Glendell Mine Modification 5 - Life Extension

Summary
1. No independent assessment of this Project: Despite a clear promise from NSW Labor that “[n]ew coal mine projects must be subject to an independent approval process”, there will be no independent assessment, public meeting or public hearing for this Project. And no merit appeal rights exist to challenge a poor decision on this Project - on its merits - in the NSW Land and Environment Court.
2. Aboriginal cultural heritage: Glencore claim that there are no aboriginal cultural heritage issues with their Project and that there are no RAPS (Registered Aboriginal Parties) who object. A member of the Plains Clans of the Wonnarua People maintains that they are a RAP, were not consulted and intend to object to this expansion.
3. Ravensworth Homestead and surrounds: Glencore’s last proposal to expand Glendell was refused consent due to the impact the expansion would have had on cultural heritage values. As at 7 March 2024, NSW Minister for Heritage, Penny Sharpe would not say when a decision about listing this property on the State Heritage Register will be made, despite clear recommendation in Nov 2023 from the NSW Heritage Council to do so. The impact of Mod 5 on the property & its heritage values is not mentioned in the Modification report and has not been considered or assessed.
4. Greenhouse gas emissions:
a. The impact of additional GHG emissions from this Project have not been assessed, including against the Climate Change (Net Zero Future) Act 2023 (CCNZF Act). This Project needs to be assessed against new ‘guidelines for large emitting projects’ (which the NSW EPA promised for Jan 2024, but has not yet occurred)
b. Glencore claim to be reducing their GHG emissions by 15% by 2026 globally, but do not explain how an increase of ~75,000 t CO2-e in Scope 1 and 2 emissions over 2 years to mid 2026 could align with a 15% reduction.
c. No evidence in latest Glendell mine Annual Review that the mine is meeting current minimum requirements to implement all ‘reasonable and feasible’ abatement measures
d. No evidence of any proposals to abate Scope 1 and 2 emissions for Mod 5

Key issues with this proposal

Prior to the election, NSW Labor promised that “[n]ew coal mine projects must be subject to an independent approval process”.
1 Since the election, this commitment has been reiterated:
● Courtney Houssos (Budget Estimates, 2 Nov 2023): “We were really clear before the election that we support the independent planning assessment process of resources projects, and that is the important overarching principle.” And “From a whole-of-government approach, we would say that we support an independent assessment of planning of all resources projects. In relation to any expansion of existing coalmines or new coalmines, they would have to go through that independent process …”
● Courtney Houssos (24 May 2023): "On the issue of coal projects … I speak on behalf of the Government and as Minister for Natural Resources when I state that we support an independent assessment of resources projects. We do not believe the assessment of those projects should be in the hands of politicians. We took that position to the election and we continue to hold that position in government. We support an independent assessment process that involves environmental assessment and also allows communities to have their say."

Despite promises that new coal projects would be assessed independently, this one won’t be.

As this Project is being assessed as a ‘modification’, I believe that Paul Scully, Minister for Planning and Public Spaces will be the consent authority for the application. The decision may be determined by NSW DPE staff, however (eg the Deputy Secretary, Development Assessment and Infrastructure), depending on the number of objections received.

No public hearing for this Project
Under s2.9 of the EP&A Act, the Minister may request that the NSW Independent Planning Commission hold a Public Hearing into any planning or development related matter – this includes modifications. NSW DPE’s exhibition notice states that: “At the time of publishing this notice, the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces has not directed that a public hearing should be held.”

Merits appeal rights extinguished
NSW DPE’s exhibition notice states that: “if the application is approved, there is no right of a merit appeal to the NSW Land and Environment Court by an objector.”

Aboriginal Cultural Heritage
The Mod 5 report claims:
“The Modification does not involve any additional surface disturbance and therefore will not result in further impacts to Aboriginal items. Nevertheless, the RAPs were notified of the Modification as a matter of courtesy. No community stakeholders have raised concerns or matters for further consideration.” But a member of the Plains Clans of the Wonnarua People says they are a RAP, and were not consulted and intend to object to this expansion.

