Christensen: Dredge Claims Spoiled by Truth (Australia)

Alarmist claims by extreme Green groups and the misuse of a scientific report to shut down Abbot Point’s port expansion, were exposed as a gross abuse of science by Federal Member for Dawson, George Christensen in parliament recently.

Mr Christensen said if the CEO of a company were to publish such blatant misinformation about the operations of another organisation they would be hauled before the courts and, possibly, jailed.

He blasted extreme Green groups for demanding the Abbot Point port expansion should be stopped on the basis of a new report on dredge disposal plumes: Improved Dredge Material Management for the Great Barrier Reef Region.

“The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, itself, released an interpretive statement to accompany the report that says the risk assessments in the study were for comparative purposes only and could not be used to assess the impact of a particular project,” Mr Christensen said.

The interpretive report said: “Due to budget and timeframe constraints, and the technical challenges posed by the large spatial coverage and the extended period for simulation, it was necessary to make a number of simplifying assumptions. Some of these assumptions (for example, no consolidation of material, all placed material is resuspended, and no re ‐ suspension of sediments in shallow water) do not reflect real conditions, leading to a lack of alignment with existing field measurements.”

Mr Christensen said it was a disgrace the extremists were willing to hijack an entirely inappropriate report when they knew it did not reflect the real world.

“It is not surprising the extreme Greens have no concern for the real world because they have a tenuous grasp on reality at the best of times,” he said. “GBRMPA has specifically said the report does not reflect the real world but because it overestimates dispersion, the Greens are willing to misuse it.”

The interpretive report was clear on the failings of the model and the direction in which the results are skewed.

“These assumptions resulted in the model overestimating the dispersion of dredged material from placement sites in both the amount and distances travelled,” according to the interpretive report.

[mappress]

Press Release, November 24, 2013