Traveston Dam Desalination Water Report kept Secret by Austrailian Officials

Dam opponents claim the government has inadvertantly admitted that desalination would offer a cheaper, quicker and more reliable solution to south-east Queensland’s water woes.

And they believe it is likely that a half a million dollar report prepared by professional services giant Gutteridge, Haskins and Davey has been kept under wraps because it supports their argument.

That has been the pattern:

Australian fishermen fear the impact of the Traveston dam on the regional fishery - Environmental Impact Statement is not complete

Australia - Differing versions of Traveston Dam EIS meant to confuse the public - MP highlights Traveston dam EIS discrepancies

Another Australian environmental impact statement rendered meaningless by 5 week comment period

Australian dam proponents try an end run around environmental impact statement

The government has confirmed that $512,000 was paid to GHD for “investigation of desalination options for South East Queensland’’ in 2005-06 but said the advice was not provided in a single report and therefore could not be released.

On Sunday, acting premier Paul Lucas announced that $125 million would be spent on preliminary works to build two mobile desalination plants if the drought worsens.

Mr Lucas acknowledged that new water sources may be needed years before the Traveston dam can top up supplies.

“By starting work straight away, up to an extra 144 megalitres a day in contingency supplies can be added to the region by the end of next year,’’ he said.

Mr Lucas said the government would assess water security at the end of the wet season to determine if the mobile plants were necessary.

“The cost of those temporary plants – if they proceed – is around $550 million and they would be ready in late 2009,’’ he said. “The options we’ve chosen to pursue further are the most effective in terms of cost and likelihood of success.’’

The opposition’s spokesperson for infrastructure, Fiona Simpson, said Mr Lucas’s statements had exposed the $1.7 billion Traveston dam as a cruel hoax and highlighted the government’s “bizarre’’ attitude to water infrastructure.

“It is clear these mobile plants can be built sooner and for less than the cost of the dam without all the harrowing consequences,” Miss Simpson said.

“We believe that a permanent desalination plant is a better option still because it would have less environmental impact, but whatever way you look at it, the dam is an incredibly dumb idea.”

Mr Lucas denied that desalination would offer a more cost-effective solution to the water solution and challenged Miss Simpson to state where she would build a plant north of Brisbane.

Kevin Ingersole, from the Save the Mary River group, said Mr Lucas’s announcement proved that the government knew desalination could do the job.

Here is the full article.

This type of thing is fairly common:

Barrick Gold Corporation conveniently left out mention of the glaciers its Pascau Lama mine would destroy: "The first environmental impact study Barrick Gold submitted to the Chilean authorities - after the bilateral treaty was adopted - neglected to mention the glaciers. It was the farmers of Huasco Valley who warned CONAMA. " See: Pascua Lama Gold Mine, a Threat to Sustainability

Australian fishermen fear the impact of the Traveston dam on the regional fishery - Environmental Impact Statement is not complete

Trawlers group fears Traveston dam impact

The Independent Trawlers Association says it is concerned the proposed Traveston Crossing dam could damage the livelihoods of fishers by reducing the flow of fresh water into the ocean.

The Queensland Government plans to build the dam near Gympie, in the south-east, to supply water to south-east Queensland if it is approved by the federal Environment Minister.

A spokesman for the trawlers association, Joe McLeod, says a draft environmental report on the dam does not include enough information on the impact it might have on fishers off the Fraser Coast.

"That's what this latest work has pointed out, that there's massive holes in their understanding or their lack of understanding of dams and weirs on marine productivity," he said.

The chief executive officer of Queensland Water Infrastructure, Graeme Newton, says all interested parties are encouraged to make a submission about the dam's draft environmental impact statement.

Here is the full article.

Australia - Differing versions of Traveston Dam EIS meant to confuse the public - MP highlights Traveston dam EIS discrepancies

The Member for Gympie, in south-east Queensland, says he is concerned people could be responding to draft environmental reports with differing information on the same project.

David Gibson says there are discrepancies between the downloadable Traveston Crossing dam environmental impact statement (EIS) and the version stored on compact disc.

Mr Gibson says the State Government needs to extend the response time to the draft statement in light of the differing versions.

"We have a problem because if the people of Queensland are relying on a downloaded EIS for their submission, and we've identified just some data that just isn't consistent between the two, how much more information is inconsistent? This Government has got to pull it's finger out and give people more time," he said.

