Key Points
- NSW will consider eight new coal mines and expansions this year that could release millions of tonnes of emissions.
- The approval has drawn condemnation from the Greens and activists who have accused NSW of regressing.
- The state would remain on track to halve its greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, compared to 2050 levels.
NSW will consider allowing eight new coal mines and expansions this year with the potential to produce millions of tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions once the coal is burnt, according to advocacy group Lock The Gate.
Among the largest expansions under consideration is the jointly-owned Glencore and Yancoal open cut mine in the NSW Upper Hunter Valley, 24km northwest of Singleton.
If granted permission to continue mining operations until 2050, the project could be responsible for 1.2 billion tonnes of CO2 emissions, doubling current direct output.
Lock the Gate Alliance NSW coordinator Nic Clyde said the government's strategy for approving new coal mining projects had fatally undermined its emissions targets.
"NSW is now staring down the barrel of the biggest climate bomb from coal mine expansions since the Paris Agreement - putting our future at risk," Mr Clyde said.
"When every other sector in the NSW economy is doing their bit to start reducing emissions to address climate change, the coal and gas sector is running in the opposite direction."
All new mining proposals and expansions were assessed against the government's target to reduce emissions by 70 per cent by 2035, as well as the impact on the surrounding environment and community, a spokeswoman for the Department of Planning and Environment said.
"This comprehensive assessment considers government policy, community feedback and advice from government agencies, as well as independent experts as required," the spokesperson said.
According to a spokesperson for the state's Planning Minister Anthony Roberts, NSW was on track to halve emissions by 2030 compared to 2005 levels.
A Labor spokesman said the party supported the NSW Independent Planning Commission deciding on significant development applications in cases including when there is considerable community opposition.
"There is an independent process to assess all resources proposals, which we support," the spokesman said.
Greens MP Sue Higginson said it was "beyond comprehension" for NSW to approve coal mine expansions when all major parties have a net-zero emission target.
"Labor and the Liberals do not consider the emissions of coal that has been exported for burning overseas, rather they only consider the direct emissions of coal that is mined and burned domestically," she said.
"It is a dangerous perspective when we consider that carbon dioxide emitted by Indian power plants that are burning Australian coal are still contributing to the climate crisis."
Criticism also continues to mount in Queensland following the federal government's approval of 116 new coal seam gas wells to be built by Santos in the state's Surat Basin just last week.
Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek quietly signed off on the approval, which is valid until 2077.
Greens leader Adam Bandt attacked the project approval, accusing Labor of "making the climate crisis worse".
Santos welcomed the decision from the government, saying the project has been subject to an environmental assessment.
"All new gas supply projects, whether for domestic or LNG markets, help to ease the pressure on the east coast gas market," it said in a statement.
"The application for the wells was made two years ago and has undergone a robust environmental assessment process, including by the Independent Expert Scientific Committee."
And days before that, Arrow Energy was on Friday granted environmental approval to drill 55 coal seam gas wells at Hopeland in Brisbane's west.
The project to expand the Shell and PetroChina joint venture's existing six-well facility is near the site of Linc Energy's failed underground coal gasification project, which is contaminated with permanent pollution of groundwater and farming land.
The Department of Environment and Science says it has placed "strict conditions" on the environmental authority obligating Arrow to monitor any potential movement of contaminants from the Linc site.
