‘Ambitious’ timeline for Qld Hydro for Borumba environmental approvals

A Mary Valley environmental group that fought the Traveston dam says the thoroughness of Federal Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek will be tested in evaluating the environmental impact of pumped hydro as it moves to start construction within the next 2 years. SPECIAL REPORT

Concerns over whether the $14.2billion Borumba pumped hydro project can follow the rules and conditions of environmental guidelines has become the forefront of conversation as a report presented to state parliament on Wednesday shows a tight turnover of approval dates before construction can start as planned in 2025.

Borumba dam and the Mary River are home to a number of endangered species such as the Mary River cod, the Mary River turtle, the Australian lungfish and the critically endangered white-throated snapping turtle.

These unique species living in the lake and river have been fiercely protected by locals who won a huge battle against the Traveston Crossing dam in 2009, when the incumbent federal environment minister Peter Garrett rejected the dam based on the unacceptable impact it would have on the Mary’s threatened species.

In 2009, then federal environment minister Peter Garrett rejected the Traveston Crossing dam based on the unacceptable impact the project would have on the threatened species of the Mary River.

The Mary River Catchment Coordinating Committee has been studying, monitoring and advocating for the Mary River for more than 30 years, fought long and hard against the Traveston Crossing dam, and is now keeping watch as the pumped hydro project progresses.

“Lake Borumba is the only thing that keeps the Mary River alive,” MRCCC chairman Ian Mackay said.

“We want to makes sure the river is not sucked any drier.”

While the group was opposed to Traveston, it has taken a more neutral approach to the pumped hydro project, being “neither for nor against the project”, which has given group members the flexibility to be critical and ensure the environmental conditions are followed and met, Mr Mackay said.

But exploratory works only started in June, and environmental approvals have been given less than 24 months before the main construction starts; the question is being asked, is the timeline adequate to ensure the environmental assessments are completed to standard?

Mary River Catchment Coordinating Committee chairman Ian Mackay says Borumba pumped hydro dam consultation has been “a heck of a lot different” to the Traveston Crossing dam.

With such an “ambitious” timeline for approvals, Mr Mackay said he could only hope the environmental tests Qld Hydro were conducting were “realistic”.

For example, some frog species can only be detected around a certain time of the year, and surveying them within Qld Hydro’s timeline is “optimistic”, he said.

For members of the MRCCC, their foremost concern is the impact on the Mary River and whether Qld Hydro’s water modelling was based off the current Mary Basin water plan, which was written up for the Traveston Crossing dam, he said.

A Qld Hydro spokesman said the company “has taken the initiative to engage specialist water modellers to consider the project against both the current and draft water plans” and would work with the new plan when legislated.

A Qld department of water spokesman confirmed Qld Hydro’s water modelling would need to be based off the new plan, which is still under assessment, but on track for delivery by May 2024, when the old one expires.

Qld Hydro is in the exploratory phase of transforming Borumba Dam into a pumped hydro powerhouse. Borumba Dam, Saturday August 5, 2023. Picture: Christine Schindler

Mr Mackay also said the MRCCC wanted to ensure the project was assessed federally, as a bilateral agreement could allow the state to assess the project on behalf of the federal government.

This however, would be “a matter for the Federal Minister for Environment and Water”, a Qld Hydro spokesman said.

A factsheet over the planning and approvals process from the company shows an EPBC Act Bilateral agreement included within the timeline.

Another question Mr Mackay had was whether it would be before or after the review of the EPBC Act.

Qld Hydro said this would come under “transitional provisions and would specify how the project will be assessed” should the review come into place during the approval process.

The endangered Mary River turtle, a bum-breathing punk-looking aquatic creature has won fights against dams on its Mary River habitat before, and it has also acquired a punk fan base.

Mr Mackay said so far the consultation process had been “a heck of a lot different” to the Traveston Crossing dam and that Qld Hydro had treated them “respectfully” and not “belittled” their concerns.

Another difference was that the Traveston dam included land acquisition, whereas this project is mostly built on state-owned land, he said.

The referral report prepared by Qld Hydro in November 2023 identified a significant impact on the cod, turtle and lungfish was “possible”, and “likely” on the critically endangered white-throated snapping turtle, which would be affected by water level fluctuations in the lower reservoir.

He said he was not sure of the extent of the white-throated snapping turtle’s habitat in Lake Borumba, being mostly found in the Fitzroy, Burnett and Mary Rivers.

For now, success of the project and the approval process hinges on the federal environmental minister’s approval and whether it can meet the standards and scrutiny of local environmental organisations passionate and knowledgeable about their waterways.

“It is an act of faith on the federal environmental minister to uphold the Act as it is written,” Mr Mackay said.

He recalled the same decision hinged on Mr Garrett over the Traveston Crossing dam and asked for Ms Plibersek to be diligent and thorough in her decision.

Originally published as ‘Ambitious’ timeline for Qld Hydro for Borumba environmental approvals