Fantastic news today, 20th June 2024. The UK Supreme Court has set a historical precedent, in overturning a previous ruling, considering the legality of approving a new oil site in Surrey.
The ground breaking decision stating that 'downstream' emissions (those released when a product is used) must be factored into decisions on whether to approve or reject planning applications for projects to extract those fossil fuels. It was a contentious decision within the Supreme Court with a 3-2 decision amongst the judges presiding over the case.
Not only will this decision stop this oil drilling from going ahead, it also sets a precedent against all UK fossil fuel extraction!
Consequently this decision should have a big impact on the upcoming West Cumbria coal mine legal challenge in the Court of Appeal 16th to 18th July.
There are 5 unique grounds that South Lakes Action on Climate Change and Friends of the Earth are appealing the decision to approve a 2.8 million tonnes a year coal mine to operate until 2049.
The reasoning for the decision against the Horse Hill project should directly impact two of these grounds against the approval of the West Cumbria coal mine. If the Court of Appeal agrees with any one ground, then the current planning permission will be overturned and the next Government will have to decided afresh whether to allow coal mining in Cumbria.
The Judges were clear in their ruling, “The whole purpose of extracting fossil fuels is to make hydrocarbons available for combustion. It can therefore be said with virtual certainty that, once oil has been extracted from the ground, the carbon contained within it will sooner or later be released into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide and so will contribute to global warming. This is true even if only the net increase in greenhouse gas emissions is considered. Leaving oil in the ground in one place does not result in a corresponding increase in production elsewhere”
The grounds in the West Cumbria coal mine legal challenge this new decision impacts challenges are:
1) errors of law concerning whether ‘downstream emissions’ caused by the coking coal were indirect significant environment effects of the proposal.
2) error of law and/ or failure to give understandable reasons concerning substitution.
Cornerstone Barristers who acted on behalf of Sarah Finch and the Weald Action Group said, "the Court noted that the direct GHG emissions over the lifetime of the project had been described as having a “negligible” effect on the climate. By contrast, the Court considered that the downstream GHG emissions (which would have been nearly two orders of magnitude greater), “could not have been dismissed as “negligible” in that way” (§82)."
The Horse Hill oil well was expected to release over 10 million tonnes of CO2. The coal proposal at West Cumbria was expected to release slightly less than that each year. West Cumbria Mining Ltd who are behind the proposed mine, claim the mine would be net zero, by paying for carbon offsetting.
To divorce the production and supply of fossil fuels from the emissions of their use is a dangerous fiction. At Coal Action Network, we know the simple truth that when fossil fuels are extracted they are used. We also know that abundance and reliability of supply encourages reliance and discourages investment in alternatives.
Five political parties have ruled out new coal extraction ahead of the election. It's clear to the majority of the UK's political leaders that limiting the supply of fossil fuels is vital to reduce their use, and they're pledging to take action on that. With the ruling in the courts today reinforcing that message. It is obvious to most people - fossil fuel producers have responsibility for the climate catastrophe created by their consumption. It's time to put to bed the absurdity of a 'climate neutral', or even 'climate-negative', coal mine as the proposed Whitehaven coal mine pretends to be.
“...we will not grant new coal licences and will ban fracking for good.”
Manifesto in full
“Maintaining the ban on fracking and introducing a ban on new coal mines.”
“Cancel recent fossil fuel licences such as for Rosebank and stop all new fossil fuel extraction projects in the UK.”
“Ban new coal licences. Follow the SNP Scottish Government’s lead and commit to no support for new coal mines, which would undermine our action to reach net zero.”
“...are opposed to... new open cast coal mines. Opencast mine sites should be fully restored for the benefit of local communities, and should never be used as a guise for private companies to undertake further coal extraction.”
The Labour Party's manifesto pledge “we will not grant new coal licences and will ban fracking for good.” follows a year of inside-track and public campaigning by Coal Action Network in the UK parliament and Welsh Senedd.
The UK’s last coal-fired power station closes this year, and last year is confirmed the hottest year on record. We’re pleased that the Labour Party has listened to our arguments, along with the Liberal Democrats, the Green Party, Plaid Cymru, and Scottish National Party which have also ruled out any new coal mining.
