For those that would like to be kept informed and up to date with developments in the minerals and energy sector in Queensland see below and/or go to the Queensland Resources Council website.
The facts about the UNESCO (World Heritage Centre) report arising from IUCN Reactive Monitoring Mission – Great Barrier Reef
Predictably, the anti-coal and gas movement led by Greenpeace has sought to misrepresent what the UNESCO report says about the impacts on the Great Barrier Reef - current and into the future - of resource-sector related development.
Recommendation for a Strategic Assessment
As the report states, work on this assessment is already under way: 'The mission was able to participate in a workshop on this assessment during its visit …' (p23). Contrary to some reporting, this is not a new recommendation.
Also contrary to some reports and claims by anti-coal and gas groups, the report does not include a draft World Heritage Committee 'decision' or any specific reference to putting project approvals on-hold during the preparation of the Strategic Assessment.
What does the report say about Australia’s management of the reef? The report says:
'The property has a history of strong management practices of which many are of high quality and an example to other marine protected areas.' (p24)
In comments on the decline in quality on parts of the reef, the only example given is 'inshore areas south of Cook town [sic].' (p24). There are no resource sector-related ports or other infrastructure in this area.
What does the report say about water quality?
The report talks of efforts (under the Reef Water Quality Plan) to halt and reverse the decline in water quality entering the reef by 2013. The report refers specifically to nitrogen run-off from farms. The Reef Water Quality Plan specifically targets nutrients, pesticides and sediment that wash into reef catchment because of agricultural activities – not mining.
Scale of development concerns
Resource sector-related projects are in the minority. The report expresses concern about 'the unprecedented scale of coastal development currently being proposed within and affecting the property…' (draft decision, p26). Earlier the report refers to 'circa 45 development proposals.'
An examination of the development proposals contained in the State Party report provided by the Australian Government to the World Heritage Committee on 1 February 2012 lists 42 projects inside and outside the reef area.
An analysis of those 42 projects shows:
62% are outside the Great Barrier Reef area
Of those 26 projects outside the reef area:
3 are Galilee Basin coal mine projects some 500Km from the coast
2 relate to the long-cancelled Chalco refinery at Bowen
nine are water infrastructure projects including five local council water and sewerage projects
There are 4 tourism projects, one agriculture project and two residential projects
Of those 16 projects said to be in the Reef area: one relates to a cancelled bridge to Curtis Island from Gladstone mainland; the Hancock Coal terminal at Abbot Point is counted twice; there are four tourism projects and one aquaculture project.
What about the proposed scale of coal port development? What are the facts?
Without any information provided to UNESCO about how likely it was that all new port capacity projects would proceed, the Australian Government’s State Party report purports to list proposed port capacity (see p65).
This report outdoes Greenpeace for ‘pie in the sky’ numbers, pointing to 953 million tonnes of proposed coal port capacity 'within the next decade'.
No wonder UNESCO is concerned if the Australian Government’s own report makes the extraordinary claim that port capacity will grow from the current 256 million tonnes to some 953 million tonnes - a 260% increase.
The next State Party report from the Australian Government must correct this extraordinarily misleading and damaging data.
A similar forecast from Greenpeace projecting a compound annual growth rate of 19 percent is almost four times an historical 5 percent growth rate and many times what is capable of being delivered.
Will the reef become a coal superhighway as Greenpeace claims?
As part of a reef-wide shipping study, independently prepared reef shipping forecasts were released by the QRC (see QRC Latest News).
This reef-wide study is being prepared by maritime experts as part of an Abbot Point Cumulative Impact Assessment being developed by coal companies and port operators in consultation with state and federal governments and agencies, including the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) and the Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA).
The study shows there are currently 4,800 large commercial vessels travelling annually to ports adjacent to the Great Barrier Reef.
Of these, about 2,500 (52%) are coal ships with the remainder carrying other bulk commodities, general cargo and tourists. By 2020, annual movements by large commercial vessels are forecast to reach 7,500 – with coal ships accounting for 4,000 to 4,500 (53-60%).
Greenpeace talks of the reef becoming ‘a coal superhighway’. The facts are that the real numbers are expected to be one ship every two hours travelling in the reef area.
These are the facts of the matter and should form the basis for formulating plans to manage shipping risks to the reef, regardless of whether the vessels involved are exporting commodities or importing essential cargo for Queensland communities.
Reef shipping incidents
Shipping through the Great Barrier Reef has been growing steadily for decades, and during that period incidents have reduced dramatically.
With the advent of mandatory reporting systems and the extension of the radar and satellite monitoring of shipping movements by AMSA, groundings have fallen from 1.0 per year to 0.16 since 1996.
In the past three years there has been one major incident – the equivalent of one incident for every 15,000 ships travelling through the reef.
The Abbot Point Cumulative Impact Assessment – Industry meeting UNESCO’s standard
The draft decision of the World Heritage Committee emphasises the importance of assessing cumulative impacts of development. Industry agrees.
The Abbot Point Cumulative Impact Assessment is believed the first of its kind in Australia where major project proponents at one location have joined to voluntarily and collaboratively to examine the cumulative impacts from all proposed projects.
The participants are North Queensland Bulk Ports and the three most advanced coal project proponents at Abbot Point – Adani, BHP Billiton and GVK Hancock.
The assessment involves 15 individual expert studies, with each of the organisations involved sharing leadership and costs on individual studies.
The studies will be incorporated into a Cumulative Impact Assessment report released in the second half of 2012 for public consultation and government review.
Details of the studies and Cumulative Impact Assessment report were presented to the IUCN Reactive Monitoring Mission during its visit to Queensland in March 2012.
The results will be a key input to the Strategic Assessment of the Reef.
Michael Roche Chief Executive B: (07) 32959560 b M: (0407) 937 887
Queensland Resources Council (QRC)
ABN 59 050 486 952
Level 13, 133 Mary Street Brisbane, Queensland 4000, Australia
This e-mail is HTML-based and formatted with images. If you are having difficulties viewing this e-mail please click here.
This e-mail is sent to you because you are a registered user. If you do not wish to receive further e-mails please edit your profile. If you no longer wish to be a registered user please click here
