Antarctic runway project would mark Australia as an environmental vandal, opponents claim

Building a multibillion-dollar runway and aerodrome in Antarctica would mark Australia as an environmental vandal, opponents of the plan have warned.

• Hobart Airport the operations base for new Antarctic runway
• Antarctic runway opposed by environmentalists

THE construction of a multi-billion-dollar runway in the Australian Antarctic Territory would be an act of environmental destruction and serve against the nation’s long-term strategic interests, the Bob Brown Foundation says.

The Australian government has proposed building a 2.7km paved runway and aerodrome infrastructure in the Vestfold Hills region of East Antarctica, near Davis Station, 5000km south of Hobart.

The runway would allow year-round access for Boeing 787 Dreamliner, Airbus A330 and RAAF Boeing C-17A Globemaster aircraft.

The Lowy Institute's website The Interpreter this week published an article entitled “the Davis aerodrome and Australia’s leadership in the Antarctic”.

There are plans for a 2.7km runway near Davis Station. Picture: Greg Stone AAD

Authors Paul Govind and Nengye Liu argue that Australia’s current environmental regulations fall short of what is desirable.

“Australia has long proclaimed itself a leader in the Antarctic Treaty System which has governed the continent for more than six decades,” they wrote.

“An indispensable part of this claim is advocating environmental stewardship.

‘But against the backdrop of increasing incursion on Antarctica’s biodiversity, and the alarming expansion of the human footprint, the proposed aerodrome, presents a conundrum: how can Australia credibly assert its leadership in maintaining the stability of the ATS while undertaking a project that carries significant risk of unprecedented, negative environmental and ecological impact?

“We suggest before carrying on a significant project such as the Davis aerodrome, the Australian government should improve its Antarctic-related legislation to ensure that environmental assessment is more sensitive to the unique Antarctic ecosystems.”

They said Australia’s long-term interests in Antarctica would be better served by being a leader in environmental management.

Davis Station from the air.

Bob Brown Foundation Antarctic campaigner Alistair Allan said Australia’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act has been demonstrated to be inadequate and constructing the runway would mark Australia as an environmental vandal.

“The fact that the EPBC Act might not be able to properly assess the massive disturbance footprint of the Davis airport is a major concern,” Mr Allan said.

“This project is estimated to increase humanity’s impact on the continent by 40 per cent.

“That means that the Australian government will be responsible for almost half of all environmental impacts in Antarctica.

“If Australia’s legislation can’t comprehensively assess the impact of the Davis airport within the current legal frameworks, then it simply should not go ahead.”

Follow @DavidJKillick

Talking Point: Paving paradise for a runway

A concrete runway in Antarctica risks massive damage and is likely to be obsolete if ever finished, writes Geoff Dannock

THERE is growing national and international concern about the Australian government’s proposed construction of a concrete runway in the Vestfold Hills, Antarctica.

The project’s final environmental assessment will soon be released for comment and is the most recent of many studies into the construction of a runway in the area. Previous studies by the Australian Antarctic Division (AAD) found construction of a runway in the region could not be justified on cost or environmental grounds.

Runway construction is to be concurrent with the modernisation of the Davis Station by 2050.

Modernisation need not require a runway of Hobart Airport proportions to achieve its goals.

By 2050 technology will negate the need for scientists to personally make real time observations. The AAD already uses robotic data collection and in 30 years that capability is likely to be far greater than anything that can be achieved by relying on what will then be ageing aircraft types, unreliable weather, and the personal attendance of scientists. Runway funds should be directed to remote data collection research by Tasmania’s tertiary institutions.

Scientists should be aware of the long-term constraints on their Antarctic research with the diversion of shipping, accommodation and other resources to the construction of a new station and runway, and the 250 involved personnel.

The government maintains the claim that Antarctica is “valued, protected and understood”. Dumping more than 115,000 tons of irretrievable concrete on levelled Vestfold Hills demonstrates the lack of veracity of that claim. AAD staff are unable to make negative public comment, while selected public servants and minister can present the project’s few questionable benefits whenever opportunities arise.

The same minister will have authority to approve the project, irrespective of the findings of the environmental assessment. The project’s Risk Assessment and Cost Benefit Analysis remain secure and unseen under the minister’s lock and key.

If the self-proclaimed Antarctic environmental protector takes such action in disregard of the local Specially Protected Area where threatened Giant Petrels nest, then the future of other species and other rare habitat types in Antarctica are at risk. International publications already recognise that construction will represent a dangerous precedent. Consulted Antarctic nations may comment but are not able to veto the project.

The government relies on the claim that the project will observe the highest standards of Antarctic environmental protection. In practice, there are few standards and those that are met will not significantly reduce the impact. Most standards are in the form of recommendations, guidelines or in the “where practicable” category.

Davis Station is one of three permanent bases and research outposts in Antarctica managed by the Australian Antarctic Division. Picture: AAD

The AAD has blemishes in meeting environmental aviation standards involving large fixed-wing aircraft. It also acknowledges an expected inability to comply with Antarctic Treaty standards that were based upon smaller aircraft than it plans to use. Australia’s own research indicates that the Treaty’s standards are already inadequate. In short, the proponent will be unable meet an environmental aviation standard which it acknowledges is too low.

The continuing presence of flies at Casey, the existing remains of past activity and landfills, its record of fuel spills and the extended time it took to treat Davis’s sewage is evidence that the proponent has ignored its environmental obligations.

It is difficult to accept that the protection of the environment is now a priority and that the organisation is suddenly positioned and willing to up its game.

Tasmanian industry has an obligation to consider more than profit when advocating support for the project. Tasmania’s future Antarctic links and credibility lay with Australia’s best scientific and environmental interests in the Antarctic, not the worst.

Those familiar with Hobart’s Eastern Shore might understand the impact of levelling hills, some approaching Rosny Hill proportions, in a largely pristine and unique environment.

If completed, the first flight is not scheduled before 2040. Those who sit in Hobart’s traffic gridlocks until then or wait for funding of more significant projects will have about 20 years to wonder why some of its billions could not have been spent on solving local challenges. My hope is that the project will disappear into the same black hole that hides the Macquarie Island Station rebuilding project, announced in October 2016, and not publicly heard of since. It was due for completion in 2022. If insufficient funding or underestimation of the cost has been the cause of that project’s demise or delay, it serves as an omen for the runway project. My fear is that the government will renege on its funding commitments before 2040 and walk away from the destruction and uncompleted runway. Ministers Ley, Frydenberg and others will of course be free from accountability and unavailable for comment by then. It is time for Minister Ley to show leadership and respect for Antarctica and acknowledge that the project is impractical and environmentally outrageous.

Hobart’s Geoff Dannock was the Australian Antarctic Division’s logistics manager, oversighting shipping and aircraft operations for more than a decade.