We'll work with whichever party forms the new Government on turning a policy ruling out new coal licences into a stronger statute. We hope the new Government will also address existing coal licences – for both operating mines, such as Aberpergwm (permission to mine until 2039), and proposed mines such as West Cumbria (permission to mine until 2049). The West Cumbria coal mine is an example of how coal mine licences can slip through the coal regulator, even when there is no domestic demand for the coal and it'll be exported to drive further climate chaos.
Coal is still the number one fossil fuel driver of climate change globally - we must lead my example, and a policy ruling out any more licences for coal mining is just that.
Published: 17. 06. 2024
Coal Action Network asked Who will stop coal? last weekend in Whitehaven, West Cumbria. At the site of the proposed coal mine, members of the local community and supporters gathered to ensure that the question of the mine is being put to election candidates. Now we need you to crank up the pressure and make sure all election candidates across the UK faces this question as they could decide the fate of the coal mine if elected and legal challenges to the mine are successful next month...
The next Government may have the opportunity to not only stop the West Cumbria mine, but legislate an end to coal mining in the UK forever. We will be working hard behind the scenes to make that happen - but, the more you can help us, the better. Join us in writing to your local candidates (automatically selected) - this could be the first step in them helping to end coal mining in the UK for good.
'Energy Recovery Investments Ltd' is proprosing to extract coal from large coal tips created by the Bedwas Colliery (1913 - 1985) in Bedwas, Caerphilly, South Wales over an operational period of 7 years (but this is often extended later). The company claims that it would use some of the sales of the coal to restore those coal tips afterwards. Based on historical estimates, the total volume of the Tips is approximately 5,000,000m³ which equates to around 8,500,000 tonnes of colliery spoil. The company claims that it expects to haul 468,000 tonnes of coal off the site via 20-tonne heavy goods vehicles (HGVs), driving further climate chaos by over 1.3 MILLION tonnes of CO2.
The Tips are classified as Category D which is defined as “A tip with the potential to impact public safety, to be inspected at least twice a year.”. The main risks associated with Bedwas are understood to be risk of tip fire and contamination of local watercourses (including Rhymney River), with land stability being of a lesser concern.
'Energy Recovery Investments Ltd' has not disclosed what proportions of coal will be sold to which market but does indicate "ERI’s proposal is to sell on these stockpiles of coal to heavy industry, the cement manufacturing industry and potentially energy production industry...", and elsewhere cite the steel sector and brickworks as potential customers.
The company would need to build a new section of haul road 575m long and 6m wide cut into the rock, and widen the existing forest track - possibly at the loss of trees bordering the road. It would involve works on setting up the site starting at 6am and continuing into the night until 10pm (16 hours/day, 15 hours every Saturday, and only Sunday without works) for 6-9 months (but this is likely to be extended, as is common for projects like this). Outside of these hours, maintanence works could still occur, according to the company. The company estimates an average of 90 hauls by HGVs per week to occur over the seven years operational period. This is equivalent approximately to 18-20 hauls HGVs going to and from the site every day.
The coal tips lie above a coal seam, which the company claims it would coincidentally have to dig into to create 'lagoons' for processing the coal from the coal tips. That's right, Energy Recovery Investments Ltd claims it needs to mine the coal in the seam, creating a further coal tip, in order to mine the coal in the coal tips already created. The company is trying to rebrand the coal mined from the tips and from digging the lagoons, as 'reclaimed' and 'incidental' coal respectively, in an attempt to get around Welsh Government policies against further coal extraction.
Energy Recovery Investments Ltd creates a new name for the coal it proposes to mine: "Reduced Carbon Coal" - a name based on the claim it could displace coal imported with the associated travel miles. This is an old argument that has been debunked many times. See our video with Economics expert, Prof. Paul Ekins or our myth-buster.
The company is so keen to distance this project from a coal mine, it has gone into greenwash overdrive - refusing to even call a coal washery by its normal name, and instead rebranding it as a "beneficiation/processing plant.
