BHP: 30 million litres of water per day for free - despite $8 billion 6 month profit

February 7, 2007 : Free water despite $8 billion 6 month profit

On the back of this morning's announcement of a 6 month profit of $8billion, Greens MLC Mark Parnell has called on BHP Billiton to start paying for water from the Great Artesian Basin as part of a complete renegotiation of the special deal that the Roxby Downs mine receives...
Mr Parnell says most Australians struggling with water restrictions would be very upset to learn that a company making an $8 billion profit in just 6 months is getting 30 million litres of water a day for free.

"BHP Billiton is laughing all the way to the bank - not only do they get special exemptions from a whole range of laws, they have an ridiculously generous deal on water," said Mr Parnell.

Since 1982, the Roxby Downs Indenture Act has granted extraordinary and unique exemptions from basic South Australian regulations and laws that all other miners and developers are required to follow. These include the South Australian Freedom of Information, Environment Protection, and Natural Resource Management Acts.

"On the back of the proposed massive expansion of the mine, and the switch to an open cut process, it is time to renegotiate the whole deal. Everything in the 1982 Roxby Downs Indenture Act should be back on the table, including water," he said.

The Roxby Downs mine is the single biggest user of water from the Great Artesian Basin, and the largest single-site industrial user of underground water in the Southern Hemisphere. When asked specifically by Phil Coorey of the Sydney Morning Herald about the amount of Great Artesian Basin water the Olympic Dam mine is using, and is likely to use in its expansion, John Howard stated last week that 'everybody's got to make a contribution to solving this problem'.

"Even John Howard has called for caps and pricing on Great Artesian Basin water, yet the Rann government still continues to give millions of litres of water away free every single day. This has got to stop," said Mark Parnell.

Federal court rejects collective native title claim

One of Australia’s biggest native title claims was settled on Monday 5th February 2007, nearly eight years after it was registered. The Federal Court has dismissed a native title claim over a massive area of land north of Kalgoorlie, in southern Western Australia. The claim mainly involved the Wongatha group and another seven overlapping claims.

The Wongatha land claim, an amalgamation of 21 previous claims, covers 160,000 square kilometres of northern Goldfields land where native title has not been extinguished by roads, towns, or freehold title.

However, the dismissed claim did not close the door for future claims...
[Goldfields Land and Sea Council is the principal voice for Aboriginal people from the Goldfields-Esperance region on matters to do with land and waters, governance, social and economic development, heritage and other matters of justice. The GLSC is the Federal Government-appointed Native Title Representative Body for the region, enjoying widespread support from communities, organisations and individuals throughout.]

In handing down his decision, Justice Kevin Lindgren said the groups did not all have a similar cultural attachment to the land, and there was no way they could collectively prove such a connection.

However Justice Lindgren did not rule out any future claims. He said he believed some native title did exist on the area of land, but it would be likely to be limited to individuals or much smaller groups. The claim includes areas of seven overlapping claims. There were nearly 400 respondents.

The meeting of Wongatha, Mantjintjarra Ngalia, Koara and Wutha claimants was held at the WMC Auditorium in Kalgoorlie. The 160,000km2 Wongatha claim in the northern Goldfields was first registered in 1999. Federal Court hearings for the Wongatha and seven overlapping claims commenced five years ago (February 19, 2002) and ran until early 2004. About 90 witnesses provided evidence of strong on-going rights and interests in their traditional land.

Sources:
ABC News - 5th Feb 07
The West - 3th February 2007
The West - 5th February 2007
The Age - February 3, 2007
Goldfields Land Council: 29 Jan 07

Great Southern Plantations destroying Tiwi Islands - Response

February 8, 2007: In 2005, Perth-based tax minimisation company Great Southern Plantations Ltd (GSP) took over a massive native forest clearfelling project on Melville Island north of Darwin (Melville together with Bathurst Is makes up the Tiwi Islands). GSP has been very open about its plans to expand its venture to clearfell around 80,000 hectares of native bush from the Tiwi Islands. The deplorable Great Southern Plantations project is the single largest native vegetation/native forest clearing project in the whole of northern Australia. Last year's clearing of 10,000 ha is comparable to the total annual native forest clearfelling in Tasmania. Many endangered and endemic species live in these forests and in adjacent rainflorest patches which are being degraded as a result of the clearing.

If approval is granted, this expansion would be ecologically, economically and culturally disastrous.

