News 
 Local News 
 News 
 Economy, Business, IT & Finance 
 Environmental permits for Gunns mill defended 

Environmental permits for Gunns mill defended

BY PETER WELS CHIEF POLITICAL REPORTER
02 Jul, 2009 01:22 PM
THE Tasmanian Government has defended the environmental permits for Gunns' proposed pulp mill, in the wake of renewed concerns about fugitive emissions from the controversial $2 billion development.

Correspondence released earlier this week between the Resource Planning and Development Commission and Gunns from 2005 showed the planning body had grave concerns that the timber company had not addressed the issue.

Bass Greens MHA Kim Booth raised the issue in Parliament yesterday, calling on the Government to publicly release all documentation compiled by the RPDC during its aborted assessment of the pulp mill.

Deputy Premier Lara Giddings maintained the Government was committed to ensuring that the pulp mill met "best practice environmental standards".

"Regulation of the project will be accordance with the stringent requirements of the pulp mill permit and will involve the assessment of documents and plans submitted by Gunns Limited," she said.

"The proposed mill is required to have a comprehensive system to collect and destroy total reduced sulphur compounds before they are released into the atmosphere."

Mr Booth sought to table the letters between then-RPDC head Julian Green and Gunns managing director John Gay in Parliament yesterday, but the Government voted down the move.

