Hermann Coal Mine Project Approved

Tuesday, November 25, 2008 03:58 AM

Prince George, B.C. - Western Canadian Coal Corp. has received an environmental assessment (EA) certificate for its Hermann Coal Mine Project west of Tumbler Ridge.

Environment Minister Barry Penner and Energy and Mines and Petroleum Resources Minister Richard Neufeld made the decision to grant the EA certificate after considering the review led by B.C.'s Environmental
Assessment Office.

The project, an open-pit mine with a capacity to produce 0.8 to 1.1 million tonnes per year of metallurgical coal over 10 years, will be located about 16 km (33 km by road) west of Tumbler Ridge. The coal will be hauled by truck to the nearby Wolverine Coal Mine for processing.

The EAO Assessment Report concludes the project should not have significant adverse effects, based on the mitigation measures and commitments included as conditions of the EA certificate. Before the
project can proceed, Western Canadian Coal will still need to obtain the necessary provincial licences, leases and other approvals.

The provincial EA certificate contains more than 100 commitments that must be implemented throughout various stages of the project. Key
commitments include the following:

* Ensure adequate diversion and sediment control to minimize stream sedimentation.
* Monitor water quality and implement contingency measures to ensure water quality remains within acceptable limits.
* Manage agreed upon water quality objectives.
* Monitor and manage the generation of selenium.
* Restore wildlife habitat at closure with a focus on caribou.
* Contribute to further caribou studies and stewardship of the Quintette caribou herd.
* Manage and minimize dust emissions.

The Treaty 8 First Nations were consulted on the assessment and the Province is satisfied the Crown's duties to consult First Nations have been discharged.

Capital costs are estimated at $55 million and the project is expected to generate approximately 100 jobs annually over the 10 year life-span of the mine. Once the project is in operation, it is estimated that over
the life of the mine the proponent will pay at least $52 million in provincial and local government taxes.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Tuesday, November 25, 2008 03:58 AM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: acrider54 on November 25 2008 5:50 AM

Give us a carbon tax then approve a coal mine so others can add to the pollution and so called global warming. A fine hypicritical government we have.

Posted by: Mercenary on November 25 2008 6:09 AM

Yea that is kinda bizzare acrider54 eh. But atleast it will create some more jobs. Too bad that it has to be at the expense of the environment.

Posted by: szd on November 25 2008 7:47 AM

I believe most of the coal in Tumbler Ridge is metallurgical and used for making steel not power.

Posted by: swingline on November 25 2008 8:27 AM

Yeah I think you're right, szd.

Posted by: seamutt on November 25 2008 9:09 AM

Huh what global warming. Its been global cooling since 2002 and global temps. are back to where they were in 78.

Posted by: rvuser on November 25 2008 10:03 AM

Thanks seamutt. Finally someone else who can see beyond the rhetoric of the environmentalist and news media. For the rest of you who have fallen for the global warming, GHG, and C02 scam being promoted by Al Gore and Suzuki, etal, check out www.icecap.us.

Posted by: gamblor on November 25 2008 11:28 AM

This is what environmentalism gets you - a slap in the face. Instead of burning that coal and making steel or electricity here, which would NEVER get approved, the coal gets shipped to China, they get the jobs and we all still choke on the fumes.

Posted by: downnotout on November 25 2008 11:30 AM

I believe that in 78 we had cold snaps that lasted for more than a week at minus 40 and if the above posts are correct than the pine beedle won't be as much of a problem as it is now.

Posted by: downnotout on November 25 2008 11:33 AM

as far as the enviromentlalists are concerned they should be the first ones whose power gets cut off who have their natural gas stopped and who are cut off at the gas pumps. Than you would hear the whooping and hollering from the other side of the mouth.

Posted by: swingline on November 25 2008 11:53 AM

Actually gamblor, the coal out of these mines (Western Canadian Coal) is shipped to many places throughout Europe and Asia, not just China.

Posted by: gamblor on November 25 2008 12:51 PM

So what? No matter where the coal goes the jobs still go with it. And the pollution still circles the globe.