Here is the full article.

World must held protect vital Mekong River from hydroelectric development - Lack of transparent environmental impact statements cited.

BANGKOK (AFP) — International donors must use their influence and push Southeast Asia's Mekong River Commission to speak out against six potentially devastating dams on the vital waterway, environmental groups said Tuesday.

The planned hydropower dams on the Mekong in Laos, Thailand and Cambodia could displace tens of thousands of people and endanger up to 1,300 aquatic species including the rare Mekong giant catfish and the Irrawaddy dolphin, activists said.

"We urge all the donors of the Mekong River Commission to review immediately their support to the MRC," Premrudee Daoroung, co-director of Thailand-based ecological group TERRA, told reporters in Bangkok.

"The existence of the MRC now, if they are not doing their job, they are blocking the way of other more transparent mechanisms" to do the job.

She said the MRC -- which comprises Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos -- had failed since its creation in 1995 to carry out adequate environmental impact assessments or consult people affected by the dams.

The group's donors, which include the World Bank, the United States, Japan, Australia and many European governments, are due to meet in the Cambodian town of Siem Reap on Thursday.

Activists urged the donors to pressure the MRC to carry out an investigation into the region-wide social and ecological impact of each dam, and to make sure people were compensated for any loss of livelihood.

Laos, which has ambitions to become the region's key electricity supplier, has four Mekong dams under consideration, while Thailand and Cambodia each have one.

"The lower Mekong is the largest production fishery area, any change on the eco-system would create a vital impact," said Pianporn Deetes, a coordinator with Southeast Asia Rivers Network (SEARIN).

Activists said that because of the lack of transparent impact assessments for the dams, it was hard to say how many people would be forced from their homes, but estimates ranged between 17,300 and 75,000.

Here is the full article.

Another Australian environmental impact statement rendered meaningless by 5 week comment period

The owner of land near the proposed Wyaralong dam south-west of Brisbane says the Government has not given people enough time to comment on an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the project.

Public comment on the EIS for the $333 million dam, to be built near Beaudesert, closes on December 12.

Prue Firth, whose grandfather settled in the region more than 100 years ago, says a lot of people in the area do not have internet access and cannot afford hard copies of the report.

"It's totally unrealistic to expect people to be able to digest this and respond in the five-week period that we have been given," she said.

(This exact EIS tactic was repeated a few weeks ago with the Traveston Dam: Australian dam proponents try an end run around environmental impact statement )

Here is the full article.

Malaysian Bakun Dam development mirrors the hydroelectric development of Patagonia, Chile by European energy conglomerates

Still beneficial? When completed, will the Bakun hydroelectric scheme be able to produce the power expected of it?

Excerpted:

BAKUN dam, the controversial hydroelectric project mooted in the 70s, is nearing completion. Temporarily shelved in 1997 at the height of the regional financial crisis, construction is now going full-steam. Its anticipated 2,400megawatt (MW) electricity, once feared to be redundant, is now highly coveted.

In August, the long-anticipated aluminium smelter deal was inked between Anglo-Australian Rio Tinto Aluminium and Cahya Mata Sarawak Bhd (CMS). The Sarawak Aluminium Company (Salco) in Similajau, 80km from Bintulu – 60% owned by Rio Tinto and 40% by CMS – is eyeing 900MW from Bakun when the first of its eight turbines start by end of 2009. Salco is gearing up for operation a year later.

(Note: This Aluminum plant is expected to consume 50% of the power generated. )
(Similar happenings in Patagonia, Chile and Argentina: Xstrata & Transelec Negotiate Cuervo River Dam Project , Aluar Aluminio Argentino SAIC May Spend $3.5 Billion on Patagonia Aluminum Smelter, Dam )

------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL EXPLOITATION WITH HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT

Sahabat Alam Malaysia (SAM) warned that Bakun’s viability has been compromised as its catchment has degraded substantially. Some 320,000ha of forest has been carved out for oil palm and forest plantations, potentially accelerating siltation of the Balui river basin and jeopardising the dam capacity.

Penang-based SAM revealed in June that the state had issued three plantation licences within the catchment between 1999 and 2002, and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) reports for the projects were approved between 2000 and 2003.

