Joewolf, to be fair to Queenstown that mining operation started...

Joewolf, to be fair to Queenstown that mining operation started over 100 years ago and that's when the damage was done. What caused those "naked" hills also supplied about a quarter of Australia's GDP at one stage! The book by Prof Geoffrey Blainey, The Peaks of Lyell, is a must read on that topic.

ZWU (and Lordolean), no one will either stake or build the mill if they don't have a licence to run it, no matter how much of a no-brainer the remaining signoffs by the feds are. If you had the building permit, would you build a house on borrowed money if you didn't first have a permit to live in it once built?

Lordolean, it is relatively easy for ENGOs to, at a generic level, harass pulp mill customers on the forest certification and chain-of-custody of wood going into their mills, but I've not heard to specific mills being singled out for their location, even the Botnia Mill at Fray Bentos. Remember, Bell Bay will be the newest, and therefore cleanest, mill in the world. You'd have to ban all pulp and paper if you wanted to convince consumers to boycott pulp based on a mill process argument. When a ship loaded with pulp ties up at a wharf in Antwerp, who knows or cares where that market pulp has physically come from? All they want to know is that it's PEFC or FSC certified wood.

Don't worry - IMHO the money will come. All recent pulp mill projects around the world have met opposition and the weeds of unreason that grow in ENGO soil (eg Fray Bentos mill in Uruguay). Most international pulp and paper companies know that just getting it built is the best way to reveal the truth. Short term pain for long term gain. All international pulp companies must be candidates for Bell Bay investment. Obviously the GFC has had a huge impact on project financing (ask RIO), but even it it hadn't happened Bell Bay has essentially been delayed by the Federal Env Dept (Garrett) requiring more Bass Strait hydrodynamic modelling (see footnote).

I think we need to stop seeing this mill as a 'Gunns project'. Apart from having a greenfield pulp mill project at a detailed design stage and mainly approved (pretty valuable IP), Gunns now just has wood for sale, and lots of it. And it's all plantation based, or very soon will be. The heat is going out of the Tasmanian forest debate already! The pulp mill project will be picked up by someone who doesn't have the Gunns/Gay baggage and it will be an international pulp company. They will swallow what's left of Gunns up in the process.


Of course, this is all just my humble opinion. I'll eat humble pie if Bell Bay doesn't happen.


* http://www.gunnspulpmill.com.au/permits/epbc.php
In relation to ... modules (L, M and N) the Minister has advised Gunns that he requires the results of the hydrodynamic modelling required under condition 38 of the approval to be incorporated into the EIMP (environmental impact management plan) before he can approve them as a complete EIMP. However, the Minister has advised Gunns that he is satisfied with the content of these modules in so far as their material does not relate to or rely on the results of the hydrodynamic modelling.

* Also look at letter from Minister Garrett to Gunns in Jan 2009 to help your understanding: http://www.gunnspulpmill.com.au/permits/epbc/Letter%20to%20Gunns%20from%20Environment%20Minister%2005%20Jan%202009.pdf

ps: note the March 2011 deadline in Garrett's hydrodynamic modelling letter to Gunns. Regardless of all the drum beating by TWS et al, that is the deadline GNS has had in front of them and must surely have been working to.