Posted by: Born in BC on November 25 2008 1:03 PM

I think it is more economics than enviromentalism. BC does not burn coal to produce power and we have no steel industry (which makes sense since we have no manufacturing industry).

I dont know how anyone who has lived in PG for any lenght of time can dispute global warming? The weather is clearly warmer and more volatile. It used to get cold in fall and stay cold, now it warms and cools all winter long. And the -35 cold snaps that lasted for weeks are a thing of the past (with the possible exception of last year, when we had a couple cold spells).

Posted by: Lynn85 on November 25 2008 1:36 PM

Re: Seamutt

It really bugs me how people state their opinions as true fact without backing their claims with any credible evidence.
And as for rvuser's so called source, lets see some peer reviewed articles that back your claim. There is evidence that we may be in a trend but it depends on what scale you are looking at. Before making claims and citing "sources" such as silly websites why not act as an academic and look at all of the evidence not just that which supports your claim. Do this an quit letting propaganda (be it for or against global warming) run your life.

Rant over... I just had to get that off my chest

Posted by: seamutt on November 25 2008 3:15 PM

Born in BC, BC is just a small region of the world. Areas around the world are getting hit with some wicked winters the last few years.

Lynn85 checkout these websites and the links they post. Peer reviewed in all actuality really doesn't mean anything. Was it reviewed without bias. To put it in simple terms, if a ford was peer reviewed by GM interests what do you think the outcome would be. Scientists all over the world are making serious coin off of so called man called global warming so don't you think there might be just a little bias there.

The world has been warming since the lat ice age and has shown no change out of the average warming of .7 degrees per hundred years. I think it is you who needs to do some research or else be happy at being scammed out of your money.

Here are some sites to use for research

icecap.us /wattsupwiththat.com .climatescience.org.nz junkscience.com .friendsofscience.org co2science.org .climateaudit.org

These sites should keep on e busy for a while.

Posted by: Mercenary on November 25 2008 3:40 PM

There is certainly something bizzare happening with the weather. Not just in BC but world wide.

BTW there are alot of detrimetal effects from burning coal besides global warming.

Posted by: seamutt on November 25 2008 4:44 PM

The weather is not bizzare, it is the instant reporting of any weather anomaly anywhere in the world that media is now capable of. Take note on how the media operates-It it bleeds it leads.

Posted by: Lynn85 on November 25 2008 5:05 PM

Apparently there is a great deal of confusion surrounding the peer review process here. Peer review in academia is conducted by reviewers who are, for the most part, other university professors and research scientists. Not that vehicles are actually ever peer reviewed, but a Ford would never be peer reviewed by GM interests, or that 'journal' would be completely discredited.

So what you're expecting me to believe is that oil, gas, and other industries are more credible sources of information than peer reviewed scientific literature. Do you honestly believe that scientists are making a 'good deal of coin' from environmental groups as opposed to the money that could be had REFUTING global warming? ExxonMobil offered $10 000 USD to scientists willing to refute global warming and many of the notable scientists currently refuting global warming can be linked back to oil and gas companies.

Websites are useful propaganda tools and there's a reason they cannot be cited as sources in any academic forum. I could post that the sky is pink on a website, it doesn't make it so. Conduct a literature review of peer reviewed scientific articles on the topic and you will find that nearly the entirety of them all conclude that global warming is in fact occurring. Don't cite websites and expect anyone with an education to take you seriously, its no better than citing wikipedia. If you're interested, I know that UNBC offers an Environmental Science course titled "Global Change", ENSC 425. If you're actually interested in the topic it provides you with all the science surrounding global warming- both anthropogenic and natural factors. That is, of course, if you don't think that the university is part of this terrible conspiracy too!

Posted by: Howrd_B_Stern on November 25 2008 6:05 PM

"ICECAP is not funded by large corporations that might benefit from the status quo but by private investors who believe in the need for free exchange of ideas on this and other important issues of the day."

Translation: Private investors, who ultimately control the purse strings and direction research is going.

"Our working group is comprised of members from all ends of the political spectrum. This is not about politics but about science. "

Translation: As soon as we can get rid of those moderates in here, we can plan on writing more propaganda for the energy sector.

