Anvil Hill campaign
From Envirowiki
| Campaign | Anvil Hill campaign+ |
| Web Site | http://www.anvilhill.org.au |
| Related campaigns | Climate change+, mining+, indigenous issues+ |
| Groups involved | Anvil Hill Alliance+,
Anvil Hill Project Watch Association+, Rising Tide+, Greenpeace+, |
The campaign to save Anvil Hill has been underway for about 7 years, since Centennial Coal first announced their intentions to mine it for export coal. For the first 6 years the campaign was a local one, and not much was known about it outside the local area in the upper Hunter Valley. Since late 2005 a large coalition of groups and individuals has been fighting the mine in the lead-up. the mine is currently being examined for approval for the department of planning.
Contents |
[edit] 1 Timeline
- 2000: Centennial announce their plans to mine the site. Anvil Hill Project Watch Association starts soon after.
- 2005 November/December: the Anvil Hill Alliance is officially formed, and the campaign starts to spread.
- 2006 October: Anvil Hill Action Camp
- 2006 October 6: Pete gray takes the Planning department to court.
- 2006 November 27: Pete Gray wins against the Planning department. (See below)
- 2007 June 7: Frank Sartor (Minister for Planning) announces the mines approval.
[edit] 2 politics
Anvil hill has been a bastard of a case for politicians, who have kept quiet on the issue as much as possible.
Frank Sartor said "had that mine [Anvil Hill] been refused, or not allowed to go ahead, the same amount of coal still would have got burnt globally."[1], which is absolute tripe, of course, as the amount of coal in the world is limited. the same amount might get burnt this year, but not over the next hundred years or so.
[edit] 3 Court case
in October 2006, Pete Gray, from Newcastle, took the Planning department to court, claiming that the Department of planning should not have accepted Centennial's Environmental Assessment. the claim was based on the Director General (of planning)'s assessment requirements, which included "a comprehensive greenhouse assessment". Centennial's EA did include some greenhouse assessment, such as diesel engine emissions and fugutive emissions, but did not include the inevitable emissions caused by burning the coal. Gray's case was that emissions caused by export coal being burnt overseas are necessarily part of the greenhouse emissions of a coal mine, and hence the EA was bunk.
Justice Pain, the magistrate, found in favour of Gray, but did not go so far as to require the EA be re-submitted. The win was valuable for climate campaigners, but would not actually stop the mine. the win also brought some much-needed media attention to the case, and climate change in general.
[edit] 4 References
- ↑ Anvill Hill Gets the Go Ahead - Stateline on ABC, 2007 June 8