Following a response on Perth Indymedia to a recent Feature article on the ongoing large-scale destruction of the Tiwi Islands, The Environment Centre of the Northern Territory (ECNT) have corrected several misleading statements made by Mr Ikin of Great Southern Plantations (GSP) in relation to the ongoing destruction of Tiwi Island forest for woodchip plantations...
CORRECTIONS to Great Southern's PR manager by Environment Centre of the Northern Territory:

The Environment Centre of the Northern Territory (ECNT) would like to correct some of the statements made by Mr Ikin of Great Southern Plantations (GSP) in relation to the ongoing destruction of Tiwi Island forest for woodchip plantations:

"JOBS – Great Southern is the largest private sector employer on the Tiwi Islands, providing non-subsidised, full-time employment for 24 Islanders, with more to come this year and beyond. Current positions include 11 forestry apprentices; two forestry trainees; 10 land & marine rangers; and one Tiwi liaison officer."

FACT: GSP Ltd wrote to ECNT in November 2006 and stated that there is just ONE full time Indigenous Tiwi Islander working on the forestry project; there are TWO part time employees, and 11 apprentices - [who may or may not end up working on the forest destruction project.] This is after five years of project operation. The Land and Sea Rangers is a completely separate program run by the Tiwi Land Council, and assisted by WWF Australia and GSP. Over the years since this forestry project commenced all kinds of exaggerated claims have been made about how many jobs it would provide for the Islanders but up until very recently when adverse publicity started to grow, the employment was all but non-existent.
___________________

"THE ENVIRONMENT – Before the first tree was planted, the forestry project was subjected to a rigorous approvals process, involving both the Federal and Northern Territory governments."

FACT: the project was approved by the Commonwealth Environment Minister in 2001 after being subject to the LOWEST POSSIBLE level of environment assessment under the EPBC Act - 'Provision of Documents'.

_________________________

"Current approvals allow forestry to utilise less than 5% of the land mass of the Tiwi Islands."

FACT: This is a misleading statement because, as recent scientific research has shown (Firth R et al 2006), the company is targetting the highest quality native forest growing on the best soils with the most rainfall - forest that is extremely important for native wildlife.
_____________________________

"Land is selected for plantation development after consideration of a number of factors, including identification of various reserves and offsets around natural features and sensitive zones, restrictions on maximum slope and soil types, protection of vegetation, communities and sites of cultural significance.

FACT: GSP's forestry project is now under investigation by the Commonwealth Deapartment of Environment due to evidence of widespread breaches of the environmental protection conditions that the project is legally obliged to comply with, e.g. buffers around rainforest patches; protection of endangered species etc.
______________________

"LEASING OF LAND – The Tiwi have engaged the Australian Valuation office to verify that correct and fair market rents are paid. Establishing a plantation project on a remote island involves significantly different considerations than in well established forestry regions within mainland southern Australia. The Tiwi Islands have very low to nil infrastructure relevant to industry and forestry in general. Great Southern is therefore required to build all roads, ports, power generation etc – all items which in other forestry regions are typically already in existence and available for use."

FACT: The Traditional Owners are being paid FAR FAR less for the use of their traditional lands for the forestry project than plantation companies like GSP pay non-Indigenous landowners in southern Australia. The Tiwi Island traditional owners are being paid $15-$17/hectare/year for the lease of their land while southern Australian land owners are paid sums in the order of $200-$300/hectare/year!

No amount of fudging about the alleged extra costs on the Tiwi Islands can account for such a massive discrepancy. Furthermore, contrary to GSP's claims, much of the infrastructure being established on the Islands for use by the forestry project is being either wholly or substantially subsidised by the Commonwealth and NT governments. This includes a recent $1.5million subsidy for the upgrade of roads.
_________________

"In summary, the project has the full support of the Tiwi Land Council and is something that Great Southern is immensely proud to be associated with."

FACT: This is simply not true. There is opposition to the project throughout the Tiwi islands community as reflected in the recent petition signed by almost 500 Islanders and table in Federal parliament calling for an inquiry into the Tiwi Land Council. The petition was initiated by a Traditional Owner who is himsel a member of the Tiwi Land Council.

Peter Robertson
Coordinator
Environment Centre NT

P.S. When will GSP tell the Tiwi Islanders what became of the millions of dollars worth of high quality native forest sawlogs exported to Asia over the past few years for which they, the Islanders, have received a grand total of just $75,000???

---

ECNT Peter Robertson's response in the Perth Indy Newswires...

