EV drawbacks

Citizens versus mining in Greenbushes, Western Australia
by Jane Cargill
March 1997


Mining operations near the town of Greenbushes are having serious impacts on health and environment. Citizen opposition has been met by intimidation and government inaction.

Greenbushes is 257km south of Perth, in the southwest of Western Australia, directly inland and east of the Margaret River. The nearest major town is Bridgetown. The current population is 400.

The first mining lease in WA was pegged in Greenbushes. Tin was first mined. Now tantalum, spodumene and lithium are the major profit-making minerals. In the "olden days" prospectors fossicked, panned and dug shafts. Nowadays the miners drill, blast and excavate in order to extract the minerals for processing. Contractors work in huge, crater-like pits several hundred feet deep.

In May 1991, Gwalia Consolidated Limited was granted approval to extend a tantalum pit adjacent to the southern boundary of Greenbushes townsite -- hence named "the northern pit extension." A small (900 square metre) plot of land inside the townsite boundary was excised for this purpose. Approval was granted by both the WA Department of Minerals and Energy and the WA Department of Environmental Protection (DEP).

A formal assessment by the DEP was not considered necessary despite the fact that blasting, drilling and mining operations would be conducted in a pit whose edge was 450 metres from the centre of town and less than 50 metres from Greenbushes Primary School and residences. Mining leases 01/6 and 01/9 were placed over Greenbushes in 1983/84, allowing mining underneath the town. The Mines Act was not followed and owners were not notified.

The Bridgetown-Greenbushes Shire was aware of this northern pit extension plan, but ratepayers and residents were not. About 10 letters were delivered by Gwalia to those residents who were 200m or less from the edge of the tantalum pit in late September 1993, informing them of the northern pit extension and ordering some to "remain indoors" and informing the others that Gwalia would assist them to "evacuate your home" whilst blasting was being conducted and "road guards" would be positioned in streets to block them.

Townspeople "flipped out." Concerned Residents of Greenbushes was formed and several town meetings were held. Fifty to sixty people voted to investigate the possibility of applying for a court injunction on Gwalia to sort out issues before commencement of the northern pit extension.

The next meeting, in November 1993, was stacked by dozens of "out of town" mine workers. A town resident -- a former local shire clerk and Gwalia shareholder -- voted to allow the company access to town land (the 900 square metre plot). Intimidation tactics were adopted to put a stop to further meetings. One man rang me to say that his and others' car tyres had been slashed whilst he was at the November meeting. His wife had since lost her part-time job at Gwalia because, he believed, he was seen speaking with me after the meeting. He said he would be unable to attend any more meetings.

Business owners in town who were seen to be supportive of a court injunction lost custom. Threats of mine closure and loss of jobs are still used today by mine management if anyone protests.

In the years since 1993, numerous houses have been damaged. Windows have been "blown out," ceilings have fallen in, flyrock has been seen and heard to land on roofs and in backyards. Insurance companies do not cover this sort of damage. Thick dust clouds have contaminated rain water tanks. Fume emissions containing nitrous gases and carbon monoxide (from explosives) often shroud Greenbushes in a pungent, blue-white haze. Children and pets are frightened by the vibrations and noise of blasts. Blasting is now six days per week, with one to three blasts each day.

Numerous government officials have visited, inspected and occasionally monitored the blasts in parallel with Gwalia's "self-monitoring." All have said that Gwalia is operating within its licence conditions -- in spite of many breaches -- and that there is not much that can be done.

The state ombudsman's office has had a file open on the Greenbushes issue for years but refuses to investigate. I was told "We can't do anything because the issue is more than six months old." The Mines Department denies that the mining lease and the Mines Act are being breached and refuses to consider any compensation for residents and ratepayers as applicable within the Mines Act.

The DEP has the power to immediately review Gwalia's licence conditions to reduce blast limits but refuses to modify any of them. The air blast overpressure limit is currently set at 120dB, never to exceed a ceiling of 125dB. This has been breached several times and caused serious structural damage. The vibration limit is set at 5mm/second, never to exceed a ceiling of 10mm/second. Neither of these limits is appropriate for blasting operations in close proximity to residences. Atmospheric and geological conditions should be taken into account within licence conditions. The "10%" provision which allows the company the privilege of exceeding limits when conducting consecutive blasts should be deleted.

The Water Corporation and the Rivers and Waters Commission refuse to supply water analyses showing radionuclide levels in the Greenbushes town water supply. (Two years ago, I was refused access through Freedom of Information (FOI) to WA Water Authority documents on radiation levels.)