With absolutely no evidence or calculations, Energy Recovery Investments Ltd makes the outlandish claim in its planning statement that any, eventual and additional, 'carbon sink' like properties of the site after operations have finally ceased may offset the processing and extraction of the coal, transport by deisel HGVs, and end use.
Energy Recovery Investments Ltd presents the mining of coal as "a beneficial by-product of the tip reclamation process". It's the very objective of this company to generate a profit for itself from the mining of the coal tips - it is very far from being a by-product.
Energy Recovery Investments Ltd claims that a proportion of its coal will be used at steelworks, necessary for green infrastructure - a common argument which is even less true today than it was previously, as both virgin steelworks in the UK converts to using processes for producing steel from scrap that doesn't rely on coal inputs, ending the UK steel market for coal.
Energy Recovery Investments Ltd is a small company with assets valued at £114,000 in its 2022 annual financial accounts on Companies House – but only £9,000 cash assets. This is concerning as there would be limited scope to recover damages if mistakes are made or the company refuses to remediate the coal tips after extracting profitable coal from them.
The company was registered in 2008 and “the principle activity of the company is the recovery of coal from redundant coal tip sites”. But since 2012, the company has idled with zero staff until employing just 2 staff a decade later in 2022. Energy Recovery Investments Ltd has only operated one other site, in 2008, Six Bells and Vivien Tips near Abertillery, South Wales - which it extracted 260,000 tonnes of coal from over 2.5 years, by subsequently getting permission to opencast coal mine one end of the site.
Despite all its efforts to distance itself from coal mining, Energybuild Ltd (the coal mining company at Aberpergwm) has previously been a major shareholder in Energy Recovery Investments Ltd.
ERI Ltd is the wholly owned subsidiary of PPM Holdings Limited, a company incorporated in just 2022 with no published company accounts and currently registered as a ‘non-trading company’. The current Director of PPM Holdings Limited, Sian Thomas, was previously Director of Green Steel Works Ltd, which deals with ‘Remediation activities and other waste management services’ and is the official office address for Energy Recovery Investments Ltd. This kind of complicated and confusing corporate structure is typical of mining companies, and has been used in the past to evade corporate accountability. The other Director of PPM Holdings Limited is Mark Harvey, is a Director of 6 companies dealing with mineral waste disposal and storage, and real estate.
This proposal has strong similarities with the sprawling Ffos-y-fran opencast coal mine. The sale of the coal from this mine was to pay for the restoration of a neglected hill in Merthyr Tydfil to the extent the coal mine was even branded as the "Ffos Y Fran Land Reclamation Scheme". Yet, the profits from 16 years of coal mining has been put of reach, and the local Council faces up to £120 million shortfall to pay for the much greater restoration works now needed. We don't want Bedwas to become the next Ffos-y-fran disaster.
With over 300 at-risk coal tips registered across South Wales, and financial shortcomings to pay for their remediation, the concern is that the Bedwas coal tip is a testing ground for remediating the remaining coal tips. This would be disasterous for our climate and represent total contempt for the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act. The company has presented a planning statement littered with the tired justifications of mining companies. Stay tuned as we ask for your help in this campaign.
The Crown Prosecution Service has dropped all charges against the four Extinction Rebellion (XR) activists who blockaded the entrance to the UK’s largest open-cast coal mine, last summer with a pink boat.
While removing the immediate burden of legal confrontation for the defendants, the decision has left a “crater of unfinished business” in the fight for climate justice and accountability for local residents..
“The action was always designed to have a much deeper impact beyond the immediate disruption with a pink boat,” explained Liz Pendleton, one of the four defendants who occupied the site for over 24 hours in July 2023. “It was designed to expose the alleged illegal activities and environmental negligence of the mining operation, in particular, its continued operation beyond permitted planning conditions and contradictory and misleading financial statements which may well constitute fraud.”
The Ffos-Y-Fran mine in Merthyr Tydfil, Wales had been operating without a licence for almost ten months when XR activists took direct action.
“By denying us our day in court the CPS has denied us the opportunity to shine a light on this potentially illegal and criminal operation,” said Liz.