Heritage
On 21 November 2023, the Heritage Council of NSW - in accordance with section 33(1)(f) and section 32(2) of the Heritage Act - recommended that Minister Sharpe list the Ravensworth Homestead Complex and Setting on the State Heritage Register. I understand that Minister Sharpe’s decision on whether to list the property under S.34 (1) of the Act should be imminent, but may not be. In Budget Estimates on 7 March 2024, the Minister described this as a “complex issue” that she needs more time to work through. Glencore’s previous ‘Glendell Continued Operations’ project application was refused by the NSW IPC in October 2022 when the IPC found that it would have: “significant and irreversible impacts on the historic heritage of the Ravensworth Homestead complex comprising colonial buildings and historic gardens in an agricultural setting, located within the proposed mine site.”
Ravensworth Estate and its heritage values are mentioned at all in the Modification Report for this mine expansion. The impacts of this Project on heritage have not been assessed, including what impact Mod 5 may have on the management and preservation of a newly-listed State Heritage Register property, should that occur.

Mine closure and rehabilitation would be deferred
Given the cultural heritage values of the site and the likely listing of the Ravensworth Homestead complex on the State Heritage Register, we do not believe that a 2-yr delay of mine closure and rehabilitation is in the public interest.

Greenhouse Gas emissions
The impact of additional GHG emissions from this Project have not been assessed
The Modification Report claims that “the Modification will not increase the overall GHG emissions from Glendell”. This is patently false. Mod 5 is projected to generate Scope 1 emissions of 74,901 t CO2-e, Scope 2 emissions of 399 t CO2-e and Scope 3 emissions of 2,635,136 t CO2-e. Total GHG emissions attributable to this Project would be 2,710,435 t CO2-e.

This Project must be assessed against new ‘guidelines for large emitting projects’ which the NSW EPA promised would be released late Jan 2024

Glencore made a claim that “there are no specific criteria for which to assess the significance of projected greenhouse gas emissions from individual projects”. Have the most obvious criteria been considered? e.g., is approval of this Project consistent with the objects and purpose of the NZF Act? Does the proponent have a credible plan to abate Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions?

Climate Change (Net Zero Future) Act 2023 (CCNZF Act)
We note the second purpose of the CCNZF Act which states that, “The Parliament of NSW...recognises— action is urgently required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to address the adverse impacts of climate change.” The Modification Report fails totally to assess this Project against the NZF Act. This Project would add more than 75,000 t CO2-e to NSW’s emissions inventory between June 2024 and June 2026.

Glencore claim to be reducing their GHG emissions by 15% by 2026
The Modification Report does not explain how an increase of ~75,000 t CO2-e over a two year period to mid 2026 aligns with Glencore’s own emissions reduction target of a 15% reduction by 2026.

No evidence in latest Annual Review that Glendell is meeting current minimum requirement to implement all ‘reasonable and feasible’ abatement measures
A review of the last two Annual Reviews for the Mt Owen / Glendell complex has revealed:
● that basic reporting of Scope 1 emissions broken down by mine and by the two main categories of fugitive and fuel/diesel emissions ceased in FY22
● no reporting on nor mention of any effort on site to implement ‘reasonable and feasible’ abatement measures
● no evidence of any continuous improvement of abatement on site
● Scope 2 electricity emissions increased by about 20% at the Mt Owen Complex from
36,009 t CO2-e in 2021 to 43,199 t CO2-e in 2022. These emissions could be
abated by a commitment to generate renewable energy on or offsite and/or purchase renewable energy from the grid.
● Total Scope 1 and 2 emissions increased by about 10% at the Mt Owen Complex from 278,984 t CO2-e in 2021 to 307,935 t CO2-e in 2022.

No evidence of any proposals to abate Scope 1 and 2 emissions for Mod 5
No abatement of Scope 1 and 2 emissions attributable to Modification 5 is proposed by Glencore in the Modification Report. This is unacceptable.

