Singleton Council Meeting 9 June, 2009 - AGL

[sysop]

This post is a mirror copy of the original in the HVPA Website

Saturday, 13-June-2009. It`s no from AGL.
. Singleton Argus published a report from the lively Council Meeting on Tuesday 9 June, 2009.Singleton Council received a reply to their letter to AGL Energy concerning the coal seam methane exploration at Broke.

The reply from land and approvals manager for AGL, Siobhan Barry, states that AGL does not support the excision of any part of the lease that it holds. Ms Barry also said that AGL would not be carrying out an environmental assessment on its test wells, as it had completed one in 2004, and is not required by the State Government to carry out another.

As a result of the correspondence, Singleton Council has resolved to write a letter to AGL expressing its disappointment with the response to the issues council had raised.

Return to HVPA Website

[hvpa667]

I have presented the following points to the Council Meeting on behalf of the Hunter Valley Protection Alliance:

• Thank Council re their motion on how CSM exploration should be managed.

• Appreciate the efforts of the Council representatives on the CCC

• Thanks the councillors who attended the meeting with the minister on 06/05/09

• As a consequence the minister now has a greater understanding of the issues

• The minister, as a result is coming to Broke in July to see first hand the potential impacts

• The Petroleum (Onshore) Act is totally inadequate regarding the practices adopted by
CSM explorers and in closely settled areas - the Act needs changing. Your motion will help make
this happen

• I have grave concerns re the separation distances - they are grossly inadequate. 1000m as proposed
in the bill, narrowly defeated, presented in the Legislative Council this week would be more suitable,
especially in closely settled areas

• AGL cannot guarantee that there will not be methane migration as happened at their
Stratford operation and also at Cranbourne. At Stratford the operation was shut down when
methane surfaced 300 m from where it was supposed to be. This migration mirrors what has
happened overseas where houses have become inhabitable and wells have become polluted. AGL makes
much of the separation distances in their reply but events have overtaken the 2004 paper on separation.
There are implications for Council re separation.

• AGL cannot guarantee that there will be no damage to aquifers. With an El Nino forecast,
there will be increased pressure on underground water supplies

• The valley served by the Wollombi Brook is of great significance - farming, grazing,
viticulture, olives and tourism. AGL appears not to care too much about these. What can
be lost - eg last weekend it was full house for holiday accommodation in Broke! 30 cars at Margan’s

• AGL have a similar modus operandi to the discredited Sydney Gas

• HVPA is very appreciative of Council’s work and both that organisation and I hope that we can
rely on your continued support. Your support is critical.

• There is not much for the community from CSM

• You cannot eat coal or gas and too much valuable agricultural land has already been lost in the valley.

• We are the custodians of the land for the future generations.

Thank you

In response to a question from Cr Howlett who asked what more could Council do, I replied that we need to tack on to all the other groups that are objecting to mining.

I should have also said that Council can operate through the Shires Association and the Parliament - I will contact her later about this.

Graeme O'Brien