributing to global warming, so it is said . It might never rain again! Repent and implement green-friendly practices (shoot the stock and plant native trees) and all will be well!

The drought is continuing despite the earlier predictions that a La Nina is with us and should have brought good winter rains. Obviously man-made global warming.

Unfortunately folklore highlights the 1982-83 El Nino when Malcolm Fraser called an early election during a drought, he lost the election to Bob Hawke and immediately the drought broke with good late autumn and winter rains. Bob Hawke was thenceforth recognised as having divine qualities.

The truth is rather more prosaic. El Nino droughts often break in autumn as they are followed by a rapidly developing La Nina, but not always. If the break does not come in autumn then the next likely period is late spring after the equinox. The current La Nina commenced as a rather weak event but is gathering strength. The Climate Prediction Center in Washington is backing its development. There has been a very active summer monsoon over Asia reflecting the benefits of the La Nina event. A late spring break for Australia after the equinox remains a good prospect.

Rather than further scaring the rural communities with fairy-tales about man-made global warming our communitiy leaders would do better to acquaint themselves with useful knowledge about climate and its prospects and reassure the farmers and their families that climate is only following a well-worn cycle. It would seem that government assistance is available as support and the prospects for rain are not hopeless. Life on the land is tough and survival depends on optimism grounded in fact, not pessimism enhanced by fairy stories.

Bill Kininmonth

Macquarie Marshes 145.jpg
Jennifer Marohasy took this photograph yesterday (September 26, 2007), it was one of many failed winter wheat crops that she saw north of Dubbo in central western New South Wales

James Bond versus Norweigan Whalers: A Translation from Ann Novek

By

Following is my summary from an editorial in Norwegian paper Fiskaren:

“In October many celebrities will gather to celebrate 30 years with Sea Shepherd, including Mick Jagger, Martin Sheen, Orlando Bloom , Uma Thurman and Pierce Brosnan among other super stars together with their cheque books.

Norway has been under heavy international criticism for its whaling policy. To counter this , Norway has presented facts after facts to defend its whaling policy. Even if the Embassies will not be attacked by anti-whalers, what consequences will show up if a new “whale war” blows up?

Probably it will mainly harm the seafood industry and the country’s image.

Sea Shepherd will arrange the history’s biggest “ Save the Whale’s Party”.

Sea Shepherd might feature images of the attacked whalers “ the Nybraena”, “ the Willassen Senior” and “ the Elin –Torild” on the big screen and as well featuring video sequences of whale’s dying in agony to the tunes of Rolling Stones.

The revenues from this gala evening will be bigger than the revenues from Norwegian whaling. Revenues that can pay new ships, direct actions and media campaigns.

With James Bond and Mick Jagger in the frontlines it might be a tough battle for Norway.

However, the Coastal Party, that represents most whalers, made this statement after the sinking of the Norwegian whaler, “Norwegian authorities must now act to promote minke whaling , as a means to save fisheries in the North. It’s a traditional, sustainable and eco-friendly industry that international extreme animal rights activists mustn’t ruin”.

Ann Novek
Sweden

More and More Polar Bears in Davis Strait

By

There was some discussion earlier this year at this blog about polar bear numbers. We couldn’t seem to agree whether numbers were increasing or decreasing and what would happen to bears if all the sea ice melted.

Well according to Dr. Mitch Taylor, a polar bear biologist who has just completed a three-year survey, polar bear populations along the Davis Strait are healthy and their numbers increasing.

According to Stephanie McDonald writing for The Northern News Service:

“Taylor and co-worker Dr. Lily Peacock have been working for the past three years on a polar bear inventory in the Davis Strait, the first in the area in 20 years. The Davis Strait encompasses the area from Cape Dyer on the eastern side of Baffin Island, through Cumberland Sound, and continues on to the area surrounding Kimmirut.

“Parts of Ungava Bay in Quebec and sections of Labrador are also included in the Davis Strait.

“The results of their study have yet to be released, but Taylor revealed last week that the numbers would be contrary to those released by the U.S. Geological Survey.

“Results will confirm hunters’ impressions, that the polar bear population is productive,” Taylor said.

Last year 841 polar bears were counted in the survey area and halfway through this year’s survey, approximately 600 have been counted. Taylor estimates that this year’s number could be as high as 1,000.

“When he started working for the Department of Environment 12 years ago, Sowdlooapik said that only one or two polar bears would wander through Pangnirtung in a year. Now, he receives almost daily reports of polar bears in popular camping sites, in outpost camps, and in the vicinity of the community.

“We could be looking at the possibility of increasing (hunting) quotas,” Taylor said. “We are seeing high densities of bears in great shape.”