Alpine Grazing

I think the Victorian Alpine grazing story has probably jumped the shark now (I have been referring to myself as The Age’s bovine reporter all morning after today’s story here).

But for any tragics below are the court documents submitted by the Victorian Government Solicitor last night seeking a judicial review of Tony Burke’s decision to reject the Baillieu Government’s cattle grazing trial in the high country under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.

Docs: img-2290902-0001

Victoria is arguing Burke’s decision to knock the trial application out at the first hurdle as ‘‘clearly unacceptable’’ (see here), was made in excess of jurisdiction.

I’m far from a being a lawyer, but in short they appear to be arguing:

1. That Burke should not have used information not in the Victorian Government’s project referral (see here) to make his decision.

2. That Victoria did not get a chance to respond to the additional information used, in breach of natural justice.

3. Protection of the national heritage values of the Alps — used by Burke to make his decision — is not appropriate, because it only applies if Australia needs to uphold international conservation agreements (which Victoria argues in this case it does not).

The Victorian Government is seeking a writ quashing Burke’s decision and costs.

A couple of experts I talked to yesterday were sceptical of Victoria’s chances, but I guess we’ll find out.

The directions hearing for the review is 9.30am, March 23, in front of Justice Susan Kenny.

 

Obama and the Coral Sea

Left out of my story last week on the upcoming details of the proposed Coral Sea marine protected area (see here) was a couple of pars about the possible timing of the draft plans release with US President Barack Obama’s visit next week.

The region of course has major signficance for the US as the site of the WWII Battle of the Coral Sea, which to some extent help stop the Japense move in the Pacific.

As I understand it the whole 972,000 square kilometers of the currently unprotected parts of the Coral Sea (there are two small parks already) will be placed into some form of protection under the draft proposal. Roughly 50 per cent is no take, the rest allows a mix of recreational fishing or some commerical fishing or both.

So will we see the release of the draft Coral Sea plans next week when Obama turns up, say November 17?

And is it right that Australian officials are talking to US officials about the President mentioning the project in some form during his time in Canberra?

Guess we’ll found out…

 

Anglesea Coal Mining Extended

My yarn on the 50-year extension of the Anglesea coal mine that didn’t make the paper this morning.

THE STATE Government has stitched up a deal with Alcoa to extend coal mining in the ecologically rich Anglesea heathland for the next 50 years.
The new deal limits the expansion of mining to a further three per cent of Alcoa’s current 7145 hectare lease, giving the company an extra 246 hectares of the Anglesea heath to expand into on top of the 419 hectares currently mined.
Alcoa will also be required to have a mine work plan approved by the State Government for the expansion and pay a $13.9 million bond for rehabilitation of the site.
The mine supplies the Anglesea brown coal power plant which generates about 40 per cent of the energy for Alcoa’s nearby Port Henry aluminium smelter.
State Energy and Resources Minister Michael O’Brien said “this revised agreement is a win-win which supports the local economy, strengthens environmental processes and conserves more of the Anglesea heath.”
But green groups were scathing of the decision with Victorian National Parks Association chief executive Matt Ruchel saying ‘‘this decision allows for a 59 per cent increase of the mine which we think is too much for such an incredibly botanically rich area.’’
Mr Ruchel said the heathland supported 700 different plants types, including a third of all Victoria’s orchids, with 21 species rare or threatened. He called for the heath to be immediately made part of the adjourning Otway National Park.
Currently the heathland under Alcoa’s mining lease is jointly managed by the company, the Department of Sustainability and Environment and Parks Victoria.
Geelong Environment Council’s Joan Lindros said the deal had given Alcoa everything it had wanted, adding it was a ‘‘joke’’ an open cut mine existed right next to the iconic Great Ocean Road.
She said Alcoa should have been required or helped to find alternative energy sources for its smelter after 2015 rather than a continuing reliance on brown coal power.
Under the original 1961 agreement between Alcoa and the State Government the company was entitled to seek a further 50-year extension to its mining operations after the first 50-years of the deal was up. The company has been negotiating with state governments since 2008 to redefine the agreement before it was extended.
The company’s general manager of Victorian operations John Osborne said yesterday “our mine and power station at Anglesea remain the most secure and cost competitive power source available to Alcoa in Victoria at this time,”
The company says the smelter, mine and power station provides 1,100 jobs to the region. The mine and the power plant provide 85 of those jobs.
The Anglesea power plant emitted 1.3 million tonnes of greenhouse gases in 2009, a little over 1 per cent of the state’s emissions.

 

MDB Authoirty Groundwater numbers

Here is the current thinking behind the groundwater numbers in the draft basin plan.

groundwaterSDLs

As reported this morning the Authoirty is planning to open up another 2,400 gigs of groundwater for extraction across the basin. That is more than double that can be taken now.