Ravensworth Underground fugitive emissions
A delay of mine closure at Glendell, may exacerbate and prolong the release of significant fugitive emissions at Ravensworth Underground. Ravensworth Underground Mine was placed on care and maintenance in September 2014. Despite zero coal being produced with zero royalties paid to the NSW Government, this mine continues to emit significant Scope 1 emissions. Just over the last 6 years - the period for which Safeguard Facility data is readily available - Ravensworth Underground has released ~1 Mt CO2-e in Scope 1 emissions, with no sign of any plan to close this mine and end these emissions. This needs fixing as a priority

My comments are included in the attached submission document.

Please see my submission attached.

Lock the Gate Alliance objects both to this development proposal and to the assessment and determination process proposed.

To the Director, Resource Assessments, Development Assessment and Infrastructure, NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure,

Please find letter attached with full submission.
Thank you for considering this submission.

Kind regards,
Adam Gottschalk
The Australia Institute

Pls see attachment.

This Glendell Modification 5, requesting an extension of time is not in the spirit of Glencore's stated intention to reduce it's Greenhouse gas emissions. It is hard to believe they are not just buying time to develop another expansion proposal, involving the removal and or destruction of Ravensworth Homestead and complex and Aboriginal massacre site.

It is now urgent humanity works toward full cooperation around solving the number one existential threat to a stable climate and the dire consequences of failing to do so.

This Glendell Modification 5, requesting an extension of time is not in the spirit of Glencore's stated intention to reduce it's Greenhouse gas emissions. It is hard to believe they are not just buying time to develop another expansion proposal, involving the removal and or destruction of Ravensworth Homestead and complex and Aboriginal massacre site.

It is now urgent humanity works toward full cooperation around solving the number one existential threat to a stable climate and the dire consequences of failing to do so.

Glencore is a huge multinational company. They have the resources and experience to mine a resource in accordance with the conditions set down bye the regulator. The fact that they have not mined the agreed to amount of coal before the end of the licence period should not be an excuse to continue operations beyond the end of the set and agreed to period. Glencore, like any other company, needs to go through the normal process of applying for an extension. It should not expect a rubber stamp to continue mining beyond the already allocated time.
Recent observations by the world's scientists of ocean temperatures and loss of sea ice in Antarctica have left experiences climate scientists "gobsmacked". Time to phase this industry out, by closing mines when their existing approvals expire.

Labor needs to keep its promises around the approvals process and PROVE that Labor supports the fair and transparent democratic process. These are at least two major reasons Labor votes are getting syphoned off by The Greens. These are the key issues with this flawed and unwanted proposal:

No independent assessment, no EIS, no public hearing and no merits appeal rights - all very UNDEMOCRATIC.
Pre-election and in government, NSW Labor promised independent assessment of new coal projects.
Prior to the election, NSW Labor promised that “[n]ew coal mine projects must be subject to an independent approval process”( Written policy platform response to Lock the Gate, ‘Survey Response - Lock The Gate - March 2023’ ). Since the election, this commitment has been reiterated:
● Courtney Houssos (Budget Estimates, 2 Nov 2023):
○ “We were really clear before the election that we support the independent planning assessment process of resources projects, and that is the important overarching principle.”
○ “From a whole-of-government approach, we would say that we support an independent assessment of planning of all resources projects. In relation to any expansion of existing coalmines or new coalmines, they would have to go through that independent process ...”
● Courtney Houssos (24 May 2023): "On the issue of coal projects ... I speak on behalf of the Government and as Minister for Natural Resources when I state that we support an independent assessment of resources projects. We do not believe the assessment of those projects should be in the hands of politicians. We took that position to the election and we continue to hold that position in government. We support an independent assessment process that involves environmental assessment and also allows communities to have their say."
Despite clear promises that new coal projects would be assessed independently, this one won’t be.
This Project is being assessed as a ‘modification’: Labor letting semantics get in the way of the actual democratic process and keeping its word at the cost of our environmental security is unconscionable - and against the wishes of the people they claim to represent.
.
No public hearing for this Project
Under s2.9 of the EP&A Act, the Minister may request that the NSW Independent Planning Commission hold a Public Hearing into any planning or development related matter – this includes modifications. NSW DPE’s exhibition notice states that: “At the time of publishing this notice, the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces has not directed that a public hearing should be held.”
Merits appeal rights extinguished
NSW DPE’s exhibition notice states that: “if the application is approved, there is no right of a merit appeal to the NSW Land and Environment Court by an objector.” This is also anti-democratic, and against community participation, while the corporation gets every consideration from the government. To wit, I note the 2 week notification period with no public participation or legal pathways to speak up for our planet. The approved time is up. The final date needs to remain the final date. The date was set for a reason. When the time is up there is a chance to review the outlook for the mining company and the government, before embarking on future projects. Glencore is also buying time, time our planet cannot give.

