Slashdot Mirror
Australia OKs Dumping Dredge Waste In Barrier Reef
An anonymous reader writes "Australia's Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority has approved the dumping of 3 million cubic meters of dredge waste in park waters. The decision has been blasted by environmentalists. 'This is a sad day for the reef and anyone who cares about its future,' said WWF Great Barrier Reef campaigner Richard Leck. 'The World Heritage Committee will take a dim view of this decision, which is in direct contravention of one of its recommendations.'"
And by "reef", they mean a patch of silt 25km away from the actual reef.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
No, the purpose of the dredging operation is to expand the coal port at Abbott Point.
The problem is that they're ignoring legitimate environmental concerns (and to the barrier reef, silt is waste) for financial convenience because it would cost more to dump it somewhere else that isn't right next a fragile ecosystem.
You are attempting to oversimplify things because you cant understand the real concerns here.
You are also attempting to prevent legitimate rebuttals of your point by attacking the person and using thought terminating cliches because your point isn't strong enough to stand on it's own merits.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
The site for the material to be placed is approximately 17 miles away. Where do you get 40? The initial location? Irrelevant. I could scoop it off the moon, and as long as I put it 17 miles from the reef, it'd still be 17 miles away from where "this is happening". I'm not arguing whether it's environmentally sound or not, but I do think that fudging numbers and using them creatively is a bad policy. Try harder next time.
In this specific case it's actually sand mixed with fine silt, it's clean but silt is a problem for coral, it needs clear water or it will die from insufficient sunlight. Having said that there is no coral at the dumping site, but there's plenty nearby and oceans have currents and storms that will move it around. It would have been much simpler to sail the barges a bit further out to open water off the continental shelf and dump it in the open ocean, but that would have cost a few more dollars so instead they lobby the feds to gain permission to vandalise the reef.
This new government has a vindictive ideological grudge against environmental issues, they are also planning to open up 70-something thousand hectares of world heritage forest in Tasmania to logging. Despite the fact that after decades of wrangling, loggers and environment groups agreed on a peace deal last year that included a ban on logging in that forest. Forestry is a major part of Tasmania's economy, nobody on either side of that long and arduous fight wants to reignite the divisive issue except the new federal government.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
This is what I get for not running the numbers myself: It's actually 15.5ish miles, but my point stands the same, even more so, if anything.
The waste is just sand and a bit of mud (not toxic at all) and they are *not* dumping it on the reef. They are dumping it in a barren stretch of sand that doesn't even have any seagrass or notable life. It is far enough away from the actual reef to not be an issue and they have a maximum amount per year they can dump and a window that they are allowed to do it in (outside of spawning season).
If environmentalists want to be taken seriously they should not cry wolf.
We see the same thing in Canada, the main perpetrators are the Tides Foundation and the WWF. It's gotten bad enough that they're paying money to native groups in order to create an artificial voice on an issue.
And before some liberal moonbat starts whining "omg sunnews" just remember, that out of all the other networks in Canada, they were the only one doing a story on it at first. Because natives are a "sensitive issue" here so they don't want to offend them.
Om, nomnomnom...
You mean the park authority headed up by these guys?
Colour me sceptical that this is such a great benefit to the reef.
Now here's the unsurprising news about the money trail - The project we are discussing is a joint venture between "mining magnates" Gina Reinhart, and you guessed it, Senator Clive Palmer.
I'm sure they can find somewhere suitable.
Yes, and that place is the open ocean beyond the reef or as clean landfill, but "doing the right thing" would mean Clive and Gina (world's richest woman) would have to spend the money they thought they could save by socialising the risks involved.
At the end of the day it's really quite simple, parks are not created for use as cheap landfill sites for the mining industry, why such an application would even be considered is beyond me. Worse still if the government were to reverse the decision, they will probably be sued for the extra costs and several million mugs like me will end up paying their costs anyway.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
There is no coral where they are dumping it, it's going 20km from the reef but still in the marine park area. the area where it is going does not even have any seagrass and is basically the same sand as what will be dumped on it.