The number in this doc, from September, are a little out of date now. The Authoirty is talking about a groundwater diversion limit of 400 gigs less than what these number add up too. But the quantam is about right for each system.

This is also a massive increase of about 2200 gigs from the guide.

Why? Good question. The states are leaning hard on groundwater. The Authority says it got new infromation from the states that has lead to the massive change.

Of course groundwater once on the surface can be traded and will count about the surface water SDLs…

 

Rebirth of the Snowy

Just to add to the brief story (here) in The Age this morning, here are some photos kindly sent to me by the NSW Office of Water of yesterday’s opening of the spillway at Jindabyne Dam. Up to 12 gigs were released from the dam yesterday, with similar amounts today and tomorrow also being sent down the Snowy. The flow will start to taper off over the coming week.
All up 84 gigalitres will be flushed down the Snowy over 19 days (the program started last week) the largest amount since the Snowy hydro scheme was built. It has been timed to mimic the spring melt of snow from the Alpine region and will flush out hardened sediment (mud and silt) that has built up along the river bed, along with weeds and algae.
Under an agreement between the NSW, Victoria and federal Government water entitlements have been recovered for the river over recent years, but the drought had seen very little allocation to those entitlements, meaning little actual water down the Snowy.
That all changed last year with the rain, which has resulted in the massive environmental water release this year. The wet conditions i9n 2011 is also expected to produce a major environmental flow next year.

Photo by Tim Haeusler, NSW Office of Water

Photo by Simon Williams, NSW Office of WaterPhoto by Simon Williams, NSW Office of Water

 

Photo by Simon Williams, NSW Office of Water

Photo by Sion Williams, NSW Office of Water

 

 

Greenie Murray-Darling Briefings

If you are really keen here are the briefings ten green groups got yesterday from the Murray-Darling Basin Authority before their (precalculated) dummy spit (see story here).

Key is what’s missing: the so called ‘‘super sheet’’ outlining the environmental watering outcomes for key indicator sites in the Basin from a 2,800 gig SDL. The groups are understood to have been told the super sheet is currently being updated and needs to go to the Basin Authoirty’s board before it is released.

The briefings they got are as follows:

* The management and planning of the Commonwealth environmental water holder. Key points: entitlements held by the environmental water holder are now over 1000 gigs as of August 31 (66 per cent in the southern basin and 34 per cent in the north). A consultation paper on trade options for the environmental water holder is also flagged to be released in the coming weeks.

Briefing is here: Cmth Enviro Water -presentation

— The Authority’s current thinking for the draft plan.
Key points: 2,800 gig SDL is again prominent. Confirms sensitivity modelling being done on 2,400 and 3,200 gigs.

Briefing is here: current thinking presentation

— Surface water environmental requirements.
Key points: Poor environmental watering results in the Lower Murray floodplain and red gum regions. Talk of capacity constraints in the system.

Briefing is here: Enviro water requirements – surface water

 

Coal-Seam Gas in Victoria

My story on Lock the Gate Alliance’s Drew Hutton’s tour of Victoria took a big cut this morning in the paper, so here is what didn’t make it (in fact not much did expect Hutton).

Despite Hutton’s tour it is pretty clear coal-seam gas development is an unlikely prospect for Victoria, at least in the short—term.

First there are only seven current coal-seam gas exploration licences or applications for licences in the state. Here they are:

Tenement No  Owner  Application Date  Grant Date  Expiry Date  Status  Municipality  Status 
EL5274  ECI International  31/03/2010   Application  Sth Gippsland  Application 
EL5275  ECI International  31/03/2010   Application  Wellington Shire  Application 
EL5276  ECI International  31/03/2010 7/07/2010 6/07/2015 Current   Sth Gippsland Shire  Current 
EL5277  ECI International  31/03/2010 16/12/2010 15/12/2015 Current  Colac Otway Shire  Current 
EL5320  ECI International  5/11/2010 7/04/2011 6/04/2016 Current  Baw Baw Shire  Current 
EL5321  ECI International  5/11/2010 7/04/2011 6/04/2016 Current  Baw Baw Shire  Current 
EL5322  ECI International  5/11/2010   Application  Sth Gippsland Shire  Application 

These licences grant exploration for coal-seam gas only. When you count exploration licenses that include coal-seam gas among several commodities the number rises to around 30.

It is also important to note that the major gas players — Santos, Origin etc — are not in Victoria. That leaves what activity there is to minor players who are nowhere near big enough to develop projects on their own and are probably just speculators.

