20.08.01Basslink  

TFIC is the peak industry body representing all commercial fishermen, marine farmers and fish processors in our state, many of whom make a living out of fisheries in Bass Strait.

The Chief Executive of TFIC Bob Lister said today "l want to make it very clear that TFIC is not opposed to Basslink. Basslink will quite rightly be a political decision but with the Tasmanian, Victorian and Commonwealth Governments all openly supportive of the proposed power cable link we wish to focus attention on the potential impact upon the marine environment and commercial fish species in the area of Bass Strait".

The proposed Basslink undersea power cable across Bass Strait is to be of a monopole configuration which Basslink admits is the cheapest possible method of linking Tasmania to the mainland power grid.

Every electrical current needs a method of completing the circuit, usually a return cable or earth wire or similar. The proposed monopole system will run a single cable across Bass Strait and it will have electrodes (an anode and a cathode) mounted on each side of Bass Strait to allow the return current to be conducted through the seawater and the seabed.

Bob Lister said "This is a technology that is currently being abandoned by European nations due to the substantial negative side effects that can impact upon both the marine and terrestrial environments.

These problems include significant quantities of chlorine being generated at the positive anode and in Tasmania's case, the anode is proposed to be situated on Tasmania's northern coastline at Stony Head.

Other reported negative effects of this type of system include electrolytic corrosion that may affect metallic structures many kilometres from the electrode (marine and on land), and electro-magnetic fields that could potentially affect migratory species such as sharks traversing Bass Strait.^"

TFIC is naturally very concerned about these possible impacts on the marine environment and commercial fisheries such as abalone, rock lobster and many scalefish species including school and gummy sharks and Australian salmon. Significant research and study of the proposed technology by TFIC and others clearly showed a substantial lack of quantifiable information, both local to the Southern Hemisphere and in the English language.

This research also revealed significant scientific, academic and community comment and concern about the monopole technology from overseas experiences, especially in Sweden and the Baltic region. Because of this, TFIC Directors were apprehensive about claims that the Basslink Integrated Impact Assessment Statement (IIAS) and its supporting studies were making without any practical way of verifying those claims.

TFIC's Executive Officer Ralph Mitchell was subsequently asked by the TFIC Board to visit Sweden and Denmark in June/July this year to establish the true facts of the experiences in the Baltic region. He was asked to endeavour to gain an unbiased and balanced perspective of the experiences and information available from as many sources as possible.

During this trip, contact was made with a wide range of experts including scientists, academics and government environmental officers as well as representatives from the fishing industry in Denmark and Sweden. A number of translated documents were brought back to Tasmania to verify the concerns and statements made by those experts.

Of those contacted, two representatives of the owners of the Sweden to Poland power cable (forced to change from electrodes to a metallic return cable system due to the environmental problems associated with electrodes) claimed that the monopole system was quite safe. All of the others of those contacted were quite adamant that the monopole system is 'worlds worst' technology and Basslinks proposed single cable system would not now be acceptable in the Baltic region of Europe.

'Worlds best' technology existing today is a bipolar system that has the return cable incorporated in the same casing as the power cable and no electrodes. This is more expensive but has minimal impact on the marine environment.

Some of the claims and studies referenced in the Basslink IIAS were investigated and found to be either lacking in credibility or at odds with reality. The obvious lack of a full evaluation of the alternatives to the monopole system in the IIAS is cause for concern, as is the difficulty to comply with appropriate water quality standards due to the chlorine emissions.

As an example, a study of migratory eels in the Baltic by Swedish National Board of Fisheries (SNBF) Senior Scientist Dr Håkan Westerberg is prominent in the IIAS as proving that the electromagnetic fields generated by a cable such as this do not affect migratory species.

Basslink urged TFIC to make contact with Dr Westerberg. During that meeting at the SNBF he very clearly demonstrated that the study was statistically insignificant and not at all representative of the fishery. Dr Westerberg indicated during the meeting that traps near an electrode cable from the Baltic Cable have a much higher catch rate because many of the eels will not cross the cable even when migrating to spawn. Only 57% of those eels tagged in two studies were able to cross the cable, with the possibility existing that the cable may have been turned off at some time during the studies.

Dr Westerberg's recommendation was very strongly against the monopole technique and he also expressed grave concerns for the school and gummy shark populations in the Bass Strait fishery.

Dr Westerberg stated clearly that while a true bipolar cable has little or no side effects, a metallic return monopole system still generates significant electro-magnetic fields, but eliminates the problems of chlorine emissions and corrosion from the stray currents in the water.

Another contact recommended by Basslink supplied papers and documents from the Swedish Fishermen's Union that showed serious concerns about the monopole system due to the severe side effects of the technology. The Danish Fishermen's Union in Copenhagen echoed these sentiments. None of the experts appeared to have a problem with a true bipolar system.

Other scientists, academics and local government representatives also expressed significant concern about the proposal for Bass Strait and strongly urged quantifiable baseline studies (as are now recommended in Sweden and Denmark) prior to any installation by Basslink. This would ensure that later comparative studies of effects could prove any losses or changes to the environment without there being a burden of proof on the person/entity that suffers any loss.

The pressure from energy companies in the Baltic for rapid installation always precluded prior baseline studies from being conducted, with post-installation studies proving difficult to gain. Baseline studies should include such things as the evaluation of corrosion of metallic structures, studies of larvae, spat and phyllosoma etc exposed to electro-magnetic radiation, voltage gradients and chlorine emissions, fishery populations and migratory traits of fauna specific to the area where the cable is to be installed.

Armed with this information the TFIC Board last week met with Basslink representatives in the TFIC offices. Following that meeting, all TFIC Directors remain concerned about Basslinks claims and have decided to oppose the proposed monopole cable because of the potential negative effects upon the marine environment.

Bob Lister said "TFlC can only accept a true bipolar cable with the return cable fitted into the same casing as the power cable. With the monopole technology being phased out or banned in Europe, it is clearly not world's industry best practice and should therefore not be permitted in Australian waters."

TFIC will be lodging a detailed submission by August 31 in response to the Basslink Integrated Impact Assessment Statement.

Bob Lister can be contacted on 03 6224 2332 or 0408 146 960