Aboriginal Cultural Heritage
The Mod 5 report claims:
The Modification does not involve any additional surface disturbance and therefore will not result in further impacts to Aboriginal items. Nevertheless, the RAPs were notified of the Modification as a matter of courtesy. No community stakeholders have raised concerns or matters for further consideration. However, a member of the Plains Clans of the Wonnarua People has advised Lock the Gate that they are a RAP, that they were not consulted and that they intend to object to this expansion.

Heritage
On 21 November 2023, the Heritage Council of NSW - in accordance with section 33(1)(f) and section 32(2) of the Heritage Act - recommended that Minister Sharpe list the Ravensworth Homestead Complex and Setting on the State Heritage Register. Lock the Gate understands that Minister Sharpe’s decision on whether to list the property under S.34 (1) of the Act should be imminent, but that it may not be. In Budget Estimates on 7 March 2024, the Minister described this as a “complex issue” that she needs more time to work through.
Glencore’s previous ‘Glendell Continued Operations’ project application was refused by the NSW IPC in October 2022 when the IPC found that it would have:
“significant and irreversible impacts on the historic heritage of the Ravensworth Homestead complex comprised of colonial buildings and historic gardens in an agricultural setting, located within the proposed mine site.”
Neither the Ravensworth Estate nor its heritage values are mentioned at all in the Modification Report for this mine expansion. The impacts of this Project on heritage have not been assessed, including what impact Mod 5 may have on the management and preservation of a newly-listed State Heritage Register property, should that occur. Mine closure and rehabilitation would be deferred. Given the cultural heritage values of the site and the likely listing of the Ravensworth Homestead complex on the State Heritage Register, I don't believe that a 2-yr delay of mine closure and rehabilitation is in the public interest.

Greenhouse Gas emissions
The impact of additional GHG emissions from this Project have not been assessed
The Modification Report makes the spectacular and absurd claim that “the Modification will not increase the overall GHG emissions from Glendell”. This is patently false. Mod 5 is projected to generate Scope 1 emissions of 74,901 t CO2-e, Scope 2 emissions of 399 t CO2-e and Scope 3 emissions of 2,635,136 t CO2-e. Total GHG emissions attributable to this Project would be 2,710,435 t CO2-e.
Glencore made a claim that “there are no specific criteria for which to assess the significance of projected greenhouse gas emissions from individual projects”. This Project must be assessed against new ‘guidelines for large emitting projects’ which the NSW EPA promised would be released late Jan 2024.

Climate Change (Net Zero Future) Act 2023 (CCNZF Act)
I note the second purpose of the CCNZF Act which states that, “The Parliament of New South Wales...recognises— action is urgently required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to address the adverse impacts of climate change.” The Modification Report has 100% failed to assess this Project against the NZF Act. I note that this Project would add more than 75,000 t CO2-e to NSW’s emissions inventory between June 2024 and June 2026.
Glencore claim to be reducing their GHG emissions by 15% by 2026
Simply put, there is no attempt at all in the Modification Report to explain how an increase of ~75,000 t CO2-e over a two year period to mid 2026 could be aligned with Glencore’s own emissions reduction target of a 15% reduction by 2026.
No evidence in latest Annual Review that Glendell is meeting current minimum requirement to implement all ‘reasonable and feasible’ abatement measures.