The coal-seam specific licenses are held by Exhaust Control Industries, a firm that to date specialises in air pollution control. ECI is working with a group called CFT Holdings, which works in gas liquefaction products. There seems to be some crossover between the two companies in terms of directors.

CFT co-director Robert Pertich sent this information sheet to me yesterday about the technology they say might be used, and the state of their Australian projects – 021011 – CBM in Victoria

Key is this line:
‘‘ECI/CFT are in the process of deciding if the Colac area is suitable in the first instance, but the project needs to be viable before  proceeding to exploration. The coals are generally very thin and not extensive, so considerable doubt exists at present.’’

Pertich later told me it was unlikely the group was unlikely to push on with its Colac license after a review of  publicly available data, but would make a final decision this week. They will now move on to assess their Gippsland licenses.

Beyond this Dr Gavin Mudd, a groundwater expert from Monash University who has been following coal-seam development issues, told me that generally brown coal — the significant majority of Victoria’s coal resources — doesn’t tend to hold much methane because it is too geological young, thus not suitable for coal-seam gas.

There are some black coal reserves around Wonthaggi but whether they are big enough to generate commercially viable amounts of methane remains to be seen.

Also this is from the Victorian Department of Primary Industries on the regulations that are in place to protect groundwater assets:

”It is important to remember that there is currently no production of coal seam methane in Victoria and nor are there any applications to begin production. In the case of the exploration licences that have been granted, no work plans have yet been submitted laying out proposed exploration programs.

Victoria has strict regulations that provide strong protection of groundwater from pollution. The State Environment Protection Policy (Groundwaters of Victoria), under the Environment Protection Act 1970, does not allow discharge that will pollute groundwater.  Impacts on ground water are also regulated by regional water corporations, under the Water Act 1989.

Under Victoria’s Mineral Resources (Sustainable Development) Act 1990 (MRSDA), a company would need to submit a work plan for approval by DPI before they could begin significant exploration works. That plan would need to identify any potential environmental risks and detail how they would be mitigated.  It is standard practice for DPI to refer such plans to other relevant agencies for their advice and input on technical matters on a case by case basis. The assessment of such proposals is then able to be informed by the best advice from expert agencies so that Victoria’s water resources are not put at risk.  

The standard conditions of all exploration licences include conditions specific to aquifer interception and protection. These issues are also dealt with in more detail in the code of practice for mineral exploration under the MRSDA.”

 

A Briefing on the MDBA Social and Economic Work

As the debate continues on the size of proposed water cuts for the Murray-Darling under the new basin plan, there is also a lot of work being done behind the scenes modelling the social and economic impacts of new diversion limits.

 The early indications out of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority — which is drawing up the river reform plans — suggests only a modest impact on overall economic growth on a basin wide scale after cuts are imposed.

The private briefing by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority — attached here MDBA35 -Economic Modelling Presentation (2) — says back of the envelope calculations shows the reduction in overall growth in the basin’s economy could be less than two per cent to 2019 if cuts are made to ensure more water for the environment. After 2019 normal gross regional product growth continues, the briefing suggests.

The Authority’s economic modelling is also looking at the social and economic impact on individual communities, not just the basin wide impact. The briefing warns some areas will face bigger impacts than others from water cuts, especially smaller towns with a heavy reliance on irrigation.

The briefing was given by the Authority’s general manager of social economic analysis Tony Webster — formerly of Treasury — earlier this month. It states ‘‘given time to adjust, businesses and farmers will be able to reorganise their production processes and use of resources to maximise their returns for a future where less water is available.’’

‘‘Overall, aggregate costs will be small —much smaller, proportionally, than the corresponding reductions in water diversions.’’

The Authority’s modelling on the economic and social impacts of proposed cuts to farmer’s water rights follows anger from rural and industry groups that similar detailed work wasn’t done alongside the basin plan guide last year. Some of the results from the new modelling is expected to be included in the draft basin plan to be released in November.

Leaked details of the new basin plan earlier this month showed the Authority ‘‘current thinking’’ for the proposed cuts are 2,800 billion litres of water a year, lower than what was proposed in last year’s ‘‘guide’’ document on river reform.

The Authority is working with the Centre for Policy Studies at Monash University and researchers at Queensland University on the overall economic impact on the basin.

The briefing points to work by Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics last year which found water cuts of 3,500 litres a year — well above what the Authority will now recommend — would reduce growth in the basin’s gross regional product by $1 billion until 2018.

But ABARE found there would still be overall growth of almost $16 billion over the same period even with cuts.

The Authority — along with researchers from CSIRO and Charles Sturt University — is also toying with the idea of a survey of 1200 people across the Basin to gather views on the value placed on the ecological health of key environment sites (though this isn’t confirmed to go ahead).

