south burnett times articles

The following article is from the today's edition of the South Burnett Times; Tuesday 28th December 2010; YOUR SAY Page 2.

SETTING THE SPIN STRAIGHT

Mr Brad Glynne continues to perpetuate the Cougar Energy line that their UCG trial at Coolabunia and subsequent groundwater contamination is an event of little consequence.

It may well be of little consequence to Cougar Energy to pollute pottable groundwater supplies, but it is a major issue to those of use who live locally.

He continues the Cougar mantra that the levels of BTEX chemicals are below safe drinking water levels.

Well your company put them there Mr Glynne.

You have done nothing to rehabilitate the contamination and have had to spend shareholders' capital trying to rationalise a disaster predicted by a group of amateur concerned citizens before you started the burn.

The burn continued for three days and resulted in a pipe shifting and toxins contaminating a potable groundwater aquifer.

Would these toxins have continued to feed into the aquifer had the pipe not blown and the burn continue?

It is tenable to consider that these BYEX levels would be a whole lot higher by now.

Would that aquifer be considered collateral damage?

Would Cougar pay to clean it up?

It hasn't spent a red cent to clean up the aquifer so far - is this the precedent for future contamination events?

Cougar do little more than what is required by DERM in an effort to resume their filthy trial at Coolabunia.

There are local cattle presenting benzene readings in their body fat.

How does Cougar account for that?

Where will local cattle farmers be if this trial continues for the initial plan of 30,000 tonnes?

More collateral damage Mr Glynne?

Another opportunity to deny responsibility?

Mr Glynne also claims that the toxins have not contaminated any drinking water supply.

This is a contemptible argument.

The burn went for three days

The toxins were localised.

But Mr Glynne, they are still there.

How would you know which drinking water supplies have the potential to be contaminated by the toxins generated by this exercise?

Cougar Energy has presented no indication that it has any idea of where these various aquifers lead.

Your company did not have the interest or the moral will to examine existing data from decades of bore drilling in the region to look at the broader picture of underground water movement.

The sad excuse for a hydro geological survey Cougar Energy presented to the public does nothing to trace the aquifers.

There is a local belief that these aquifers run to Kingaroy Creek which flows ultimately to Gordonbrook Dam, which for your information, Mr Glynne, is the Kingaroy town water supply.

You say the levels are minute and small.

Mercifully the burn failed and they are not greater.

But Mr Glynne, the levels are there and they are there as a result of your company's activities for three days out of your anticipated project of 30 years.

0.02% of your total burn time.

What will be the state of our groundwater when the remaining 99.98% is burnt?

Your company, which you promote as "world's best practice", violated a number of site selection best practice criteria to put its trial here.

If you can't get your site selection right how can anyone have confidence that you can carry out the practices in which you claim to lead the world.

Mr Glynne, instead of never-ending spin, it's time to recognise the failings of your own making here at Kingaroy, pack up you gear and go.

ROSS WHITEFORD,
Kingaroy Concerned Citizens Group