A review of the last two Annual Reviews for the Mt Owen / Glendell complex has revealed:
● that basic reporting of Scope 1 emissions broken down by mine and by the two main categories of fugitive and fuel or diesel emissions ceased in FY22
● no reporting on nor mention of any effort on site to implement ‘reasonable and feasible’ abatement measures
● no evidence of any continuous improvement of abatement on site
● Scope 2 electricity emissions increased by about 20% at the Mt Owen Complex from
36,009 t CO2-e in 2021 to 43,199 t CO2-e in 2022. These emissions are easy to abate. They simply require a commitment to generate renewable energy on or offsite and/or purchase renewable energy from the grid.
● Total Scope 1 and 2 emissions increased by about 10% at the Mt Owen Complex from 278,984 t CO2-e in 2021 to 307,935 t CO2-e in 2022.

Case study: GHG reporting has gone backwards at Mt Owen / Glendell
In 2021, whilst very little information was provided regarding abatement of Scope 1 and 2 emissions, at least they were reported in the mine’s Annual Review.
In the 2022 Annual Review, Glencore ceased reporting a breakdown of diesel, fugitive and electricity emissions. They also ceased providing a breakdown of emissions by mine (between Glendell and Mt Owen).
No evidence of any proposals to abate Scope 1 and 2 emissions for Mod 5
No abatement of Scope 1 and 2 emissions attributable to Modification 5 has been proposed by Glencore in the Modification Report. This is unacceptable.

Ravensworth Underground fugitive emissions
A delay of mine closure at Glendell, may exacerbate and prolong the release of significant fugitive emissions at Ravensworth Underground. Ravensworth Underground Mine was placed on care and maintenance in September 2014. Despite zero coal being produced with zero royalties paid to the NSW Government, this mine continues to emit very significant Scope 1 emissions. Just over the last 6 years - the period for which Safeguard Facility data is readily available - Ravensworth Underground has released ~1 Mt CO2-e in Scope 1 emissions, with no sign of any plan to close this mine and end these emissions.
Approval of this modification is likely to encourage mine management to continue focussing on the pursuit of new and additional reserves of coal to mine, rather than devoting time and resources to solving the significant, legacy GHG issues that currently exist on site.

I object to this project going ahead.

Submission prepared on behalf of Mr Scott Franks attached.

attached objection to the modification

Please confirm receipt of submission

I already wrote a submission and it disappeared. Look at the data. Look at the ocean temperatures. No coal, if you value the lives of your children and grandchildren.

1. No independent assessment of this Project:

Despite a clear promise from NSW Labor that “new coal mine projects must be subject to an independent approval process”, there will be no independent assessment, no public meeting and no public hearing for this Project. In addition, no merit appeal rights exist to challenge a poor decision on this Project - on its merits - in the NSW Land and Environment Court.

2. Aboriginal cultural heritage:

Glencore claim that there are no aboriginal cultural heritage issues with their Project and that there are no RAPS (Registered Aboriginal Parties) who object. A member of the Plains Clans of the Wonnarua People has advised Lock the Gate that they are a RAP, that they were not consulted and that they intend to object to this expansion.

3. Ravensworth Homestead and surrounds:

Glencore’s last proposal to expand Glendell was refused consent due to the impact the expansion would have had on cultural heritage values. As at 7 March 2024, NSW Minister for Heritage, Penny Sharpe would not be drawn on when a decision about listing this property (or not) on the State Heritage Register will be made, despite a clear recommendation in Nov 2023 from the NSW Heritage Council to do so. The impact of Mod 5 on the property and its heritage values is not mentioned in the Modification report and has not been considered or assessed.