One licensee, Shin Yang Forest Plantation (155,930ha), has begun planting oil palm. The other two, Bahau-Linau Forest Plantation (108,235ha) and Merirai-Balui Forest Plantation (55,860ha), are owned by RH Forest Corporation, a subsidiary of logging giant Rimbunan Hijau, and will establish pulp and wood tree monocultures.

“This is clearly in breach of prudent land-use policy within the catchment area, as recommended by the Bakun EIA. We have written to relevant authorities on this matter but have not gotten an answer,” said SAM council member Mohideen Abdul Kader. He added that the government has broken its promise to gazette 1.5million ha of the catchment to ensure the feasibility of the dam.

The Bakun EIA recommended controlled logging to reduce sediment from reaching the reservoir and to secure unpolluted water for the turbines.

------------------

CHANGING RAINFALL PATTERNS

A source familiar with the dam development cautioned that with changing rainfall patterns linked to global warming, there might not be enough water during dry seasons to maintain the volume for electricity generation.

*(The problem of dimishing water and galciers in the Andes is becoming a concern throughout South America: When Ice Turns to Water , As glaciers melt, Chile's future uncertain , Chile's Puelo River: Diminishing water volumes impact residents and Endesa dam proponents )

------------------

FALSIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

SAM honorary secretary Meenakshi Raman said the EIA has flawed assessments and lacked scientific rigours, and was approved despite the proximity of plantations to the dam. SAM has called on the Finance Ministry, as owner of the dam project, to explain the failure to protect the catchment.

Following its investigation on complaints by two Penan settlements on Shin Yang plantation project, Malaysian Human Rights Commission also recommended that Sarawak reviews the EIA preparation and verification procedure.

(Again the norm: Endesa Strategy & Tactics I – Revisiting the Ralco & Pangue Hydroelectric Projects on the Rio Bio Bio , False Environmental Impact Statements induce Regional Environment Commission to Implement Fines. )

RESTRICTED AND DISMISSED LOCAL PARTICIPATION

Both Shin Yang Forestry and NREB did not response to media queries. However, in a Bernama report on Oct 9, NREB controller of environmental quality Dr Penguang Manggil dismissed the need for public participation in the EIA process as “the uneducated rural communities could be easily manipulated by certain non-governmental organisations to oppose development plan.”

(Typical: Endesa Strategy & Tactics I – Revisiting the Ralco & Pangue Hydroelectric Projects on the Rio Bio Bio )


Here is the full article.

Australian dam proponents try an end run around environmental impact statement

Public given six weeks to analyze 1600-page environmental impact statement, technical reports delayed, public charged exhorbitant fees.

Traveston Dam opponents have asked for an extra two months to analyse the 1600-page Environment Impact Statement released for public comment just over a week ago.

Kevin Ingersole, from the Save the Mary River Coordinating Group, said it had taken more than a week to obtain the EIS and accompanying technical reports and the six-week time frame for submissions was absurd.

Mr Ingersole said the government had devoted almost a year to process but had been slow to provide the documents and then expected the public to respond with lightning speed.

“It’s just part of the ongoing game trying to smash the will of the community,’’ Mr Ingersole said.

“I have written to the Coordinator General and said ‘since this is a multi-billion dollar project and the reports run to a couple of thousand pages and the government has been working on this for about a year, I think it’s unreasonable that we’ve been given six weeks to examine it’.

“We have asked for an extension until February 1.’’

Mr Ingersole was also furious that the government was charging $150 for the EIS and a further $300 for the technical reports, claiming the expense would be a significant deterrent for many organisations and individuals.

Several community groups in the region have expressed the same view, claiming the cost and the six-week time frame were outrageous.

Keryn Jones, from the Sunshine Coast Environment Council, said she believed it was a deliberate ploy to prevent the EIS from receiving the scrutiny it deserved.

“They are bombarding us with so much information it’s impossible for us to analyse it in the time they have allowed,’’ Ms Jones said.

“They know community groups don’t have the resources to give this proper scrutiny, let alone individuals, and who can afford the cost?

“They have made it as difficult as they can for us to assess it.’’

*(Manipulation of Environmental Impact Statements is not unique in these cases: False Environmental Impact Statements induce Regional Environment Commission to Implement Fines. Pacific Hydro of Australia is part owner in the La Higuera Project on the Tinguiririca River.)

Here is the full article.