EES Hub
Current Status: October 2024
Fighting the terminal again
In March 2023, the Victorian Planning Minister announced that Viva Energy’s environment statement for the project had serious deficiencies – sending them back to the drawing board to redo crucial studies on marine ecology, noise impacts, air pollution and cultural heritage.
The community breathed a sigh of relief and many of us hoped Viva would drop the project. Instead, they’ve come back for a second round.
That means yet another Environment Effects Statement with submissions and hearings. It means we're being forced to check Viva's homework again. But it's also a chance to show Viva – and the rest of the gas industry – that local communities, backed by people around the state, will be there to uncover every short-cut and fight fiercely for our climate and precious local places.
What is an EES and how does it work?
When the government judges a project to present a risk to the environment, they request that the applicant (Viva) prepare an Environmental Effects Statement.
Viva pays for various studies into different aspects of the environment that their proposal might effect and submits them to the Government for review, this is called an Environmental Effects Statement.
02
Where can I read the EES?
Viva have published the EES on their website. You can access it below.
03
We’ve teamed up with experts and local community groups to bring you a webinar on Tuesday 15 October covering key aspects of their proposal and what you can do to help.
04
Can't make the webinar? Download our guide to making a great submission below
Key Impacts
The LNG import terminal proposal is damaging across many areas of our environment, community and climate.
Marine Environment, Dredging, & Terrestrial Ecology
The marine models and studies were found to be inadequate to reflect the conditions in Corio Bay and the extent of flora and fauna to a level of detail required to determine the environmental effects of the terminal. This included concerns about what impacts the Project might have on adjacent Ramsar wetlands.
Air quality
The project was found to “cause significant increases in some pollutants”, but the levels of these pollutants didn’t exceed the allowable limits adopted for the project. However, the IAC was uncertain as to whether these figures were a worst-case scenario. The IAC determined that they weren’t “satisfied that air quality risks have been appropriately designed out” and felt that Viva had prioritised “operational flexibility rather than minimisation of risks of harm” in regards to their duty to minimise environmental effects.
Cultural Heritage
The Wadawurrung Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation submitted that Corio Bay and Port Phillip Bay have only existed for 1000-3000 years and that they continue to “see this [as] cultural landscape and believe that the area contains Wadawurrung living cultural heritage sites”. Despite the scoping document for the EES specifically requiring the need for investigation into “adverse effects on underwater Aboriginal cultural heritage values”, Viva failed to undertake this survey. As such the IAC made it a condition that this work be undertaken.
Noise and vibrations
The IAC was unable to confirm that the Project, when combined with Viva’s existing refinery, could meet the cumulative noise limits due to the fact that the refinery was likely already exceeding its allowable noise levels. The noise study in the EES was deemed unsuitable and a, “new or heavily revised noise assessment is required”.