4. Greenhouse gas emissions:

a. The impact of additional GHG emissions from this Project have not been assessed, including against the Climate Change (Net Zero Future) Act 2023 (CCNZF Act). This Project must also be assessed against new ‘guidelines for large emitting projects’ (which the NSW EPA promised would be released late Jan 2024, but which has not yet occurred).

b. Glencore claim to be reducing their GHG emissions by 15% by 2026 globally, but make no attempt to explain how an increase of ~75,000 t CO2-e in Scope 1 and 2 emissions over a two year period to mid 2026 could be aligned with a 15% reduction.

c. No evidence in latest Glendell mine Annual Review that the mine is meeting current minimum requirements to implement all ‘reasonable and feasible’ abatement measures

d. No evidence of any proposals to abate Scope 1 and 2 emissions for Mod 5

I object to Glendell Modification 5 proposal. It is literally and metaphorically stretching it for Glendell to be even proposing the modification, particularly so near to closing time. The time for just one more drink is long past. There appears to be an assumption that this extension in time proposal could be approved because the removal of the solid material has already been approved. This is limited thinking. The activity that in fact is seeking to be approved with Mod5 is the production of ~75,000 t CO2-e in Scope 1 and 2 emissions into the atmosphere over the next two years. The impact of this activity on the atmosphere of 2024 -2026 obviously needs to be independently assessed. This should include under the Climate Change (Net Zero Future) Act 2023.


Time is the critical factor now. Every fraction of a degree of global warming that can be prevented from occurring is significant. Glendell mine coal extraction was for a specific period. The Financial Times May 24 2023 reported that Glencore are committed to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions globally by 15% by 2026. Yet this commitment has not been acknowledged or recognised in this Mod5 proposal. There is no plan for abatement of the scope 1 and 2 emissions.

It is too late. The final date for the extraction of coal should stand. Glencore admits this on one hand but tries to blithely wave it away with the other. In any case there is no adequate assessment, the Glendell Modification 5 proposal is not appropriate. NSW government has a duty of care to act in the public interest. The coal should be left in the ground.

I object to any extension of time for the Glendell Coal Mine.
I hope to successfully attach one page outlining reasons.

I object to the proposed Glendell MOD5 Modification.
I oppose this project for three main reasons.
(1) Now - given the already evident disruption of our climate system - is not the time to extend the life or area of any fossil fuel mine. And, further, how would approving this mine be consistent with the new NSW Climate Change (Net Zero Futures) Act?
(2) I live in Wollongong, and have seen the misuse of "modifications" by local coal companies. How will the determination of this project, by the minister only, with the wider community having no merit appeals rights, be consistent with democracy and with "participation" of the community as outlined in the NSW Environment Planning and Assessment Act's objects?
(3) Such mining, if it proceeds will be merely a continuation of colonisation. The fact that there is no additional surface disturbance is used to claim a lack of further Aboriginal cultural impacts, seems to me rather insulting and offensive to say the least. It seems there are so many forms of disrespect and disinheritance possible towards our First Nations peoples, and this would be just one more.

So I object for at least these three reasons. If I had more time to investigate this project further, I would investigate rehabilitation/restoration aspects as well as modification-associated methane emissions. I know methane emissions from coal mines are under-reported in Australia (and very likely under-estimated at the application stages). Further I am sure there will be negative socio-environmental impacts with the diversions of Bettys Creek and Swamp Creek. Why cannot we start just caring for country instead?

As a descendant of convicts Thomas Hassall and Samuel Swain both assigned to Dr James and Mrs Mary Isabell Bowman at Ravensworth property i object to the extension proposed for the Glencore Glendell mine. I object for the following reasons,
The unknown location of the grave of the late Dr James Bowman, colonial surgeon who died at his Ravensworth property on 17 August,1846. I believe Dr Bowman was buried soon after his death on his property.
Also the unknown location of the child Elizabeth Swain, who disappears from the historical record after the arrival of her mother Patience Swain who was bought to Australia to be reunited with her husband whilst he remained a convict assigned to the Bowman property. I believe it is highly likelythis child died and was buried whilst her mother Patience Swain , a free person, resided at the Ravensworth farm.
I would like this property to revert to the ownership of the Australian people in memory of those people who settled in the Ravensworth area.
I also object to this extension due to the already highly damaged state of the Hunter Valley due to open cut coal mining, and the extreme risk to the planet of overheating and environmental damage due to the burning of fossil fuel.

This expansion of the mine, is not in the public interest as the mine would contribute to anthropogenic climate change and harm Aboriginal cultural heritage values. All in all, this expansion constitute a significant loss to future generations.