Middle ground was hard to come by when supporters and opponents of the proposed extension to Rix's Creek open-cut mine gathered to argue their cases in Singleton on Monday.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
As an army of supporters wearing high-vis workwear took their seats at the Independent Planning Commission meeting, an equally passionate group gathered outside to protest.
The Bloomfield group is seeking to extend the mine's life for 21 years and extract a further 25 million tonnes of coal.
READ MORE:
If approved it is estimated the mine will employ 255 full time workers and 44 full time equivalent contractors. The value of wages would be $21 million annually
But Singleton GP and Doctors for the Environment representative Bob Vickers urged the commissioners to look beyond the project's economic benefits and carefully consider the community health impacts of mining.
He pointed to numerous patients with diseases linked to poor air quality.
"The minimum net profit value of this mine covers approximately one tenth of the calculated health costs that air pollution costs the Hunter," he said.
Dr Vickers rejected claims that there was no evidence to show mining adversely affected workers' health.
"It's very easy to step back and say that person had a stroke because they smoked cigarettes, they drank alcohol they didn't exercise enough, it definitely wasn't the 40 years they spent working in an open-cut pit," he said.
"It's the cumulative impacts. We have larger scale data from around the world that confirms the negative health effects."
The Department of Planning's director of resource assessment, Howard Reed last week described Bloomfield's air quality assessment as 'inadequate'.
Bloomfield spokesman Geoff Moore said the company's assessment had been rigorous but said the requested information would be provided.
"The air quality impact assessment has been the subject of many reviews over the years. We consider it sound and, while we do not believe it requires any change, we will provide the additional information requested," he said.
"It has been with the Department of Planning and in the public domain since 2015. While it is disappointing that this has been raised at this stage, we will provide the addendum."