Olympic Dam expansion: above the law?

Hedley Bachmann, in his August 2002 report to the state government on reporting procedures for the SA uranium industry, recommended:

In order to allow the release of information about incidents, which may cause or threaten to cause, serious or material environmental harm or risks to the public or employees, the government should revise and appropriately amend the secrecy/confidentiality clauses in the legislation.

While the veto power held by BHP Billiton remains intact, citizen confidence and faith in the SA government cannot. South Australian citizens have a right to know exactly what actions, decisions or activities our representatives and corporations are undertaking, particularly in such a high-risk operation as the Roxby Downs mine.

The mine consumes more resources than any other enterprise in the state and has the potential to seriously damage the health of workers and our natural heritage. Many natural wonders, which are of deep significance to the land’s traditional owners, come under the indenture area. Responsible, accountable governments and corporations should have no need for secrecy, and in a project the scale of Roxby Downs, there is too much at stake to maintain it.

Environmental Protection

The Olympic Dam mine is licensed to take 42 million litres of water a day from the Great Artesian Basin. The GAB is a vast and ancient body of water that lies deep under the surface of central Australia. It begins in far north Queensland and is a source of water for many pastoral properties and habitats, including the fragile and unique mound springs in SA’s arid north. BHP Billiton currently extracts 37 million litres a day from this source - a number set to increase to 42 million litres following the expansion. Farmers, environmentalists and traditional owners have reported dramatic reductions in water pressure, threatening and sometimes extinguishing rare ecosystems.

Radioactive waste tailings dam at Olympic Dam is 80 million tonnes and growing at rate of 10 million tonnes per annum. The tailings dam has been plagued by spills - most significantly in 1994, when the mine operators admitted some 5 million cubic litres had leaked from the dams over two years. Environmental audits provided to the Rann government continue to emphasise that the mine tailings are inadequately managed and require the implementation of urgent remedial measures. BHP Billiton has no long-term plans for the management of these tailings, which because of their radioactivity may remain dangerous for thousands of years. When all valuable resources have been extracted, BHP Billiton plans to simply “cap” the tailings dump with soil. Olympic Dam consumes more electricity than any other body in the state, 10 per cent of the state’s production, making it SA’s single biggest producer of greenhouse gas. The expansion will increase this number to 25 per cent and when combined with carbon emitted from digging the open pit, this will make it impossible for South Australia to meet their Kyoto targets.

The Indenture Act provides an override to the Environmental Protection Act and the powers and functions contained within. The EPA was to provide for the protection of the environment and the establishment of an Environmental Protection Authority to monitor and enforce compliance with the act. The key objective of the legislation is the avoidance of “environmental harm”, defined to mean any harm or potential harm to the environment, of whatever degree or duration. Potential harm includes risk of harm and future harm. This legislation embodies SA’s most important and strongest environmental safeguards but its provisions are absent from BHP Billiton’s Olympic Dam operation. In fact, under the indenture, Primary Industries and Resources South Australia is responsible for overseeing the project’s environmental standards. As a government body dedicated to promoting mining, PIRSA has a clear conflict of interest in this role.

Conclusion

The Indenture Act has no place in a society which values, equality and which takes seriously environmental protection. The Act should play no role in the proposed expansion of Olympic Dam and should be substantially amended in 2010 when it comes before the South Australian Government for review.