1 June Moving towards decarbonisation June 1, 2021 By AMPLA Admin Resources and Energy Article, Decarbonisation 0 Australia is on a path towards achieving a net zero economy by 2050. The Government’s focus is on supporting traditional industries whilst helping to reduce costs and commercialise low emissions technology. Moving towards decarbonisation Australia is on a path towards achieving a net zero economy by 2050. The Government’s focus is on supporting traditional industries whilst helping to reduce costs and commercialise low emissions technology. The Government’s support is focused on several key areas, hydrogen being key with an additional $275m committed in the 2021-2022 Federal Budget towards developing four new clean hydrogen hubs and implementing the clean hydrogen certification scheme. This will include up to 10 feasibility studies to determine the best location for the hubs, with potential locations including Darwin, Gladstone and the Eyre Peninsula. A further $263 million has been committed to carbon capture storage (CCS) and carbon capture utilisation and storage (CCUS) projects. It’s anticipated that this funding will be applied over 10 years. In addition the government has also committed $565m to support low-emissions international technology partnerships. This will be spent on co-funded research and demonstration projects with the Government actively pursuing collaborations with the UK, US, Japan, Singapore, Germany and South Korea. While these initiatives put Australia on the path towards decarbonisation, activities at each level of Government are also working towards the same goal. For example, in a recent development consent application by the SIMEC Group (SIMEC) for the Tahmoor South Coal Project, the Independent Planning Commission in NSW (IPC) placed significance on environmental measures. It did this by imposing stringent conditions on the project that included minimising Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions. These conditions included requiring SIMEC to commission and prepare a study within two years to determine if there were any reasonable and feasible measures to further reduce Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions. In addition they have to monitor and report on their actual emissions annual and ensure they offset any excess emissions compared to their forecast. Interestingly, the IPC didn’t impose any conditions regarding Scope 3 emissions even though they accounted for 70% of the project's greenhouse gas emissions. This is because there was limited scope to directly reduce those emissions and the IPC found the emissions to be reasonable and acceptable. This example highlights that organisations can expect additional scrutiny of their projects, but there is an appetite to balance the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions with the importance of the project. While the industry plays a significant role in enabling other sectors to embrace clean energy, it also needs to consider its own energy use. According to the Mining Energy Consumption 2021 report, the mining industry accounts for circa 3.5% of global energy use. The industry must also look at its own energy consumption and look at ways to become more sustainable and efficient. This may come in the form of energy efficiency in processes such as grinding or the use of data and artificial intelligence to identify opportunities to reduce energy consumption. Many companies are already looking at how they can reduce emissions. For example, Fortescue has announced that it will develop Australia’s first green steel plant while also extending its use of hydrogen and battery energy to decarbonise its fleet and plant. While BHP has introduced emission-free surface mining vehicles and is exploring carbon capture and storage. However, there is one issue that may impact businesses who are trying to meet their environmental obligations through clean energy is supply. KPMG has highlighted in its report Resourcing the Energy Transition: Making the World Go Round that supply chain and environmental, social and governance issues may limit access to the resources required to transition to clean energy. In particular, mined mineral and metals, such as lithium, cobalt, indium and graphite, that power green technology may be difficult to access despite their being sufficient supply globally. This is because they’re held by a small number of countries who may seek to take advantage of increased competition or ensure energy security. The report suggests that an increased focus on recycling, reusing and repurposing (known as the circular economy) may minimise supply issues. Initiatives such as these will go a long way towards ensuring net-zero emissions are achieved, not only within the industry but also globally. Related Articles Climate change action is being driven by business and industry While everyone’s focus in recent months has been on the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change was top of everyone’s mind when the year began with bushfires ravaging Australia. The pandemic has seen individuals and organisations assess their ideologies and perspectives on a range of topics, climate change being one of them. It now seems that climate change is back on everyone’s agenda and none more so than business and industry. Victorian and Western Australian State Budgets In recent weeks we’ve seen both the Victorian and Western Australian Governments deliver budgets for their State. Both have included significant investments in the energy and resources sector. In Victoria, the budget has signalled the importance of the mineral industry to regional development. Victorian mines directly contribute $510 million into the state economy in 2020-21. QUEENSLAND’S MINE REHABILITATION REQUIREMENTS FOR VOIDS: ENSHAM CASE STUDY The State of Queensland reformed its mine rehabilitation legislation, namely the Environmental Protection Act 1994 (Qld) (EP Act), in 2018 through the Mineral and Energy Resources (Financial Provisioning) Act 2018 (Qld) (MERFP Act). A case study of the Ensham open-cut coal mine[i] in central Queensland highlights three issues for the efficacy of this regulatory framework. The first issue concerns an available exclusion of rehabilitation requirements for existing mining voids (the area of excavation created by open cut mining) in flood plains. Under the EP Act, as amended by the MERFP Act, a holder of an environmental authority (EA) may, in its Progressive Rehabilitation and Closure Plan (PRCP) and PRCP Schedule, identify land as a Non-use Management Area (NUMA).