The legal proceedings revealed a shocking lack of cooperation from the mine, including failure to provide basic operational logs, communications between the mine and governmental bodies, and internal documents relating to the financial and environmental management of the mine's operations. This critical information would have shed light on the legal position of the operation and whether funds had been set aside for environmental restoration - which was a condition for the getting the go ahead in the face of overwhelming local opposition. The defendants were also confident this would have led to their acquittal.
The dropping of the case also casts doubt on the legitimacy of the arrests, as in the case of aggravated trespass the police can clearly be seen acting in the interests of corporate bodies who then fail to prove that they themselves were carrying out lawful activities.
The discontinuation of charges is a testament to the strength of the activists case and the shaky foundation upon which the mine's operations stood, explained Raj Chada from Hodge Jones & Allen, representing the defendants:
“In seeking disclosure from the CPS, we highlighted the need for transparency on several critical points. Our requests were aimed at uncovering potential evidence of the mine operating beyond legal scrutiny, which raises concerns about the legality of its operations. The CPS's inability to meet these disclosure obligations casts a shadow over the proceedings and suggests that the depth of the mine's legal and environmental mismanagement may be greater than previously understood.”
For over a decade and a half, the Ffos-Y-Fran mine has been a symbol of the environmental and social challenges that face communities at the ‘coal face’ of climate degradation. The abrupt end to this case marks not a clear-cut victory but a complex milestone in the ongoing struggle. While it spares the defendants the strain of a continuing court battle - already exceeding seven months in duration - it denies the platform to publicly expose the depth of negligence and alleged fraud by the mine's operators, Merthyr (South Wales) Ltd., including their failure to fulfil obligations towards land reparations and the creation of green jobs.
Speaking upon hearing the news, local resident and defendant Marcus Bailie commented: “Our fight was not just against the physical act of coal extraction but against disregard for the land's future and the community's well-being. The piles of coal and the colossal scar on the landscape left behind serve as stark reminders of the environmental impact that has yet to be addressed. The real victory would have been to hold those responsible to account in a public forum, forcing a reckoning with the consequences of their actions.” Marcus went on to say, “We’re not the criminals here!”
Chris and Alyson Austin, residents of Merthyr Tydfil who have been campaigning for years for the mine to be closed said: “We feel angry and betrayed about the waste-land they have left behind.”
The bittersweet outcome underscores the resilience and dedication of activists and the broader environmental movement. It also highlights the complexities of seeking justice in a system where procedural technicalities can overshadow substantive issues. The fight for the Ffos-Y-Fran mine was never just about legal vindication; it was about bringing to light the injustices inflicted upon nature and communities - and campaigners promise, it won’t end here.
For further information, quotes, or to arrange interviews, please contact: press@extinctionrebellion.uk | +44(0)7756136396
On 23 October 2023, over 30 Wales-based NGOs, businesses, and community groups signed an open letter to Wales’ Climate Change Minister, Julie James, calling for the Welsh Government to ban coal mining once and for all (sent by Climate Cymru). On 10th January 2024, Julie James wrote back—but claims a ban isn’t needed, even though 1.6 million tonnes of CO2 could have been prevented since 2022 if the Welsh Government had adopted a ban. That failure has caused 362 additional deaths from climate change related causes. Julie James’ claims just don’t stack up against those lives lost. Here’s why:
The open letter to Julie James highlighted that an issue with the current policy is that it is riddled with caveats and exceptions. Carmarthenshire County Council’s Planning Officer even wrote in September 2023 that it was “difficult to know for certain how to interpret the coal policy”. Julie James failed to respond to this point entirely. A clear ban would remove the existing ambiguity that makes the current policy challenging to apply.
Julie James also did not respond to our point that Merthyr (South Wales) Ltd would not have been able to mine 500,000 tonnes of coal from Ffos-y-fran over the past 1.5 years if there was a clear ban on coal mining. The mining company exploited the exceptions in existing policies to secure a de facto extension. To protect against this climate assault recurring by closing the loopholes, a clear coal ban is needed now.
