News 
 Local News 
 News 
 General 
 Coalmine growth threatens to choke villages 

Coalmine growth threatens to choke villages

11 Jan, 2011 03:00 AM
Upper Hunter communities could be subjected to even greater levels of pollution in the next decade due to the continued expansion of the coalmining, a new report says. With coal production predicted to grow at 2per cent a year for the next 20 years, some fear their communities will become uninhabitable.

The international best practice study calls for more stringent pollution controls to protect Upper Hunter communities.

‘‘Growth in coal production is expected in all NSW coalfields over the medium term and, with current emission controls, this could lead to higher ambient concentrations of particulate matter in populated areas such as Muswellbrook and Singleton and also in smaller towns such as Camberwell in the Hunter,’’ the report says.

Camberwell resident Deidre Olofsson said it was unlikely the historic village could withstand further pressure from the mining industry.

‘‘They will wipe us off the map; it’s that simple,’’ she said. ‘‘I doubt there will be any other industry other than mining left in the Hunter in 20 years.’’

The report, prepared for the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water, found the government’s regulatory regime for the mining industry to be ‘‘very transparent’’.

It also found mines had made significant progress in the reduction of pollution in recent years, but more was needed.

‘‘Overall coal mines have adopted many elements of best practice. However, no mine has completely implemented best practice across the full range of activities,’’ the report says.

The largest source of PM10 (particulate matter 10 micrometres or less in diameter) is coal haulage trucks travelling on unpaved roads (40per cent), followed by wind erosion of exposed areas and stockpiles (27per cent).

The report estimated that the consistent application of best practice particulate control measures would result in a 49per cent reduction in PM10 emissions.

Singleton Shire Healthy Environment Group member Carol Russell said the practice of advance land clearing for future mining was in need of urgent reform.

‘‘They [the mines] are clearing out massive amounts of land way in advance of what’s needed,’’ Ms Russell said.

‘‘It generates an enormous amount of dust.’’

Ms Russell said the effectiveness of the government’s new Upper Hunter dust monitoring network had been compromised because there was no national measuring standard for PM2.5 particles.

‘‘We are still behind the times and community expectations in relation to monitoring,’’ she said.

‘‘The community is now talking about the impact of PM1 particles.’’

A Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water spokeswoman said the mining industry would be required to improve dust management practices.

This would include attaching pollution reduction programs on mine licences that would require site-specific best-management practice reviews to identify and then implement cost-effective actions to mitigate dust emissions, with priority given to the major emitters.

All dust management plans would be reviewed with a focus on air quality monitoring, effective dust control systems, revegetation and rehabilitation, and adaptive management.

The spokeswoman said the department would consider additional measures following closure of the comments period for report, which is open until February 7.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

RELATED COVERAGE

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
It is very clear that we need greater control over mining. The new environmental standards should have stringent control mechanisms.

Three breaches and the mine is closed permanently.

Posted by Chookman, 11/01/2011 6:31:02 AM, on The Herald
communities have no chance of preventing this from happening when the large mining companies are so powerful that they hold sway over the government. totally wrong
Posted by judgedredd, 11/01/2011 6:31:58 AM, on The Herald
Conditions of consent need to focus more on the impacts of the mine on the community. Real time open access air monitoring (inculding very small particles) should be a standard condition for all consents.
Posted by Bigfeller, 11/01/2011 7:10:45 AM, on The Herald
Sorry but what does 'international best practice study' mean?

Who is the study for and who paid for it?

Posted by Nigel, 11/01/2011 7:43:54 AM, on The Herald
The residents living in the mining areas suffer the social, health & lack of infra-structure problems while the executives reap huge profits that are rarely distributed to the communities where the wealth is created.

It is time for Hunter residents to consider a seventh state from the Hunter to the Qld border to develop the social communities presently being denied diverse economic opportunity by the Sydney-based politicians rolling in mining royalties.

Posted by Machiavelli, 11/01/2011 9:29:05 AM, on The Herald
If what I read about Chinese scientists developing a way of reusing spent fuel rods from nuclear power stations is correct, then the coal industry might just be at the start of the end.
Posted by Wally, 11/01/2011 9:34:26 AM, on The Herald
It is interesting how the state government stops coal mines to protect the horse breeding industry but they don't care about impact on humans. If coal mining is so dangerous to the thoroughbred industry, then surely it is dangerous to the local communities. There are already provable examples of how open cut coal mining affect local residents health. Wendy Bowman who has never worked in a coal mine according to 4 Corners has symptoms of "black lung", showing that coal dust levels are high enough to cause deadly coal related health conditions in local residents. But the NSW Government refuse to do anything to force coal mining companies to reduce their contamination of the air, because that would cost coal companies more money and we can't have that can we. It is time that coal mining was restricted to "underground mining" only to protect human, animal, water and vegetation health. But again because of the higher expense to mine underground, that won't happen. We all have to make everything as easy and cheap for coal mining companies as we can, so that Government says.
Posted by onebadpig, 11/01/2011 12:18:35 PM, on The Herald
How is it that even when Mines meet their average yearly dust emission limits they still make life a misery for their neighbour’s. The emissions that are permitted by the NSW Gov. do not create a barrier or provide protection for the local environment & communities. We are still exposed to hazardous levels of dust & Fine air born particles that have been proven the world over to be the cause of illness' that shorten life and reduce health and impact the quality of life for those exposed.

When the NSW Gov. & the Mining industry stop dishing out their spin statements on how "PROGRESS" is being made towards "BEST PRACTICE" and own up to the fact that the industry will always generated dust the only real method of control is creative recording & reporting.

Where it is accepted that they regularly breach the dust levels but due to the fact they can cancel the breaches out with the wet low dust days. The upper level should be the upper level not the average maintained by creative reporting. The community should NEVER be exposed to the regular periods of dust as a few dust free days may average out & improve official records but it won't clean the old dust out of your lungs

Posted by SPARKS, 11/01/2011 12:55:28 PM, on The Herald
Gunna look good when we get our flood - a moonscape of giant craters filled with mud - how much compensation will we be up for to appease the multinationals? Even Kristina K. will be donating to the telethon. Oh, forgot unless it happens before March she will be working for one of them.
Posted by greenant, 11/01/2011 1:38:17 PM, on The Herald
Current mining is already unsafe. We know that no level of lead is safe for children and we know the mines emit many kg of lead per year. Therefore all children within say 10km of the mines should therefore have their blood lead monitored. None is done

Despite all health experts telling the government for years the key size of dust particle that should be monitored is 2.5 microns and also they should be just as interested in the CONTENT as the SIZE and WEIGHT of particles, they ignore the health advice. They follow the Dept of Planning's age old practice which has been to monitor the much larger and less relevant sized dust particles (PM10).

It takes years to damage lungs and brains but the increased extent of mining is speeding that up and the very high rate of developmental problems seen in Muswellbrook 5yr olds is in all likelihood the result of the above policy of allowing the Dept of Planning to set the consent limits using industrial expediency rather than using modern health criteria to do this.

Do not be deceived into thinking that if the mines are complying with their criteria this means they are safe

Posted by steve robinson, 11/01/2011 4:30:54 PM, on The Herald
1 | 2  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES

Most popular articles


 
Landcom Sanctuary 190512
 
 
 
 


Newcastle Herald







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...