[ii] This is land that would not be rehabilitated “to a stable condition” and not have a post-mining land use. This rehabilitation exception as a NUMA is not applicable to mining voids wholly or partly in flood plains – these must be rehabilitated to a “stable condition”,[iii] as defined in the EP Act. This is the “section 126D(3) rehabilitation obligation”.[iv] However, the transitional provisions of the mining rehabilitation reforms differentiate the rehabilitation obligations of pre-existing mines (those existing at the time of the reforms, such as the Ensham Mine) and new site-specific mines.[v] Pre-existing mines with a “land outcome document” that presents an outcome similar to a NUMA can establish criteria for rehabilitation or management of a void in a flood plain that supersede this section 126D(3) rehabilitation obligation.[vi] The MERFP Bill Explanatory Notes for the transitional provisions reveal that this exemption from section 126D(3) “does not retrospectively breach existing rights and provides certainty to industry on the transitional process”.[vii] However, this grandfathering is arguably disconnected from environmental risks of such residual voids, creating two classes of mines based on the timing of a mine’s existence (pre-existing versus new). This Ensham case study provides an example of a pre-existing mine’s use of a “land outcome document” to exempt rehabilitation of residual voids in a flood plain but without clarity around the non-use management status of the area of the residual voids. The second issue discussed in this case study is progressive rehabilitation. The design of a financial assurance system to increase progressive rehabilitation was “a clear objective of the EPA’s work in 2004”, yet the EP Act fell short by failing to clearly outline criteria for certification of final rehabilitation for industry, and a scheme of refunding financial assurances at the termination of mining activity.[viii] These issues remained unaddressed until the 2015 State election when the then Labor Opposition ran on the campaign “[to] investigate the expansion of upfront rehabilitation bonds for resource companies to fully fund long-term rehabilitation activities”.[ix] Thereafter, the Queensland Treasury Corporation published a number of discussion papers advising of the shortcomings of the current financial assurance framework and that, in 2017, there were “220,000 hectares of disturbance, with an estimated rehabilitation cost of $8.7 billion”.[x] Queensland’s 2018 mining regulation amendments concerning progressive rehabilitation were intended to ensure “rigorous” review of NUMA approvals in PRCPs, “through an objective public interest evaluation” for future or newly established mines.[xi] However, the reforms may not effectively address instances in which progressive rehabilitation has been lacking in large, open-cut, mature mines in operation at the time of these legislative changes. As of 2021, approximately 33% of the Ensham Mine’s 4,944.7 ha of scheduled rehabilitation areas had been progressively rehabilitated.[xii] According to Ensham’s PRCP, this level of progressive rehabilitation exceeds that of other open-cut mines in Queensland.[xiii] For established mines, such as Ensham, that are approaching closure and have large voids that have not been substantially progressively rehabilitated across their mine life, the most economical rehabilitation option may be to rehabilitate residual voids to accord with legislated requirements. Under Queensland’s legislation, “rehabilitation” does not necessarily mean these voids will be re-filled. This may be contrary to community understanding of what rehabilitation is. Thirdly, this case study highlights areas in the regulatory framework in which information transparency could be improved – particularly public access to information – which raises issues of accountability, quality of community engagement and, ultimately, social licence on the part of mining companies and government. Information transparency is also relevant to community engagement and expectations for rehabilitation, such as the meaning of “rehabilitation” of residual voids (i.e., refilling to establish a pre-mining state versus the legislated “stable condition” standard). This article is structured as follows. Part 2 presents the legal and operational context of the Ensham Mine. It also describes the operational history of flooding and its relevance to rehabilitation and management of post-mining residual risks, which leads to a discussion of the rehabilitation legal reforms. Part 3 discusses the reform of Queensland’s rehabilitation legislation framework as it concerns residual voids, including the transitional provisions of the EP Act. Part 3 also explores Ensham’s Residual Void Project (RVP) for the development of the rehabilitation criteria for residual voids and considers the community engagement process. Part 4 comments on the transitional regulatory design issues in Queensland’s framework, issues concerning progressive rehabilitation of pre-existing open-cut mines such as Ensham, as well as transparency of information and community consultation. Part 5 concludes and suggests future research. Submission - DISER Consultation Paper December 2020 ‘Enhancing Australia’s decommissioning framework for offshore oil and gas activities’ ARELJ Article- Managing water resources in times of fracking: Regulation and reform in Western Australia Energy industry and government response to COVID-19 In response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) crisis, government and industry have come together to ensure the community, economy and industry are supported. The Council of Australian Governments Energy Council (COAG Energy Council) has formed the Energy Coordination Mechanism (ECM) which is expected to have a complete plan by the end of April. The immediate focus of these efforts has been on four areas Showing 0 Comment Comments are closed.