Response from David Ikin, Public Relations Manager, Great Southern Plantations Limited: http://perth.indymedia....

WA to trial fifty Zero Emission Vehicles

Friday, 9 February 2007 - Back in the 1950s, an electric car was among the fastest, most efficient cars ever built. It ran on electricity and produced no carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Almost 60 years on, as peak oil approaches and with CO2 vehicle emissions contributing to rapid global warming, electric cars are coming back. Despite strong community support, Australia has been slower on the uptake. But tow the Western australian government is calling for a trial of zero emission vehicles..
In an announcement today, the WA Government says it will allow a trial of 50 small zero emission vehicles (ZEV-lites), making it the first and only to do so - provided the Federal Government permits the cars to be imported into Australia.

Planning and Infrastructure Minister Alannah MacTiernan today said: "These types of electric vehicles are already a common sight on London’s streets where they also attract benefits such as free parking, on street recharging points, and exemption from the congestion charge".

With a maximum speed of around 70km/h and a range of 100km, the vehicles have very low running costs and when recharged using renewable energy such as GreenPower, produce no particulate or greenhouse gas emissions. Even with ordinary electrical energy it is still far more greenhouse friendly than any other low emission vehicle on the road. In the past, safety concerns had been raised as the reason for blocking the use of these vehicles in Australia.

However, French Government figures show that ZEV-lites had lower accident and fatality rates than cars, motorbikes and mopeds. The WA trial would enable a limited number of ZEV-lites to be closely monitored to assess the vehicle’s performance under Australian road conditions. The Federal Government had previously declined to issue import approvals for ZEV-lites claiming that no State had showed an interest in registering the vehicles.

"We urge the Federal Government to reconsider this decision given that WA has confirmed it is prepared to shoulder the burden of managing the trial of the vehicles," the Minister said. Ms MacTiernan said that a combination of climate change and peak oil would require significant changes in the transport sector and that ZEV-lites could offer a versatile and environmentally sound transport option.

The Australian Greens welcomed the WA government's decision to trial 50 Reva electric cars and called on the Howard government to issue an import permit. Greens transport spokesperson Senator Christine Milne said the electric car could play an important role in helping to reduce the growing greenhouse emissions from the transport sector but the "Howard government had so far thwarted a trial. The WA government is to be congratulated for taking on the Howard government over the use of the Reva electric car on Australia's roads," Senator Milne said.

She said the vehicles are approved for use on public roads in many countries but the Howard government has frustrated the efforts of people to import the Reva and has refused to create an appropriate vehicle licensing category for the electric car.

"Instead of promoting fuel guzzling V8 vehicles as Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane is, the federal government should help redirect Australia's automotive manufacturers towards producing vehicles with improved environmental performance, thereby ensuring a long-term future for the industry," said Senator Milne

In November 2006, the South Australian-based owners of an electric car that had been destined to be crushed were given a reprieve by the Western Australian Government. The Solar Shop imported the Reva Electric car a year ago, but has been unable to comply with Australian Design Rules and feared they would have to destroy it to avoid a fine.

The Western Australian Government wrote to the Federal Government to ask for an extension on their import approval certificate. Solar Shop manager Adrian Ferraretto says, while he is happy the car will not be crushed, they were hoping for a different outcome from the Federal Government.

"They've been asking us to treat it as a conventional car as opposed to the category to which it was designed to, which is a heavy quadricycle," he said last year. "The reason why we have issues with this is because pretty much every other country in the world has a light vehicle category and pretty much every electrical vehicle in the world falls within this category, so if we don't have a light vehicle category, we don't have electric vehicles in Australia."

The Federal Government says the calls for a new category are unrealistic.

In November 2006 Greens WA MLC Giz Watson said it was time the Federal Government recognised the need to establish a new category and suitable safety standards to facilitate the rollout of clean green cars in Australia.
CAR makers are dragging the chain on introducing alternative-fuel vehicles into Australia, despite high oil prices and growing consumer demand.

Despite countinuosly higher petrol prices, Australian car makers have no immediate plans to go greener. American parents of Ford and Holden offer several alternative-fuel options in the US, where hybrids made up 1.2 per cent of vehicle sales. Environment groups are calling for government intervention to ensure the introduction of cleaner, more economical vehicles.

"We would buy them if they were here," Jeff Angel of the Total Environment Centre said. "The more they produce, the cheaper these cars are going to become. Car manufacturers should start becoming part of the solution."

