Bauxite backtrack based on ‘errors’

The Australian government dumped its conditional approval for Rio Tinto’s proposed $1.5 billion bauxite mine and port development based on a one-page submission led by the Wilderness Society that contained errors of fact about its shipping plans through the Great Barrier Reef, the mining giant has alleged.
Rio has also warned that the decision sets a bad precedent for the nation’s resources sector just a week after revelations that environmental activists had developed a secret plan to disrupt and delay projects by using legal challenges and exploiting the Lock The Gate movement against coal-seam gas projects.
The opposition seized on the situation to declare it showed “who is really dictating environmental policy in Australia”.
Federal Environment Minister Tony Burke recently revoked an earlier decision to approve the project proposed for south of the Embley River near Weipa on Cape York, and declared he would force the miner to consider the impact of its massive project on the Great Barrier Reef — sparking Rio to warn of a significant impact on 3,000 jobs in Gladstone at a time when the manufacturing sector was already under pressure.
Environment groups had urged Burke to revoke the decision, saying there would be a significant increase in shipping through the reef that could see up to 700 ships yearly — or 14 a week — transporting bauxite from the mine, with two alumina refineries in Gladstone a key destination for the ships.
But Rio Tinto Alcan’s boss of bauxite and alumina, Pat Fiore, said there would be “very little” change to shipping traffic through the reef from Weipa to Gladstone.
“The vast majority of any extra shipping from the South of Embley project will be travelling north to export markets in Asia — not through the Great Barrier Reef,” he said.
The decision sent shockwaves through the mining industry, with the Minerals Council of Australia saying it was “deeply concerned that a multi-billion project can be put at risk with an unsubstantiated one-page complaint from a green group.”
“There are clear parallels with the anti-development document revealed last week in which it was made clear that green groups would use vexatious action to halt developments,” spokesman Ben Mitchell said.
Others in the industry said they feared Labor was concerned about preference deals with the Greens in the Queensland election.
Burke has defended the move, insisting it was based on the “World Heritage values of the reef and the potential cumulative impacts of shipping movements. Any claim to the contrary is wrong,” he said.
It is standard practice to make such decisions on departmental advice — which means the decision would not be based only on the original complaint.
A one-page submission published on the environment department’s website calling for the decision to be revoked warns about the impacts on newly discovered crab and shrimp species — identified as part of the environment impact statement (EIS) — as well as for the critically endangered bare-rumped sheathtail bat.
Wilderness Society spokesman Glenn Walker has released a separate two-page submission that contained more formatting but had some further information.
“Well, two pages, but that’s all we needed because the hole in their EIS was so big,” he said.
Burke said his decision was based on “significant new information” in Rio Tinto Weipa’s draft EIS, including information on shipping in the Great Barrier Marine Park that was not provided in the initial referral.
He said the decision meant the new information about shipping could be fully taken into account to ensure the reef was protected.
The Wilderness Society accused the company of arguing there would be no increase in its shipping through the reef but not providing evidence to support this.