This is part of a wider work to value ecosystems services, along with economic benefits to industries like tourism and fishing from increased environmental water.

Irrigator and farming groups were given an early briefing of this social and economic work on Wednesday and Thursday and are said to be sceptical of the early direction. Environment groups will get a similar briefing next week, along with some of modelling implications of the 2,800 gig cut for the health of key environment sites.

 

The Early MDB Advice

Last week we saw another leak of proposed water cuts in the soon to be released draft Murray-Darling Basin plan (see post from last week).

On the back of that I thought it was worth revisiting internal advice from the Authority (attached  FOI – MDBA Review of Env Objectives (3) and reported in The Australian here) released via FOI a few months ago to Liberal Senator Simon Birmingham.

The advice was requested from the Murray-Darling Basin Authority chief executive, and was prepared by the Authority’s director of natural resource management. It is from December last year, before key staffing changes including a switch of CEOs.

The advice finds the ‘‘weakest’’ modelling type was used for the basin guide released last year, producing SDL recommendations of 3,000 to 4,000 billion litres of water a year. The modelling process has now been revised for the full draft basin plan due November.

It also says early revised modelling indicates 2,800 billion litres of water a year emerged as enough to meet the environmental requirements. It is interesting that 2,800 gigs pops up this early and continues to hold in last weeks leak of later modelling.

These two points have been widely canvassed to date in the media.

But there is also an interesting set of recommendations and discussion about reviewing high end flows for the southern part of the basin (think Barmah and Gunbower) and the level of protection afforded to international recognised wetlands under the Ramsar convention (which drives water requirement demands in the southern Basin).

High end flows resulted in some of the bigger environmental watering results in the basin guide (up to 7,600 gigs depending on the level of environment protection). The advice says such flows in the southern basin will be ‘‘difficult to deliver’’ because of the degree of regulation and inherent risk to third parties of trying to manage and ‘‘add’’ to moderate and higher floods (essentially the risk of flooding nearby properties via environmental flows). It also states water obtained via buy-backs will not be ‘‘suited’’ to meeting peak flows 2-3 times a decade.

The document also looks at the Authority’s scope to reconsider the level of protection for Ramsar wetland sites. It recommends ‘‘limits of acceptable change’’ contained in the convention to the ecological character of a wetland does not need to be taken as a ‘‘given.’’ The advice argues the limits were set without active consideration of trade-offs between environmental, social and economic factors and can be considered aspirational.

But the advice comes with a warning. Dropping higher flows reduces the amount of floodplain that can be protected. That would test what is meant by ‘‘not compromise’’ assets in the Water Act (which legally underpins the new Basin Plan) and challenges the Ramsar ‘‘limits of acceptable change.’’

Later the advice suggests if the Authority decides to walk away from the Ramsar limits of change it opens itself to public challenge, though any challenge is unlikely to be successful because Ramsar is non-binding.

Are these the areas someone from the green side of the debate would mount a legal challenge to the basin plan, depending what decisions are made in the draft and final version?

At any rate they are something to watch when the draft is released in a couple of months, especially if its final recommendations stays at or drops below 2,800 gigs.

Until then we wait for the next leak.

 

Minchin climate doco update…

This morning I wrote a story on a new doco on attitudes to global warming being produced staring Liberal powerbroker and climate sceptic Nick Minchin and climate change campaigner Anna Rose (see here).

The show is being called ”I Can Change Your Mind” and Minchin and Rose will talk to a bunch of people in the climate space to see if their views can be shifted on the issue.

A couple of things have come from the story this morning.

First, I have been quietly slipped a list of organisations that are potentially co-operating with the program (i.e. who Minchin and Rose will visit as part of filming):

o    Manua Loa Observatory, Hawaii

 o    Climate Change Research Centre, Australia

 o    Berkeley University /Berkeley Earth Temperature Project

 o    US Navy

 o    Atmospheric Sciences, MIT

 o    Copenhagen Business School

 o    University of California

 o    University of East Anglia

 o    Global Change Institute, University of Queensland

 o    Yale Project on Climate Change Communication.

Second,  Minchin is upset that I wrote he had described climate change as a left-wing conspiracy to de-industrialise the western world.

Minchin says he has never used the word ”conspiracy” and the record shows this. These are his comment from Four Corners that backs up the second part of the line:

”For the extreme left it provides the opportunity to do what they’ve always wanted to do, to sort of de-industrialise the western world. You know the collapse of communism was a disaster for the left, and the, and really they embraced environmentalism as their new religion.”

The word conspiracy was later used to characterise Minchin’s climate views by a number of people including Malcolm Turnbull. I should have attributed the word conspiracy to them rather than Minchin and I have apologised to him for that.

Right-o.