Re: Why is AGL proposing to build a new gas terminal in a RAMSAR wetland?


Considering that Victoria is already a net exporter of gas, can AGL explain why they have chosen a Ramsar-listed wetland site as the preferred location for this project? Can your project demonstrate no net loss of native vegetation or damage to the values of the Ramsar-listed wetlands of Westernport Bay? Australia is a signatory to the International Ramsar Convention wherein the Australian Government is legally obligated  to 'protect' migratory bird habitat in Westernport Bay. This proposal will pose a significant risks to these values and will trigger the Federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.


Will the marine literature review incorporate case studies on the impacts of FSRUs already in operation in similar environments, including the impacts of entrainment, discharge, marine noise and accidents/pollution? This Gas terminal proposal will have far reaching impacts on the marine environment of Westernport Bay and should NOT proceed. 


Does AGL accept the Australian Energy Market's projection in its June 2018 Gas Statement of Opportunities that there are no supply gaps forecast before 2030? Has AGL considered alternatives to their destructive gas import terminal? For example, have you looked at how to reduce the need for gas through efficiency upgrades and switching to electricity where possible? Or using existing pipeline capacity for bringing gas into Victoria?