prospectus next week, page-76

I can appreciate your mind set more wrt cag/exergen, mnm/exergen, and esi/exergen and overall community, techy, environmental based arguments now that you have articulated your concerns in such a manner.

The initial selling off of the Maddingly coal mine buffer zone is rather a moot point to many. It is now considered last century's problem imho, and much of the Maddingly mine, like Beaconsfield, has become a dump for waste of varying toxicities.

At that particular point in time, post Alpington paper mill lignite usage, lignite was not considered as a valuable commodity at all,,, for sure, and many decisions in hindsight appear now days to be less than Kosher.

But people are people,, not simply tenants of a parcel of land adjacent to some multi-national's bottom line interests. ( Bulga Vs Rio Tinto precedent citation of 2013 below)

If RIO TINTO have experienced a learning curve via the Bulga precedent , I would hazard a guess, that BM in all probability will remain a peri-urban ''solastalgia'' based community until it is absorbed ultimately into Melbourne's urban sprawl. cag, mnm, esi, exergen, and all other related lignite protagonists that have ( mnm ) or have had (esi)BM lignite interests aside, I recall this very topical link having a profound effect on all concerned,,,, 330 million tonnes of coal exported from Australia per year or otherwise.
The ''otherwise'' being a perceived requirement on a global & national basis to refine Lignite into stable exportable or locally exploitable energy products. As a human being living in a similar Melbourne regional lifestyle peri-urban environment where gold mining was once prolific, I can empathize completely. We have digressed somewhat from the topic outlined in the thread heading, however, to understand any CAG prospectus armed with related and topical history is imho relevant. Enjoy.

http://bulga.theglobalmail.org/