In the open letter to Julie James, it’s stated “A coal mine ban can be drafted is such a way that allows for the safe winding down of existing coal mines, and Coal Authority access to fulfil its regulatory duties”. That didn’t stop Julie James trying to use that against a ban anyway: “we also have a duty to manage the safe closure and restoration of existing and historic mining infrastructure”. Julie James accompanies this with a reason that’s even more bizarre: “The incidental extraction of limited coal may also be required during the construction of infrastructure projects”. Those wouldn’t be coal mines so wouldn’t fall under a ban—the Coal Authority even licences this differently as an ‘incidental coal agreement’. The burden and hazards of historic mines across Wales would diminish under a coal ban, rather than risk being added to—a very real risk in light of Ffos-y-fran.
Julie James says “…coal licences may be needed in wholly exceptional circumstances and each application will be decided on its own merits”. But this creates exactly the problem that Julie James lamented in her letter in October 2011 to then Minister for BEIS Kwasi Kwarteng: "both the developer and the Coal Authority committing significant resources respectively to preparing and determining applications... before Welsh policy can properly be applied”. A coal ban would end the pipeline of applications, and the private and public funds they waste.
Julie James twice hails “the presumption being against extraction” in current policies. We hope it’s not presumptuous to argue for a commitment stronger than a ‘presumption’ in the face of catastrophic climate change. What justification could opening a new coal mine have in the face of the 362 lives that’ll be cut short due to the Welsh Government’s refusal to ban coal mines up until now? Climate vandalism over the past year shows nothing short of a ban on coal mining can protect the lives and ecosystems at stake.
Finally, Julie James concludes her letter by claiming the “Welsh Government has adopted and implemented the strongest policy opposition to coal extraction across the UK Governments”. Even if that were true, the Welsh Government clearly needs to go further given current policies have failed to prevent 1.6 million tonnes of avoidable CO2 in the past 1.5 years. But it’s also not true. Julie James’ claim to be leading on a progressive coal policy is based on her comparison to a similar one set out in the Scottish Parliament back in November 2021. She ignores the de facto ban that the Scottish Government more recently introduced in October 2022—as referenced in the open letter to Julie James. If Julie James actually wants the Welsh Government to boast the strongest policy opposition to coal mining, she’ll have to be bolder by committing to a ban on coal mining in Wales.
We're not celebrating the purported end of coal mining at Ffos-y-fran in Merthyr Tydfil, South Wales today. Because the abject failure of Merthyr County Borough Council to stop the past 15 months of illegal coal mining at Ffos-y-fran has resulted in:
The Welsh Government, rather than stepping in to issue a stop notice to prevent the illegal coal mining, even transported the illegal along rail lines owned by the Welsh Government to customers...and continue to do so. The coal company has amassed a huge stockpile of coal at the rail terminal to continue selling off after 30th November - largely made possible by the Welsh Goverment's rail lines.
The Welsh Government's policies against coal mining are obviously not strong enough - why won't the Welsh Government take its place next to Scotland in issuing a clear ban on coal mining?
There are around 150 workers at Ffos-y-fran who face redundancy today. Merthyr (South Wales) Ltd has let workers down. The company had many years of knowing when planning permission expired, and to retrain and support workers to find work in more sustainable industries for when that happens... but hasn't. To add insult to this injury, the company further let workers down by refusing to pay for the restoration that it's legally obliged to, and which would have provided many workers with years of work to come on site, in the green sector of nature restoration.
The final restoration plan promised to local residents since 2007 now hangs in the balance as the mining company makes off with bumper profits from both legal and illegal coal mining, but refuses to meet its obligation to pay for the restoration. It's siphoned MILLIONS of pounds of profits into related companies, and neither the Council nor the Welsh Government seems intent to challenge that. Local residents and the Welsh Government's own report warned the Welsh Government and Local Council nearly a decade ago of this exact risk - why wasn't that acted on? Sign our petition to demand the Welsh Government commits to delivering:
We obtained a letter from the Coal Authority to the Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council, in which the Chief Executive of the Coal Authority is scathingly critical of inaction within the Council and their handling of Ffos-y-fran. The Council must be held to account for its failings.
Extinction Rebellion Cymru protestors blockaded Ffos-y-fran illegal operation for over 24 hours - which is 24 hours longer than Merthyr County Borough Council managed to. Despite the illegal activities of Merthyr (South Wales) Ltd, its owner David Lewis has been left untouched. On the other hand, XR protestors were arrested, held in police cells, and have court hearings about for preventing illegal coal mining. Please donate to their legal fees crowdfunder against this gross injustice.
