News 
 Opinion 
 Editorial 
 General 
 The Hunter coal rush 

The Hunter coal rush

11 Aug, 2010 05:00 AM
NEWCASTLE'S place at the pointy end of the global surge in demand for energy has never been more obvious than now.

Frenzied efforts to push ever more coal through the port have led to the Newcastle Coal Infrastructure Group (NCIG) announcing plans for a massive expansion of its new coal-loader. This $900 million expansion will lift the loader's annual export capacity from 30 million to 55 million tonnes.

Resource economists suggest the port is likely to be exporting 180 million tonnes of coal by 2013. At the present price of about $115 a tonne, that represents more than $20 billion in product value and about $1.7 billion in royalties to the NSW government.

Around the world many countries are scrambling to buy energy assets and sign long-term supply contracts in order to ensure energy security for future economic growth. This intense international competition has led to big increases in the value of these assets, including Hunter Valley coalmines.

Shrewd and lucky investors have made millions, as the celebrated case of former electrician Nathan Tinkler - who has made more than $1 billion trading coal assets over the past three years - vividly illustrates.

Former NSW Labor treasurer Michael Egan, now chairman of NCIG, noted that his organisation's huge investment in coal-loading capacity was underwritten by unmet demand from existing mine owners wanting to sell their product on the hot market as well as by predicted demand from new mines.

A couple of questions might be asked.

The first is whether the Hunter's rail network can cope. Important recent upgrades have improved capacity but more investment will probably be needed.

The second question relates to the Hunter Valley's environment, and particularly its rivers and water resources. Farmers, water users and environmentalists are already asking where the government will draw the line on this vital issue.

In an energy rush it makes sense to maximise the benefits of high demand and high prices. But level heads are needed, in the midst of the excitement, to ensure that future generations of Hunter people aren't disadvantaged in the clamour for profits today.

Cyril Renwick

PROFESSOR Cyril Renwick, who died on Sunday, was a giant of the Hunter's intellectual landscape. His belief in the economic importance of regions remains the guiding force behind the Hunter Valley Research Foundation he created.

Even in retirement Professor Renwick never stopped working for the Hunter. In the wake of the 1989 earthquake he advocated offering a major international prize for a redesign of the city of Newcastle, but lamented that few backed his call.

In retrospect, many Novocastrians may wish that characteristically brave suggestion had been adopted.

