FOLLOWING on from its success in the NSW Land and Environment Court against Rio Tinto’s Warkworth mine expansion, progressive think tank The Australia Institute (AI) has set its sights on New Hope Coal’s controversial plans to extend its New Acland mine .
AI has produced a report into the socio-economic effects of extending the open cut New Acland coal mine, pre-empting the release of the mine’s environmental impact statement (EIS) – Biting the Land that Feeds You.
Ominously for New Hope – near Toowoomba on the Darling Downs, AI mounts the same argument which won against Warkworth near Bulga, in the Upper Hunter Valley.
Essentially, AI argues that input-ouput models used by the mining industry to predict the socio economic impacts from a mine are flawed, overstating the net benefit and ignoring the effects on other industries which compete for skilled employees.
New Acland has been in the spotlight for its negative social impacts – with opponents arguing it has turned destroyed the Acland community of 64 families and threatens to extend the damage to the nearby town of Oakey, with over 4,000 people.
If New Acland is granted approval, it would provide similar grounds for appeal that Warkworth presented.
In August, Justice Brian Preston found in favour of Bulga Milbrodale Progress Association’s (BMPA) appeal against Rio Tinto’s Warkworth mine expansion in the Land and Environment Court, it was the first time an open cut coal mine extension had been rejected in NSW.
AI economists Rod Campbell, then at advocacy group Economists at Large and Dr Richard Denniss gave evidence that Rio’s modelling of the mines socio-economic benefits was flawed and overstated job creation, which was accepted by Justice Preston.
The crux of that argument also lies at the heart of the report into New Acland.
New Hope compiled an economic assessment of the New Acland mine stating that the extension of the mine would extend its life until 2029 add 100 jobs on to the existing 300 at the mine and boost the indirect jobs created by the mines activity from 2300 to 2850.
Dr Denniss told the Land and Environment Court in the Warkworth case that the inpout output models:
“Assume that there is an invisible pool of highly skilled workers who would remain unemployed in the absence of the [coal] project going ahead. In turn … all of the wages spent by this ‘ghost workforce’ will result in an increase in retail or other spending.”
The reports goes on to argue that industries are interrelated, and it is impossible to calculate the number of indirect jobs one project creates and/or takes away from other operations:
“If the number of indirect jobs ‘created’ by every industry were to be added up, the total number of jobs in the economy would be many times the number of employees in Australia,” the report said.
However, New Hope's chief operating officer Bruce Denney rubbished AI's claims and questioned the report's impartiality.
“Here are the true economics of the New Acland project - the direct economic output of the revised New Acland project is valued at $6.6 billion for the life of the project.
“The indirect economic output is estimated at $12b – which gives a total economic output of almost $19b.
“The Australian Institute website shows that this report is co-authored by a former Operations Director at Beyond Zero Emissions. I think that speaks for itself."
While the New Acland assessment process rolls on, Rio has submitted altered plans to extend Warkworth. The NSW Planning and Assessment Commission will hold a hearing in Singleton on December 19 to get public feedback.
Following BMPA’s court victory, controversial amendments to planning laws this week to prioritise economic considerations above social and environmental factors when considering mining and CSG projects.
Known as Mining State Environment Planning Policy (Mining SEPP) amendments, the changes provide an interim measure while the government rolls out sweeping changes to the State’s broader planning regime.
The amendments were made by then Resources Minister Chris Hartcher, who has jointly appealed the Justice Preston’s ruling with Rio in the High Court. The matter is yet to be determined.
New Hope argues the New Acland mine provides benefits to agriculture.
