It has been an amazing couple of weeks in politics that included a change of Liberal Party leaderhip and the ETS defeat.

I wonder whether the Climategate scandal timing may have had something to do with it.

Regardless of whether climate change is real, I am all for reducing energy consumption. It simply makes sense to use our energy sources wisely. However, I believe that the proposed ETS would have unnecessarily caused job losses and other major economic consequences to the Australian economy.

I believe that there are better ways of reducing energy consumption.

One of my biggest problems with these type of schemes is that they penalise Australia, while our competitors benefit. Countries like China that are taking Australian jobs talk about reductions but do not make any real change. The result: Australia becomes even less competitive against these low labour cost countries.

What real alternatives are there?

Firstly, rather than just create subsidies to offset costs, I believe that any emissions tax should be used directly to improve energy efficiency. Use the money to figure out how to more efficiently mine coal, generate power, etc.

Secondly, make the scheme dependent on other countries also reducing emissions. This way, Australia can commit to emissions reduction while still remaining competitive.

It will be interesting to see how this all pans out next year when the government is supposed to tackle the issue again.

Calvin Close
Australian Mining Reference

Robe River Mining Company, a subsidiary of Rio Tinto, had proposed the $12.5 billion Mesa A project as an expansion of the Pilbarra iron ore project.

The Troglobite is a small invertebrate that is only 4mm long, has no eyes or pigment and lives 5 – 30 metres below ground. It cannot survive above ground.

During its investigation of the Mesa A Project, Robe River discovered 11 of these troglobotic fauna, and committed to setting aside a mining exclusion zone to protect them. However, the EPA said that five of the species live in the area to be mined, and do not occur in the mining exclusion zone.

This news has sent shock waves through the mining industry, with many people raising questions about balancing environmental concerns with the need to foster WA’s biggest ever mining boom.

As expected, Rio Tinto has said that it would appeal the decision.

This is not the first time that the EPA has rejected proposals for mining projects. Recently, they knocked back the Gorgon gas plant on Barrow Island due to the impact on the island’s rare turtle. The WA Environment Minister at the time, Mark McGowan, approved the project with a list of environmental conditions imposed on it.

There are other similar cases.

I do not want to write a long story about this news, because there are many news items that have been published about this already.

Instead, I want to open this up to people to comment about it.

What is your opinion about saving rare species of fauna at the expense of bringing great financial benefits to the WA economy?

Do you think the decision is justified?

Post a comment and let the minng industry know what you think…

Calvin Close
Managing Director
Australia’s Mining Reference