Recent WA Health Department documents obtained through FOI show National Health & Medical Research Council standards have for several years been breached for gross alpha and beta radiation levels in several groundwater monitoring bores adjacent to dams that have been used to top up Greenbushes and Balingup town water supplies. Lithium, aluminium and manganese levels are also of concern. An alternative town water supply is warranted immediately. The WA Department of Conservation and Land Management has been responsible for attempting to initiate "land swap deals" with Gwalia, for example state government land adjacent to the northern townsite boundary of Greenbushes in exchange for Gwalia's virtually barren, partly revegetated blocks in the middle of state forest. (This move was contested in state parliament. I believe the company acquired freehold title to this land adjacent to the northern boundary.)

I was refused access to the Gwalia share registry for two and a half months. The ASC eventually granted me access in January 1997. I have yet to sight the shareholders listing.

I have done hundreds of hours of research and years of work on all aspects of the problems. Hundreds of documents have been obtained under FOI. Reams of correspondence with scientists and other specialists have been collated. Continual lobbying of politicians in successive governments has produced mountains of paper also!

I have made repeated protests on behalf of residents who are reluctant to be identified because of direct or indirect association with the mine. It is general knowledge that there have been secret contract agreements with several residents, whose names are known, including special structural assessments and guaranteed insurance cover and monthly payments to those inside various "zones." Radiation dust levels are on an "upward trend" according to the Radiological Council. According to the Council, Gwalia has acknowledged that it is aware of the health effects on its workers. The DEP has attributed all these problems to both increased mining activities and "hard rock" mining.

The happenings in Greenbushes raise important issues of private and public accountability as well as health and environmental impacts. A number of journalists have received material and prepared stories but, for some reason, only a few have been actually published or broadcast. ❗

This document is located on the

Suppression of dissent website
 
Last edited:
EV drawbacks

EV drawbacks
 
At the end of the day if you truly believe the dire climate crisis warnings then you should sell or destroy your fossil burning vehicles/heating/cooking etc
And go sustainable electric or nothing at all
So that our children have a future
 
In the video I’m referring to the case was made VERY strongly that current data started being measured in the late 1800s.

And that was also the coldest average period in THOUSANDS of years.

So, it is obvious that temperatures will rise from a historic low point.

You then use that exact same graph… as though the previous video and conversation had never happened !

If you have a counter argument, thats great, let’s hear it.

Ignoring valid points is not a counter argument.

With respect FB - I did’nt use any graph, NASA did. The IPCC did. The consensus of the world‘s climate scientists did. And to be honest, I think Santa occasionally shows it to the elves, but I would’nt swear on it!

I’ll make you a deal - I’ll have another look at the conflicting graphs and whichever video you are talking about, if you come out of the closet!

I believe the science, Shane does not. You’ve got the fence wedged so far up your clacker the splinters must be unbearable! I’ve tried (courteously) teasing your opinion out several times, but to no avail. I still don’t know whether you are a climate believer (with reservations), scheptic (with caveats) or a denier (with performance anxiety) - not my naming convention!

I can debate (or battle) with Shane (thanks Shane I quite enjoy it) and he and I know where the land lies. What do you believe? I’m ‘all at sea’ mate which is a real problem, as I joined the Army! Help me out here?
 
With respect FB - I did’nt use any graph, NASA did. The IPCC did. The consensus of the world‘s climate scientists did. And to be honest, I think Santa occasionally shows it to the elves, but I would’nt swear on it!

I’ll make you a deal - I’ll have another look at the conflicting graphs and whichever video you are talking about, if you come out of the closet!

I believe the science, Shane does not. You’ve got the fence wedged so far up your clacker the splinters must be unbearable! I’ve tried (courteously) teasing your opinion out several times, but to no avail. I still don’t know whether you are a climate believer (with reservations), scheptic (with caveats) or a denier (with performance anxiety) - not my naming convention!

I can debate (or battle) with Shane (thanks Shane I quite enjoy it) and he and I know where the land lies. What do you believe? I’m ‘all at sea’ mate which is a real problem, as I joined the Army! Help me out here?

Nah mate, no deal, we’re too far apart.

I’ve tried my hardest to make clear what I believe. I believe in reducing overall pollution, in making a better world, in doing so holistically ie as well as, not instead of human / society wellbeing, in using science and technology to help us do this.

And I believe a lot of the real valuable discussion and debates, and progress, are being thwarted by the fact that political bodies have hijacked ‘the end is nigh’ mantra.

I firmly / passionately believe IN science… you believe THE science.

