If you register as a "user" of this site, you can leave comments on its content. You cannot create content unless you are a member of the HCEC.
How this site worksUser loginThe HCECNavigationNews from the HCECReceive news, including upcoming events, things you can do and progress made, direct to your email inbox: create an account here, then subscribe here. Who's onlineThere are currently 0 users and 1 guest online.
|
Exposed: NSW coal will run out in 35 years3rd April, 2007 The Hunter Community Environment Centre has revealed today that coal reserves in NSW could run out in less than four decades, adding to urgent calls to cease coal expansion plans in the Hunter Valley. Based on current industry growth and production rates, HCEC claims that the 10,600 million tonnes of coal under NSW will be exhausted in just 35 years. HCEC spokesperson Georgina Woods said, “NSW is currently producing 156 million tonnes of coal per year, most of which is coming out of the Hunter Valley, and 70% of which is being sold for export.” Production increased by just over 6% in the 2004/2005 financial year and plans are underway to continue massively expanding exports. If coal production continues to expand, we will exhaust our known reserves in under four decades.” This revelation is based on widely available industry data and we are stunned that the Government has ignored it. Surely we need to reflect on whether NSW should allow international coal corporations to dig up and sell this diminishing resource simply for export profit.” Burning coal for electricity is fuelling global climate change, and export coal is NSW biggest single contribution to that problem. Why are the NSW and Federal Governments not acting in the public interest? Burning this coal is going to accelerate global climate change, and it’s going to run out soon anyway. Why aren’t we radically changing the economic and social foundations of the Hunter region now, before it’s too late?” Background information
|
SearchUpcoming events
Popular contentRandom Quote"Think of the climate as a small boat on a rather choppy ocean. Under normal circumstances the boat will rock to and fro, and there is a finite risk that the boat could be overturned by a rogue wave. But now one of the passengers has decided to stand up and is deliberately rocking the boat ever more violently. Someone suggests that this is likely to increase the chances of the boat capsizing. Another passenger then proposes that with his knowledge of chaotic dynamics he can counterbalance the first passenger and indeed, counter the natural rocking caused by the waves. But to do so he needs a huge array of sensors and enormous computational reasources to be ready to react efficiently but still wouldn't be able to guarantee absolute stability, and indeed, since the system is untested it might make things worse. So is the answer to a known and increasing human influence on climate an ever more elaborate system to control the climate? Or should the person rocking the boat just sit down?" |