SOURCES:
WA calls for trial of zero emission vehicles - Media Statement
Greens welcome Reva car decision - Media Release
Top car makers stall on hybrids in Australia - SMH
WA intervenes to save electric car - ABC News. November 6, 2006
Road, safety chiefs 'ganged up' to stall electric cars - Sydney Morning Herald, 4 October 2006
Who killed the electric car? - Giz Watson
REVA Australia website
Start your (electric) engines: the race to revive the electric car is on - WWF
Movie: Who Killed the Electric Car
Reva wins ‘Most Ethical car’ award in the UK - ENS News

Australia should stop dirty exports - coal is the new asbestos

February 9, 2007: Australian of of the Year, Professor Tim Flannery, said exporting coal is not in Australia's national interest and the Federal Government should no longer be supporting the industry.

"This government has let the country down. This government has become a menace to the future of our children."

Greens Leader Bob Brown says Australia should phase out coal exports within the next three years. Brown's proposal follows comments by Professor Flannery, who said the "social licence" of coal is being withdrawn across the globe because of its massive contribution to greenhouse gas emissions...
Prime Minister John Howard is at odds with Australia's most celebrated climate scientist over coal. After being named Australian of the Year and vowing to criticise the government, Professor Flannery has called for an end to coal exports.

Dr Flannery said exporting coal could no longer be considered to be in Australia's national interest. "The social licence of coal to operate is rapidly being withdrawn globally, and no government can protect an industry from that sort of thing occurring," he said. "We've seen it with asbestos, we'll see it with coal." Professor Flannery said it was too late for the planet to clean up coal.

Dr Flannery said rather than dirty coal, solar thermal and geothermal technologies could form the basis of meeting Australia's energy needs and they were better options than, for example, nuclear power.

Senator Bob Brown agrees. "Neither the Howard Coalition nor Rudd Labor will tackle our biggest cause of climate change - burning coal. Both the parties support burning more, not less," Senator Brown said. "This is an extreme position considering the massive economic and environmental crisis the world is facing."

"The nation should rapidly transform to being the world's largest exporter of solar power technology, other renewable energy options and energy efficiency technology - creating thousands of jobs and a multi-billion dollar export income in tandem with the replacement of coal," Senator Brown said.

However Nationals Senator Barnaby Joyce says Australians would be "living on the streets under a tarpaulin" if the country adopted the plan. Senator Joyce said coal was Australia's major trade export earner, and ceasing exports would cause untold economic harm. Senator Joyce said Australia should be pursuing research into clean-coal technology, but not at the expense of the coal industry.

Senator Brown said Howard's silver bullet of "clean coal" technology was at least a decade away and the government could not wait to phase out coal over 30-years.

Senator Brown proposed a reduction of coal exports and their replacement with exports of renewable energy. He said Australia had fantastic solar energy research which could save the planet but which was being purchased by foreign companies. "We do need extreme measures compared to what has happened in the past," he said. "This government has let the country down. This government has become a menace to the future of our children."

Senator Brown said the Greens saw it as politically unacceptable to have a phase-out over 30 years which would wipe out the lifestyle, economy and jobs of future generations. "The Greens are talking about intervening on the market. The big parties won't and so are therefore saying let this country and the rest of the planet go to perdition because we won't take action," he said.

"We are a rich and wealthy country. We can look after the coal miners and we can replace their fortunes with a much more job-productive industry." Senator Brown said he was proposing a reduction of coal exports and replacing them with exports of renewable energy.

He said Australia had fantastic solar energy research which could save the planet but which was being purchased by foreign companies. Australia can no longer put its head in the sand. Even if we do nothing to phase out coal exports, our customers will. The Europeans are already talking about sanctions and restrictions on coal imports. The issue is not just what we think the future of coal is, but what our customers think the future is. Business in Europe is not going to accept the Australian government freeloading with coal," Senator Brown said.

Greens MP Lee Rhiannon has called on NSW Premier Morris Iemma to meet with
Professor Tim Flannery to discuss the future of the coal industry. "The best thing Mr Iemma could do ... is to announce an end to coal exports and no new coal projects. Voters are looking for leadership and real solutions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Now is the time ... to move past the coal age. A good place to start would be to talk with Professor Flannery," Ms Rhiannon said.

