The approval of a mining project in Queensland, Australia, has spurred a bit of controversy among scientists and environmentalists, who fear it may cause harm to the Great Barrier Reef.
As the largest collection of coral formations, the Great Barrier Reef already struggles with climate change pressures. But now, Queensland Minister for Natural Resources and Mines Anthony Lynham has approved three individual mining leases for what is expected to be the largest coalmine in the country.
With an estimated cost of $21.7 billion, the Carmichael mining project is expected to extract some 60 million tons of coal each year from the inland Galilee Basin.
Adani, the Indian energy company responsible for building and operating the mine, described the project as "a core component of Adani's plans for delivering energy security in India, as well as pursing export opportunities in other Asian markets."
However, in order to accommodate extra traffic from coal exports, the project requires expanding the port at Abbot Point, which is adjacent to the Great Barrier Reef. Experts warn this could release plumes of soil and debris over the reef, inevitably demining its vulnerable ecosystem.
What's worse is the mining and eventual burning of this coal will send huge amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. This, in turn, will accelerate global warming and subsequent rises in ocean temperature linked to coral reef deterioration.
"If it goes ahead, burning coal from the Carmichael mine would create billions of tons of pollution, making climate change worse and irreversibly damaging the Great Barrier Reef," said Josh Meadows of the Australian Conservation Foundation.
The group is now challenging the legality of previous approvals by Australia's national government, claiming that it violates the country's international obligations to protect the World Heritage Site.
Current estimates indicate that if the mine operates for 60 years, Carmichael would yield 2.3 gigatons of coal, which would generate 4.73 gigatons of carbon dioxide when burned.
"We will argue that the federal environment minister, Greg Hunt, did not properly consider the impact that pollution from burning the mine's coal will have on the Great Barrier Reef," Meadows added. "Hunt went against his international responsibilities to protect the reef, a UN World Heritage Site."
The case will be heard in a court in Brisbane in early May. In the meantime, several environmental stipulations have been placed on the project, which more than a dozen of the world's major banks have declined to fund.
"The mine's environmental authority had about 140 conditions to protect local flora and fauna, groundwater and surface water resources, as well as controls on dust and noise," Lynham said. "A further 99 stringent and wide-ranging conditions apply to the rail and port elements of the project."