Professor Renwick 's love of the Hunter, his credibility and his influence brought valuable dividends which deserve the gratitude of the people of the region.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Ed. It is realLy a "PROFITS RUSH" It's about money pure cash nothing else. We already have plenty of coal to supply our power industry. Just a thought maybe they will create some new customers for this very good little earner, say, build a few more coal burning Electricity Generators, Hmm, quick we need cooling water for them, Tillegra, maybe??? All good plans to keep the royalties rolling into Sydney as I expect they could do with a few more freeways. This is a selfish heartless grab for fees and royalties by a sick State Government with no conscience. They will do whatever is required to protect their good earners be it coal or cupcakes no matter the resource the laws will be amended to strip those that oppose them while increasing their control & authority to sell off other peoples homes & livelihoods to King Coal. We need this level of investment into Energy alternatives, but alas they don't pay as well so bugger the People & their Valley. The more Coal Mines created the harder it is to look at alternatives as they demand a market and our government is addicted to the royalties. Start writing letters of apology to put in Hunter schoolyard time capsules, SORRY KIDS!!
Posted by SPARKS, 11/08/2010 12:18:54 PM, on The Herald
The government accept climate change is being significantly influenced by burning fossil fuels and this is damaging the planet. Kevin Rudd thought this is the greatest moral challenge and few have contested this statement. We believe drug use is harmful but the greatest ctiticism is directed at drug manufacturers and pushers. Australia is the world's greatest coal manufacturer and pusher. We need to acknowledge this makes us morally bankrupt and start winding back coal and developing alternative industries and creating many more jobs in the process Steve Robinson
Posted by steve robinson, 11/08/2010 8:46:29 PM, on The Herald
Government Departments & Mineral Council people MUST recognise & agree 'to the obvious', that mining is destroying our agricultural food growing land, rural country/towns & villages, our creeks & river systems, killing wildlife/removal of habitat. Mines push people out from home/towns/villages in NSW & around Australia. Mining companies move into an area and destroy & poison people 'little by little' & day by day from coal dust toxins & methane gas etc in the air & drinking water. Profit for the select few at the expense of, everyone/everything & environment. If Government approves these mining companies to proceed any further, The Bucketts Way, a designated NSW Tourist Drive to Stroud, Gloucester, Barrington Mountain Ranges is going; hurry up and see it, before its all gone! If Gloucester Coal/Stratford/Duralie Coal, AGL Gas works/pipeline to Hexham, Gloucester Resources & Thunderbolts Gold Metallic Minerals in this valley & Barrington Ranges (mining/tree plantations/aerial spraying) is Gov. approved, ruthless 'attack practices' by companies, removing valley/river systems to Taree & Mammy Johnsons/Wards Rivers to Karuah River, Port Stephens/Marine Park, extinguished forever!
Posted by Amanda Albury, 12/08/2010 5:42:53 PM, on The Herald
Questions come to mind: China and India pay billions of A$ to have ownership rights of Australian coal, well then would it not be more economical to use our technology and mine the coal that is in in China and save on labour, transport and royalty costs.
Posted by jimbob, 12/08/2010 5:57:15 PM, on The Herald
Yes, given Newcastle's coal is primarily thermal - viz. just for power stations and not for steelmaking - Question 3 must be the "supply of deadly goods" by foreign mining companies to foreign nations to burn. What a sham.
Posted by Peter, 15/08/2010 12:02:03 AM, on The Herald
Answers: 1) no, the rail network is already overloaded. But we can always spend more money there (you kinda answered that yourself). Also, in 100 years time we'll be able to use the massive rail network for other stuff. 2) Pollution in the region is waaay beter than it used to be when BHP and that lead smelter were operating - just ask the EPA, they'll tell you there is nothing to worry about. 3) Future generations will inherit our money, just like Gen Y and X are getting rich off the baby boomers right now. So no worries there either!
Posted by fnord, 16/08/2010 2:00:29 PM, on The Herald
Mine coal in China? That's a laugh. Before you know it the Aussie supervisors would be arrested on some hammed up charge and be kept in confinement for a few years. But I don't like the idea of China owning the rights to Aussie coal either. Can anyone think of anything Aussies own the rights to in China? Solar power would be something to look into I suppose. There's a lot of empty space over the divide. Nuclear power plants would be better but you'd probably bring in the Chinese to build them and run them and then they'd own the rights to them. It's a sticky situation I'll admit. I remember the coal trains from embarking at Victoria St. Station in East Maitland. Some of them would come by so fast that it seemed they'd fly off of the rails! And then all the ships off the headlands in Newcaste waiting to come in for a load. Yes, there is a lot of coal moving around the Hunter.
Posted by downstarr, 16/08/2010 4:32:46 PM, on The Herald
Those financing this $900 million development should heed the view of some coal analysts who argue that 2011 will be the peak year for current coal extraction and that like peak oil this fossil fuel will decline henceforth. The easily reached coal will give way to more difficult mines just as climate change will bite into coal burning BAU - business as usual.
Posted by pablo, 17/08/2010 9:31:16 AM, on The Herald
coal mining at any cost. why are we the residents of the Hunter Valley paying for the Tilligra Dam? it has not been finally approved and justice and God forbid it is, the lost irreplaceable farmland cannot be reclaimed. the squanders like the coal industry and the residents of Sydney must pay the price, that is this proposed dams sole purpose, to provide for others. royalties from coal must be used to create infrastructure not just frittered away by the state. the cost must not be bled from the local frugal users. just fill up the exiting cavernous holes the miners have dug, let them give something back to the communities they say they care about and leave existing natural countryside alone, we don' have much left and soon there will be none.
Posted by mos, 17/08/2010 11:26:03 PM, on The Herald
Australia has agreed along with the international community to cut 5%off Greenhouse emissions by 2020, that's 10yrs from now. We can't go rushing to expand Coal mining & increase the amount of coal that that we dig up for profits. These mines all seem to have a 20+yr life so some time during the next 10yrs the worlds coal burners are going to stop expanding & contract their carbon emissions (the rush reason?). The NSW Gov. & King Coal will be crying poor when the royalties & super profits dry up. For sure they won't be the ones hurt in the crash or able to find the cash to pay for the repair of our landscape ruined for a few years of profits? We should reduce coal and invest in energy alternatives that create more jobs than Coal could and grow & be profitable long into the carbon reduced future. It takes a lot of land, water & dirty energy to get coal out of the ground it then releases all the Methane gas trapped in it (worse than CO²) it constantly oxidises, more CO² & this is even before the diesel trains haul it to oil powered ships that take it o/seas for more train trips then burnt. King Coal's a false future, here for a short, dirty, good time. What's the plan then?
Posted by SPARKS, 18/08/2010 1:58:18 AM, 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.

Most popular articles


 
Balance Health Club-Wests Tower
 
Bounce
 
Landcom Sanctuary


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...