Share
1,775 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 81
clock Created with Sketch.
07/03/21
14:31
Share
Originally posted by vcubitt:
↑
The fundamental problem here is that every single Australian wants uninterrupted and endless energy provided to their homes and businesses regardless of the source. But most Australians don't want any of the infrastructure (even wind turbines cop bad press and who wants dams for hydro) in their backyards. It's ok to put it in someone else's. That's got to change. I am not an environmental scientist, but IMO, I question how much more of an impact a gas rig (which cannot be seen from the beach and so won't spoil anyones views) is going to have on migrating whales and dolphins any more than the hundreds of very large ships that cruise up and down the east coast and anchor offshore already quite regularly. Grant it will mess up a tiny bit of the seafloor where I am sure whatever life is there at the time will relocate for the time being. I'd also like tourism operators and the PM who say they don't support PEP11 to tell us precisely how its going to interfere with tourism. Other areas of Australia that have gas exploration off shore are still popular tourist destinations, eg the Gippsland Basin. If the government reject PEP11, they will be setting a precedent to reject future resource exploration and even the installation of renewables if a particular group of people don't like how they believe it's going to spoil their view or get in the way of a migrating something. Setting a precedent like that is dangerous ground for a government that says it supports transitional resource exploration, which leads me to think it will be approved if it ticks all the boxes that it's supposed to, despite the PM's off the cuff comments.
Expand
Originally posted by Spectreskyfall:
↑
have to agree on most points there , however as far as sealife moving ..... war ships get sunk , artificial reefs are made , from concrete steel and other materials , if like me you have spend a feair bit of time recreational diving , you will see that that marine life flourishes around structure .... not sandy bottom. the Best Fads (fish attracting devices ) in the world are Rigs People are worried about a negative affect the rig will have on the fisheries .....what will it cause a drama for the huge Nets that are dragged over the sea floor indiscriminatley destroying everything . or your ok with all your oil refineries on the ports being converted over to get more Shipping in ....mmmm FFS wake up guys , if you want to protect the wildlife cool , I am all for it , start sinking the whaling ships or the fish processing ships .... but you let that pass right ...because that too is not in your back yard . you cant make a omlete without breaking eggs , just minimise the breakages.
Expand
I agree and having worked on barrow island a class A nature reserve can 100% confirm it brings all types of sea life into all structures put in the water. They even played footage while waiting at the aiport of under water cameras around the christmas trees on the sea floor. The lng jetty that heads out to in whale migration path. They head in figure out its not what it use to be and head out around the jetty and go on there merry way. They dont go belly up because of a pin prick in the ocean thats in there road ! The controls that are in place environmentally up there are next level. If BPH adapted half these controls and put them in place there wouldnt be an issue. IMO