From Wattsupwiththat.com "About:I�m a former television meteorologist who spent 25 years on the air and who also operates a weather technology and content business, as well as continues daily forecasting on radio, just for fun."

Wow, 25 years on the air while idiots like Dr. Suzuki were in labs conducting experiments. Too bad Ted off Mary Tyler Moore wasn't born later. He could put Al Gore to shame.

Junkscience.com's founder: Steven J. Milloy is: the founder and publisher of JunkScience.com and DemandDebate.com; a portfolio manager of the Free Enterprise Action Fund ; and a columnist for FoxNews.com .

Wow Foxnews. There's a credible fair and balanced source of news. Cronkite look out. Kind of like asking Goebbels for an update on Jewish activity.

Posted by: dow7500 on November 25 2008 7:13 PM

The question isn't about whether there is a warming trend. The question is what is causing it. There have been warming and cooling trends for millions of years. Long before fossil fuels were used. The melting of the last ice age. Farming in Greenland. All before man made GHG. The latest report I saw has now assigned a 90% chance that Global warming is man made. Did they throw a dart and come up with this number. I don't have a lot of faith that anybody can assign that percentage with any accuracy.
Kind like the last 2 hurricane seasons where forecasted to be well above average. Oops blew that one. The science is far from settled.
8

Posted by: seamutt on November 25 2008 7:57 PM

Lynn85 I guess I can lead you to water but can't make you drink. Like I said have a look "into" the websites before knocking them, check the links and credentials of the thousands of skeptics in these. Just where do you get your information? How do you know its not biased? Get your information from Al Gore, he is one of the biggest scam artists going. 200,000 a speech, not bad coin. Plus he funked science. He will not debate. He makes millions with his carbon trading interests. He is not very worried about sea level rise as he bought a high end condo on the San Francisco waterfront. Oil and Gas industry is old news, time to update your information.

Howrd_B_Stern wow you should get a job with Gore and double talking Hansen they could use your help. Suzuki's claim to fame is fruit flies.

Science is being corrupted by scientists feeding at the trough of so called man caused global warming.

Posted by: kevin1006 on November 25 2008 11:37 PM

Lynn85... ignore the folks like seamutt as they will not be convinced of anything they've already made their minds up on until it's 30c in Feb. The important thing is that most people do understand humanity is altering the Earth's climate... the hillbilly class will never get it so why bother with them?

Posted by: Howrd_B_Stern on November 26 2008 9:08 AM

Seamutt, I'd rather work for a man who has earned a Phd than to follow silly websites that are filled with propaganda, like you. And please when I call BS on you (and I did), at least admit it.

Junkscience.com HA HA HA! I think that was recently discredited by Ms. Jones grade 3 class.

Posted by: seamutt on November 26 2008 9:55 AM

Well I used to be a believer at one time until I started doing some research. But I guess its like religion, some people will blindly follow no matter what. Oh and if you would bother reading the websites you would find that there are thousands of scientsts and PHD's saying hey wait a minute, just what is going on here. I never said humanity isen't having some effect, no one knows how much or how little along with natural variations in climate change.

How come the climate models that Hansen plays with have to be adjusted to the real world conditions all the time? How come he won't let outsiders see how his programs are run? How come Al Gore will not debate while collecting his big checks?

I could go on and on but some day I hope you folks will get thirsty.

Posted by: Shellshadow on November 27 2008 9:54 AM

You do not have to have a phd to see that right here in Prince George the weather is abnormal. Barely any snow....warmer weather in Sept and Oct than Aug was. I had 3 feet of snow in my back yard last year this time. How often in the last 5 years has PG experienced -30??

I just have to look back 30 years when I was a child and the proof hits me in the face. I do not have to read anything to see that people like Mr Gore (even though profitting) is right.

Posted by: interceptor on November 27 2008 3:38 PM

Thats the point Shellshadow - dont compare it to 30 years ago... how about 1030 years ago? Or even 10030 years? Perhaps the same cycle repeated itself then?