"The links between the expansion of the coal industry and global warming are beginning to resonate with the electorate. We can have a win for the environment and for jobs by phasing out coal. Generating a unit of energy from wind power creates about four times the number of jobs as coal. The Greens are working with a range of community groups to plan for a just transition from the era of coal to a renewable and energy efficient future," said Ms Rhiannon.

Others are saying Professor Flannery should address Parliament about his proposal for solar-thermal geothermal energy to replace the dirty coal industry. WA Rights group Project SafeCom said "Mr Howard stumbles around in Parliament like a greedy child in a pitch-dark school tuck shop on environmental issues, and that Mr Howard can only do what he thinks is best - and that is to support his 20th Century friends in the coal industry."

"The Prime Minister either has no idea that solar technology already can supply all base load energy for Australia's energy needs, or - more likely - that he tries to hide these options at all costs, even showing that he and his government is prepared to lie about the baseload generation capacity of these technologies. Tim Flannery can wake them up, and make them think clearly again. He should be given the opportunity to make his case in Parliament in a joint sitting of both Houses." Mr Smit said.

Greens climate change and energy spokesperson Senator Christine Milne said Labor's refusal to accept that coal is part of the greenhouse problem shows it has failed to come to terms with climate change and the actions needed to combat it.

"The Australian Labor Party cannot expect to be taken seriously on climate change while it adopts the coal industry's line that exporting fossil fuels to power the world is of no consequence for global warming," Senator Milne said in Canberra. "Australia under the Howard government has spent 11 years evading its international responsibility to help reduce emissions while making handsome profits from selling coal. We have plenty of other options, including solar thermal power, wind, biomass and geothermal. It's time to get on with creating more jobs and wealth from building these industries."

Meanwhile, the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, which represents coal miners, declared its support for establishing a carbon market. "Coal miners have voted to support carbon trading and, frankly, it is a disgrace that the Howard government has taken 10 years to even start talking about it," CFMEU president Tony Maher told the ABC. The prime minister disagreed. "Union leaders don't necessarily speak for workers," Mr Howard told parliament. For the last 10 years, a lot of coal miners have voted for us."

Mr Howard said coal-fired power stations were a very cheap source of energy in this country, and Australia was the largest coal exporter in the world. Ignoring the benefits and availability of Renewable energy, Mr Howard said as "clean" coal became more expensive, we could then start to look at nuclear power. "At the moment nuclear power is not economic, compared to dirty coal. But if you apply new technology to that, the cleaner technology becomes dearer and make nuclear power economically more feasible."

Professor Flannery said that in the future, coal would be seen as just as dangerous as asbestos is now. "As the situation unfolds and the matters get more critical, the world is not going to allow people to pollute our common atmosphere, as occurs at the moment," he told ABC. Dr Flannery said solar thermal and geothermal technologies could form the basis of meeting Australia's energy needs and they were better options than nuclear power.

His comments were immediately dismissed by the Prime Minister, John Howard, who said money would be better spent on developing technologies to clean up coal production.

Meanwhile, Beach Petroleum last month announced a $30 million investment in Petratherm's hot-rock project in South Australia. If successful, the project will supply electricity to the Beverley uranium mine and eventually link to the national grid. Petratherm is also working to help China establish its geothermal potential.

The Earth's atmosphere is not as big as many assume it is, for example, it is much smaller than the ocean. Professor Flannery says our thin atmosphere is about one 500th the size of the ocean.

He says "that explains why we've had three atmospheric emergencies, if you want, through my lifetime, you know. We had acid rain, then we had the hole in the ozone layer and now we’ve got greenhouse gases and climate change. We haven’t yet precipitated a global oceanic pollution crisis. It is not that we don't throw rubbish into the oceans, it’s just that the oceans are so much bigger."

--

Coal exports earned the nation $25 billion last year. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, coal mining employs 28,300 workers. Over the last 12 months, employment growth was over 299,000.

SOURCES:
PM fights Flannery at coalface - February 8, 2007 News Ltd
PM, Flannery clash on coal industry - February 8, 2007 SMH
Brown back eventual coal export ban - February 8, 2007 The Australian
Flannery should address solar-thermal power - February 8, 2007 SCOOP
Labor's climate policy in tatters over coal exports - February 8, 2007 Greens Media Release
oyce blasts Greens over coal exports- February 9, 2007 The West
Coal will be the new asbestos, says Flannery - February 9, 2007 SMH
The Australian Editorial: Keeping the message cool on climate - February 9, 2007
ABC LATELINE Tim Flannery