CLICK HERE TO READ THE RPDC LETTERS.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
How can a 4 year old letter from the RPDC to Gunns that pre dates even the release of the Gunns DIIS for the pulp mill constitute news? This is a beat up even by the Greens dodgy standards of accountability. Of course there were concerns about potential odours from the mill. But even a cursory examination of the documentation supplied by Gunns including the recently released pulp mill design report shows clearly these concerns have been addressed. The mill will have the latest design technology that will eliminate unpleasant smells and government monitoring standards for the mill are so sensitive that rotting seaweed and passing cars already exceed those limits. If the Greens and the RPDC are that worried about offensive smells perhaps they could raise some concerns about the real stench that comes from Ti Tree Bend from the thousands of tonnes of chlorinated sewerage Launceston City discharges into the pristine Tamar River every year
Posted by Harry, 2/07/2009 9:25:22 AM
This latest action by Giddings/Bartlett to vote down tabling of those documents has got to be the decisive giveaway of impropriety by our state government over the whole pulp mill farce. Will someone please take action against this state Labor government. They are way out of line.
Posted by aghast, 2/07/2009 10:15:23 AM
Why is the government preventing these documents being tabled in parliament for all to see? Instead of printing government spin, the Examiner should investigate this matter thoroughly as Gunns and the Labor government have gone out of their way to avoid explaining fugitive emissions. For information there are up to 1,000 seals that will become saturated and leak noxious odour. This happens well before any burners and cannot be controlled. These types of fugitive emissions have not been eliminated in any mill any where in the world. To make claims that the proposed mill won't have this problem is deception of the greatest order. It is going to have an impact of 50 to 60 km of smell affecting everyone in Tamar Valley and out to Deloraine and Longford. We are tired of people spinning the odour issue as it is going to ruin life here in the Valley. The proposed mill must not and will not be built in the Tamar Valley.
Posted by Judith, 2/07/2009 11:40:28 AM
Tasmania is now almost totally isolated by the world pulp and paper markets because we have failed to become FSC compliant. The 20 year Forestry Tasmania wood supply deal for Gunns mill fails FSC compliance. FSC is now required by any Gunns joint venture partner. The Burnie and Wesley Vale mills were not bought by Nippon Paper for the same reason. Surely somebody in Tasmania can escape the 'pulp mill as religion' mantra, and realise what we are doing here is regarded as criminal activity by the rest of the world. Its not OK to force the Tassie devil to extinction just to make another Gunns shareholder a millionaire. Its not OK to disregard the working vineyards less than 400 meters from the proposed mill site. Its not OK to completely ignore the thousands of jobs that this mill will sacrifice. The old dark days are over for Tasmania. Back room arrangements will get big business nowhere. Realise the environmental movements of the globe have become a massive force with the power to boycott whole countries and send rogue companies to their doom.
Posted by Karl Stevens, 2/07/2009 11:59:43 AM
In response to Harry's post at 8.25am, I prefer to go with pulp and paper scientist - and former RPDC panellist - Dr Warwick Raverty, who in yesterday's Examiner reiterated that: "You can't ever promise no fugitive emissions [will occur]." It doesn't matter how good the technology is, leaks WILL happen. They are happening in pulp mills throughout the world - including in Germany's Stendhal mill that has been held up as a pulp mill standard to aspire to. Things were OK for about 12 months but now the community who live in proximity are complaining long and loud. Gunns proposed pulp mill is many times larger than the Stendhal mill, so the smell will be many times greater, and travel many kilometres further. Quite apart from the additional health issues this flawed project will generate. The mill is the wrong project for the Tamar Valley and it's beyond time that Gunns and federal and state governments recognised it.
Posted by anne, 2/07/2009 12:12:46 PM
Yes, that would be a good start Harry, but that doesn't resolve (or even scratches the surface) in how gunns is misleading us all... gunns is not using the latest technology (stop fooling yourself) and is NOT using worlds best practice!!! The technology is 20 odd years old... I should know, I worked in the industry and at that time we went to a non-chlorinated closed loop tertiary treatment system and even then we had fugitive emissions!!! And the reason was that the global consumer was starting to demand a more sustainable paper product, made from 100% plantations... gunns doesn't want to go that way because they need the older technology to breakdown our native and old-growth forests that they will be feeding this tree hungry giant!!! It is cheaper, thanks to our short-sighted state government!!!
Posted by Henk of Launceston, 2/07/2009 12:39:43 PM
I don't want to live in Stench City. So Harry, why don't you go move to Hampshire and they can build the mill there!
Posted by Jack, 2/07/2009 12:53:21 PM
Harry, what an intelligent human being you must be to write such a letter.Fugitive odours, some of which are the worst mankind can experience, will possibly not be a problem for the first two to three years after startup but for the remaining 70 year + life of the mill the people of the Tamar Valley will suffer. You are possibly more intelegent than Dr. Warwick Raverty who has had many years of first hand experience with pulp mills and who was on the board of the RPDC which would have ensured a fair decision for all.
Posted by bingley waters, 2/07/2009 1:15:36 PM
This is about a government that is in the pocket of big business. The pulp mill is the sharp end of the govt/business wedge...this is why none of the big parties, Liberal, Labour, state or federal will do anything to save the environment...the Greens may not stay in long but we need a new approach....just as after 26 years of Liberal power, the Whitlam Labour govt was needed...it got us out of Vietnam, gave us Medicare and free education...this revolution was thrown out after 3-4 years...but its benefits are only now peterring out. The Greens will give us that neccessary change and renewal.
Posted by marjon, 2/07/2009 2:03:14 PM
If you don't want a pulp mill at Bell Bay, then leave. The rest of us will enjoy a clean valley, fresh air, employment and a great community spirit... all with the pulp mill and a renewable resource. The concerns above are not new, and have been addressed. You NIMB'eys must be getting desperate. Good to see. By the way, there absolutely no chance that old growth material will used in the mill, stop spreading lies.
Posted by BringitON, 2/07/2009 2:08:23 PM
1 | 2 | 3  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.

Most popular articles

1.  Napier quits due to illness
2.  Lighting crew man pleads not guilty
3.  Launceston awaits Labor pledges
4.  Father calls for jail for work bullies
5.  Financial pain from weekend blackout
6.  Bartlett in TV debate against Libs
7.  Blackout hits shops: Retailers angry at ...
Stevenson Audi
 
Esk Property
 
Devonport City Promotions
 
Buy Locally
 
 
How to book a classifieds advert
 SEND...
Email a FriendEmail a friend
 SAVE...
FavouritesFavourites
Del.icio.usDel.icio.us
 SHARE...
FacebookFacebook
DiggDigg
StumbleUponStumbleUpon
MySpaceMySpace
RedditReddit
NewsvineNewsvine
LinkedInLinkedIn
KwoffKwoff
TwitterTwitter