People hailing from Cumbria to London, and everywhere in between, descended on the Mines and Money Conference in London across two days (28th-29th Nov 2023). We demanded that investors stop pouring cash into the mining sector, and instead invest in our collective future. Together with Fossil Free London and other groups, we greeted investors with flyers highlighting risks to investments in mining that mining companies want to hide—such as successful grassroots resistance to mining projects around the world.
We also heard on the grapevine that EMR Capital PTY, the ultimate owner of the proposed West Cumbria coal mine (WCM), was attending in the desperate hope of raising the £230 million still needed to start the WCM. So local campaigners from Cumbria came all the way to London to deliver a message to potential investors in WCM—steer clear! To further ruin EMR Capital PTY’s plans, they also handed investors a risk assessment, provided by BankTrack, outlining risks specific to the proposed WCM proposal. Two other coal mining companies were present at the conference too.
There’s many alternatives we must take instead of clawing the ground up to reach the minerals beneath, and that is where investment is needed. For example, we need:
This would truly be ‘resourcing tomorrow’—the strapline for this year’s Money & Mining conference. Instead, the conference encourages investment in the rush for remaining minerals, fuelling human rights abuses, land grabs, destruction of local eco-systems, and climate change.
We call out the host of this disastrous conference, the Business Design Centre, which boasts its ethical ‘B-Corp’ status. You might want to raise your concerns with the certifying body about giving these hosts any kind of ethical certification (certification@bcorporation.uk), pointing out that at least three fossil fuel companies advertising coal mines and oil production were touting for investment at the conference (BHP, ADX Energy, and Teck).
On Friday September 15th, as insurers and banks faced a wave of national protest, Coal Action Network announced that five insurers have given guarantees that they will not provide cover for the planned controversial West Cumbria Coal Mine.
The insurers that have ruled out underwriting the mine are AEGIS Managing Agency, Argenta Syndicate Management, Argo, Hannover Re and Talanx. These are the first financial institutions to rule out any involvement with the project, and the win represents a new phase in the campaign to stop the project from going ahead.
Global Fight to End Fossil Fuels on September 15-17th saw half a million people joining protests across the globe to call for a just transition away from coal, oil and gas in history, making it the largest climate mobilisation since the start of the pandemic. Over 400 actions, marches, rallies, and events took place around the world, coordinated by more than 780 endorsing organisations with millions of participants taking part. In the UK Protests took place in London, Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield, Birmingham, York, Wrexham, Cardiff, Shrewsbury and Croydon. Hundreds of campaigners from Extinction Rebellion, Mothers Rebellion and Coal Action Network took to the streets assembling with banners and placards, at the doors of financial institutions, yet to rule out supporting the proposed mine.
They were joined by Buddhist and Quaker groups and other members of the local community. Some groups took part in theatrical actions, dressing as canaries to draw the link between the birds used in mines and the toxicity this mine will bring, while others held silent vigils.
These actions at Probitas, AXA XL, Chubb, Hiscox, Travelers, Chubb, Markel, CNA Hardy, and QBE Insurers as well as HSBC bank set out to raise awareness of the issue, by talking to passers by and staff, delivering letters to the insurers at and putting up blue plaques to publicly criticise these financial institutions and make it clear the this is No Time For A Coal Mine.
Andrew Taylor from Coal Action Network said: “The British government has ignored the pressure from people across the UK who are calling for them to stop the climate-wrecking West Cumbria coal mine, so today people have taken to the streets to demand that insurers and banks, including HSBC, turn their backs on this disastrous fossil fuel project. Four insurers stating that they won’t be involved is just the beginning.”
West Cumbria Mining Ltd wants to extract 2.78 million tonnes of coking coal annually from what would be the UK's first new underground coal mine in 30 years. The project has faced fierce public opposition with over 100k people joining the campaign and legal challenges as campaigners believe it goes against the government’s legally-binding net zero emissions target.
