Environmental working group presentation part iii selecting an lng hub site in the kimberley
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 15

Environmental Working Group Presentation Part III: Selecting an LNG Hub Site in the Kimberley? PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 55 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Environmental Working Group Presentation Part III: Selecting an LNG Hub Site in the Kimberley?. Tim Nicol, Resources Liaison Officer, CCWA. Ranking Sites is Premature. Kimberley is world class environment deserving of world class decision: Scientific knowledge is lacking

Download Presentation

Environmental Working Group Presentation Part III: Selecting an LNG Hub Site in the Kimberley?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Environmental working group presentation part iii selecting an lng hub site in the kimberley

Environmental Working Group Presentation Part III:Selecting an LNG Hub Site in the Kimberley?

Tim Nicol, Resources Liaison Officer, CCWA


Ranking sites is premature

Ranking Sites is Premature

  • Kimberley is world class environment deserving of world class decision:

    • Scientific knowledge is lacking

    • Heritage assessment is incomplete

    • TO consultation rushed for such a complex issue (informed consent)

  • Inadequate information to make a decision on any site

  • Default position should be no decision until information provided (Precautionary Principle)


Which site can be sacrificed

Which Site Can Be Sacrificed?

  • Kimberley has outstanding natural and cultural values

  • The case has not yet been made that any site can be sacrificed for development

  • Considered unlikely that environmental impacts will be acceptable for any Kimberley site


Alternatives need to be considered

Alternatives need to be Considered…

  • With appropriate assessment consider:

    • Offshore FLNG

    • Pilbara (not Barrow or Burrup)

    • No development option


Browse basin lng development and ghg emissions

Browse Basin LNG Development and GHG Emissions

  • Processing Browse LNG will result in significant CO2 emissions for WA

    • WA Government target ~26mtpa by 2050

    • No policy on CO2 Emissions for major projects like Browse Basin

Inpex + Woodside approx 18mtpa

Source: Premier of Western Australia (2007)


Browse lng developments and greenhouse gas emissions

Browse LNG Developments and Greenhouse Gas Emissions

  • No robust sequestration options identified

  • Biosequestration unacceptable for this magnitude of emissions

  • No GHG plan = No Development


What about renewable energy

What about Renewable Energy?

  • WA far behind on renewable energy opportunities:

    • California: Ausra 175MW, BrightSource 200MW baseload solar thermal

    • Massive wind capacity

    • Geothermal underinvestment

    • LEED fund 35m over 5 years, adequate???

    • CETO wave project, where is it now?

  • Where is the R.E.D.T.?


Key impacts dredging

Key Impacts: Dredging

  • Gorgon: Largest dredging project in WA

  • EPA recommendations: One of 5 key reasons Gorgon rejected by EPA

  • Dampier Port lost 23-35% coral cover – EPA limit 10%

  • Geraldton Port – Investigated by then DEP after dredge plume damaged extensive sea grass


Key impacts shipping

Key Impacts: Shipping

  • Gorgon – EPA quarantine concerns

  • Increased shipping

  • Turbulence

  • Spills?

  • Interference with wildlife

  • Loss of remote and natural amenity value

  • Introduced marine pests


Key impacts water

Key Impacts: Water

  • Gorgon project (from ERMP) uses 1.9 GL/year

    • Cape Leveque Coast: 8.3GL/year

    • Isdell River SWMA: 4.3GL/year

    • Prince Regent River SWMA: 4.2GL/year

    • King Edward River SWMA: 4.2GL/year

    • Drysdale River SWMA: 4.2GL/year

  • No water management plans for these areas


Key impacts more people

Key Impacts: More People

  • More fishing, cars, towns, boats, marinas, roads etc

  • Busselton Experience


Key impacts remote natural experience

Key Impacts: Remote, Natural Experience

  • This experience increasingly rare in the world

  • Kimberley place of exceptional natural beauty and remote: irreplaceable

  • Valued by many people around the world


The environmental ngo experience of environmental impact assessment

The Environmental NGO Experience of Environmental Impact Assessment

  • Esperance Lead Pollution

  • Dredging at Geraldton

  • Predictions and commitments in EIA do not always translate to reality

  • Any development is a risk


The environmental ngo experience of the boom

The Environmental NGO Experience of “the Boom”

  • Environment and Aboriginal heritage comes second to industry:

    • Eg. Hope Downs and Weeli Wolli Creek in Pilbara

    • Eg. Windarling Range in Goldfields

    • Eg. Pluto LNG Plant on Burrup

    • Eg. …

  • As development increases, more exploration, more mining, more problems for the environment

  • Difficult to stop: Thin edge of the wedge

Martu Idja Banyjima Traditional Owner Slim Parker speaking in front of flooded Weeli Wolli creek on YouTube and at Conservation Council event in Perth.


Ranking sites is premature1

Ranking Sites is Premature

  • Commend the commitment to process thus far, but only a start

  • Complex decision in a complex time

  • No need to rush


  • Login