I don’t know you from Adam, so can only deduce from what you write, and from that it seems that you believe whatever the higher authorities tell you ?

We are from two different religions, so let’s agree to disagree.
 
Last edited:
Someone please explain why COAL mining (and oil drilling) are becoming extinct, but mining all the materials to produce those batteries (with all of the attendant toxic byproducts) is just fine.

I can't wait to hear the "logic"...
 
Last edited:
The good thing is, the pollution will simply flow into Mexico, so "no harm, no foul"

The "vast underground geothermal field" will be affected, and you KNOW it's directly connected to the earthquake-prone fault(s) in the area. "What could possibly go wrong?"

but... but.. the "clean" products MAGICALLY have NO toxic waste associated? IT'S A MIRACLE!!!!!

Magically clean underground brine, not like that horrible fracking stuff, right?

In "one of the poorest" sections of California. >>>> N.I.M.B.Y. much? Watch the deep pockets EAT UP as many square inches of that area as possible, before a single current resident gets any benefits. THAT, my friends, is how it works. Gavin Newsome is probably already as invested as it gets... No "insider trading", no, of course not.
 
Last edited:


60 Minutes!?
The CBS Entertainment Group is your source for non partisan non biased information?
60 Minutes is an entertainment show produced and aired with a very specific audience in mind.
Bet you didn't hear any downside to Lithium on 60 Minutes...and you never will.
Again, an entertainment production disguised as a news source presented to appease a narrow but fiscally productive audience in which to advertise and support their political agenda.
One cannot, with honest intentions, actually anticipate objectivity and accountability with that information source.

The growth of the "Lithium" business is scary, 125% in 3 years. The vast majority that mining biz is in Africa, owned, overseen and controlled by the Chinese. They turn around the finished battery products and move them to western countries aka Europe and the US.

I just get all warm and fuzzy knowing EV's are becoming so popular and helping to save the planet.

I sure don't hear any of the EV advocates laying out the plan for how to deal with all this newly introduced waste product...."Currently, globally, it's very hard to get detailed figures for what percentage of lithium-ion batteries are recycled, but the value everyone quotes is about 5%,"
EV batteries are larger and heavier than those in regular cars and are made up of several hundred individual lithium-ion cells, all of which need dismantling. They contain hazardous materials, and have an inconvenient tendency to explode if disassembled incorrectly.



Lithium Mining in Mali Lithium Mining in the Congo
EV drawbacks
EV drawbacks



Lithium strip mining in Sudan Strip mining in South America
EV drawbacks
EV drawbacks
 
Someone please explain why COAL mining (and oil drilling) are becoming extinct, but mining all the materials to produce those batteries (with all of the attendant toxic byproducts) is just fine.

I can't wait to hear the "logic"...
There is no logic. Just greed.
 
Does this document have any credibility? Is it genuine? It doesn’t look like a formal report or have the appearance of a university document; not sure why the text and signature block are different fonts.

Dr Phillip A Fields area of research is Reproductive Biology. Did anybody check or does it just fit the narrative? Maybe he does babies and the biosphere!

Happy to be proved wrong.

Bonus quiz question: Is the mining of lithium and other constituent elements of EV batteries better or worse for the environment (in general terms) than the production of petroleum for and carbon monoxide emitted by 1.4 billion cars, for the entirety of their lifecycle?
 
Last edited:
Why aren’t more doctors talking about climate change?
Lithium Discontinuation While Attempting to Conceive
 
Does this document have any credibility? Is it genuine? It doesn’t look like a formal report or have the appearance of a university document; not sure why the text and signature block are different fonts.

Dr Phillip A Fields area of research is Reproductive Biology. Did anybody check or does it just fit the narrative?

Happy to be proved wrong.

Bonus quiz question: Is the mining of lithium and other constituent elements of EV batteries better or worse for the environment (in general terms) than the production of petroleum for and carbon monoxide emitted by 1.4 billion cars, for the entirety of their lifecycle?

RE: The bonus question.... Aren't we basically just finding another horse to back and then flog to death when the current one keels over? Perhaps no better nor worse? Desperate times beget desperate measures.
I assume Lithium is finite, and will battery cars be 100% recyclable?
Terrible thing to say, but I'll be out of the race within thirty years, and I never watched or bet on The Grand National either, too much else going on.
 
Is the mining of lithium and other constituent elements of EV batteries better or worse for the environment (in general terms) than the production of petroleum for and carbon monoxide emitted by 1.4 billion cars, for the entirety of their lifecycle?
That comparison won't be known for approximately 100 years. That's how long ICE cars have been prolific.
 
Back
Top