Why not go underground?
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
With the Planning and Assessment Commission (PAC) saying the Warkworth and Mount Thorley open cut mine expansions are capable of gaining approval my question to PAC is why not make a recommendation that the Warkworth expansion should only be approved if its an underground mine.
An underground mine would not have the impacts on the village of Bulga and the endangered ecological communities clearly identified in the 2013 decision to reject the first Warkworth mine expansion by Chief Justice Brian Preston, NSW Land and Environment Court.
It must also be remembered that Justice Preston’s decision was upheld by the NSW Supreme Court.
While PAC acknowledges the latest Warkworth continuation project is the same footprint as the one twice rejected in the courts it says legislative changes make the new proposal capable of approval.
However I don’t agree with PAC – too much is at stake here first respect for the judiciary because without that our society simply crumbles.
But also there is another way here – underground mining which the main opponents to the mine, the Bulga Milbrodale Progress Association, have said for five years they would not oppose.
An underground mine keeps the jobs, keeps the royalties, keeps the economy going, utilises the infrastructure – it’s a win win situation and there is an underground mine neighbouring the project so why not go underground.
I have heard some arguments about why an underground wouldn’t work; the main one being Rio Tinto don’t do underground – well only in Australia it would appear and if that’s the case, perhaps Sam Walsh could get on the phone to his counterpart Ivan Glasenberg and talk turkey and get Glencore to do the work for them.
Come on PAC, put something out there that may work.
Let's save our villages, reduce air particle pollution, avoid final voids, keep the jobs and, hey, it may even work for Anglo American at Drayton.