Claude Fourcroy, a spokesperson for Money Rebellion who supported the national day of action said: “The West Cumbria mine is incompatible with the UK’s climate commitments and will fuel climate breakdown. The City of London needs to stop funding and insuring new fossil fuels now.”
Over 30 Welsh NGOs and businesses have signed a letter to Welsh Minister Julie James and Deputy Minister Lee Waters, demanding they draw a line in the sand and announce ban on any further coal mines on Welsh soil. The letter was sent to the Welsh Government on 11th October 2023.
The Welsh Government already has policies against new and extended coal mines but these are caveated and confusing. The renewed call for a clear coal mining ban comes less than a month after existing policies would have failed to stop a recent bid to reopen the shuttered Glan Lash opencast coal mine in Carmarthenshire. The coal mining company, Bryn Bach Coal Ltd, applied to double the size of the coal mine over six years. Controversially, Carmarthenshire County Council’s Planning Officer advised Councillors in the Officer’s Report, and at the Planning Hearing, that "Overall, it is considered that the proposals would largely meet the criteria of the coal policy" (p66). Ultimately, the application was rejected on the grounds of local ecological impacts—but it has exposed the weakness of existing policies, with the Planning Officer adding that it is “difficult to know for certain how to interpret the coal policy” (p66).
The open letter coincides with the first anniversary of Scotland’s announcement of its own de facto ban on coal mining, in October 2022. Daniel Therkelsen, campaigner at Coal Action Network says “The Welsh Government faces a choice—align itself with the backtracking and flip-flopping of the UK Government, or regain its international leadership position alongside Scotland, as a progressive country of confidence and stability for green industry to thrive.
Welsh Minister for Climate Change, Julie James, wrote a letter to the UK Government in October 2021, lamenting the current policy situation, which “results in both the developer and the Coal Authority committing significant resources respectively to preparing and determining applications”. NGOs and businesses that signed the open letter to Ministers Julie James and Deputy Minister Lee Waters are calling for a clear coal ban that clears up the confusion Carmarthenshire Council identified and the caveats that creates uncertainty and potentially wasted resources for coal mining companies, such as Merthyr (South Wales) Ltd, which also applied for an extension in September last year but was conversely rejected due to the Welsh Government’s coal policies by Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council.
Daniel Therkelsen, Campaigner, Coal Action Network: “The Welsh Government has said their position is ‘clear’, that ‘they want to bring a managed end to the extraction and use of coal’—but their jigsaw of policies on coal is as clear as the coal dust that continues to plague communities living around mines in South Wales, ban new coal mines and extensions and be done with it. Nothing about a ban would prevent access by the Coal Authority to address safety issues.”.
Overview and key facts on Glan Lash opencast coal mine extension application. The extension application was to extract a further 95,038 tonnes of coal (more than the original coal mine, licenced for just 92,500 tonnes).
Key Welsh Government policies relating to coal extraction include:
Planning Policy Wales (Edition 11) s.5.10.14 “Proposals for opencast, deep-mine development or colliery spoil disposal should not be permitted. Should, in wholly exceptional circumstances, proposals be put forward they would clearly need to demonstrate why they are needed in the context of climate change emissions reductions targets and for reasons of national energy security.”
Minerals Technical Advice Note 2: Coal “Government policies and planning guidance on the provision of coal have previously been set out in Mineral Planning Guidance Note 3 (MPG3) published in 1994 for England and Wales. MPG 3 (1994), apart from the Annexes, was cancelled by MPPW. This MTAN supersedes the 1994 Annexes, which are hereby cancelled… This coal MTAN sets out how impacts should be assessed and what mitigation measures should be adopted, and seeks to identify the environmental and social costs of coal operations so that they are properly met by the operator.”
Coal policy statement, 22 March 2021: “The opening of new coal mines or the extension of existing coaling operations in Wales would add to the global supply of coal, having a significant effect on Wales’ and the UK’s legally binding carbon budgets as well as international efforts to limit the impact of climate change. Therefore, Welsh Ministers do not intend to authorise new Coal Authority mining operation licences or variations to existing licences. Coal licences may be needed in wholly exceptional circumstances and each application will be decided on its own merits, but the presumption will always be against coal extraction.”
Published: 10.10.2023
