Chatham Rock Phosphate - CRP

[ziggy415]

feels worse than comparing apples with bananas ... The provided snippet was talking about a potash supplier in Russia - and CRP plans to supply phosphate. Yes, both can be used as fertilizer (and for other things as well) - but phosphate and potassium are in no way exchangeable (less than apples and bananas, which are to a certain degree substitutable, if you don't care what kind of fruit you want to eat).

If your ground lacks phosphates, than you need to add phosphates, no point in adding potassium - and vice versa.

true...i think the thing i got the most was the manipulation of prices by the big boys and one of the previous posts thought the price of fertilizer made chattams break even at best....sucking nodules from 400 meters below the surface still seems a bit pie in the sky for me but the rewards to the country to me are a winner if it works...i think the chattam islands will get new inforstructure so their keen as well.....time will tell

[MAC]

How to support CRP’s marine consent application

The Chatham Rock Phosphate marine consent application is now open for public submissions. As a shareholder you can help our application succeed by making a submission in support. Groups opposed to our application will be asking their supporters to submit, so we’re encouraging our shareholders to have their say.
We’ve included below a summary of key benefits of the project, which might help you with some ideas as to what to say. Below is some information from the Environmental Protection Authority website to make the process as easy as possible for you.

The EPA says a submission is not a vote for or against an application; it’s what your submission says that’s most important – not how many people say the same thing.
Further guidance is available from the information sheet ‘How to make a submission on an EEZ marine consent’. See the submission information sheet

The EPA must receive submissions no later than 5.00pm (New Zealand Standard Time) on Thursday 10 July 2014. To make your submission using the online form click Online submission form . You can attach a Word or pdf document at the end of the online submission form if you want to add further information.

Please note you must complete the online submission form within half an hour or it will time-out, in which case you will need to fill out the form again from the beginning.
Alternatively you can email, post or deliver a submission using this Word document Submission form (Word, 200 kb) It must reach the EPA and CRP before 5.00pm on Thursday 10 July 2014 by email, post or delivered in person.

If you’re emailing, send to CRPapplication@epa.govt.nz and format the subject line of your email with your name and Chatham Rock Phosphate Submission. If you email your submission to the EPA, it’ll be automatically forwarded to CRP.
Alternatively the postal address is - Environmental Protection Authority, Private Bag 63002 Waterloo Quay, Wellington 6140 and if you deliver in person take it to Environmental Protection Authority, Level 10, 215 Lambton Quay, Wellington

If you’re posting you’ll also need to send to - Attention: James Winchester, Chatham Rock Phosphate Limited, C/-Simpson Grierson, PO Box 2402, Wellington 6140, New Zealand.
If you’re delivering in person please mark it - Attention: James Winchester Chatham Rock Phosphate Limited, C/-Simpson Grierson, Level 24, 195 Lambton Quay, Wellington New Zealand.

If you need further information to guide you in preparing your submission check out ‘Having your say about an activity’ If you have questions about making a submission or don't understand parts of the submission form, please email CRPapplication@epa.govt.nz or phone 0800 382 527 or +64 4 916 2426 if calling from overseas.


Information about our Marine Consent proposal

Chatham Rock Phosphate (CRP) has now applied for an environmental marine consent to undertake seabed mining at 400 m water depth, about 250 km from the Chatham Islands and 450 km from the South Island.

The marine consent process has a six-month prescribed timeframe so interested parties can make submissions and be heard at public hearings. The EPA has appointed a panel of experts who will base their decision on the scientific evidence they hear. Environmental considerations are balanced against economic benefits. Assuming we receive consent at the end of the year we expect to start production in 2017.

Background


To recap, New Zealand scientists discovered the rock phosphate resource on the crest of the Chatham Rise in the 1950s. Mining the resource has only become viable with the rising price of phosphate and advances in marine technology. CRP has identified at least 35 million tonnes within the mining permit area – more than a 20-year supply at expected production rates.

While we have applied for a large area we are proposing to mine an average of just 30 km² a year – the equivalent of what the fishing industry bottom trawls in just 8 hours.

Our technical partner, international dredging company Boskalis will use conventional dredging technology attached to a long pipe to suck the top 30 cm of sandy silt up to a large mining vessel. Mechanical sieving will separate the phosphate nodules (2 to 150 mm in size) and discharge the finer sand and silt from another flexible pipe near the seabed. No chemicals are involved.

CRP has spent more than $20 million on scientific research, including six CRP-funded surveys to the Chatham Rise. We have a highly skilled technical team (including three scientists who collected and interpreted most of the data in the 1970s and 80s) and our focus has been to:
· evaluate the likely environmental impact of the project
· identify ways to minimise and monitor effects
· define the resource and develop a mining plan

Stakeholder involvement has been central to the project. After talking to anyone with a potential interest (including environmental groups, the fishing industry, iwi and imi, media, etc) we’ve identified and investigated their concerns and provided information and mitigation options.

Environmental benefits

The project will have localised environmental effects on the seabed within our permit area but will also have significant environmental benefits. Some arise from substituting our product for phosphate fertiliser now sourced from Morocco and other distant locations.

The benefits of using local phosphate include:
It reduces water pollution from run-off when used as a direct application fertiliser because it releases slowly, requiring less frequent applications than conventional fertilisers, further reducing its carbon footprint
· It’s an organic New Zealand-origin product
· It offers security of supply
· It’ll reduce the carbon footprint by lowering transport distances
· It has one of the lowest known concentrations of cadmium of any phosphate rock, which will help prevent cadmium accumulation in New Zealand soils, which in some areas is already at high levels
· The rock is highly reactive, heightening its effectiveness as a fertiliser, and has strong liming qualities.

Benefits for NZ and Chatham Is

CRP expects to sell the product to New Zealand and export to at least eight countries in the Asia-Pacific. The project also has significant economic benefits, including making New Zealand $900 million richer, according to the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research.

It will have particular benefits for the Chatham Islands. We’ll be able to supply cheap fertiliser; little is applied there because of prohibitive transport costs. Chatham’s Federated Farmers representatives estimate fertiliser could increase farm production 10-fold and add 350 new jobs. Given the current population is below 600, that increase in farm production could transform the local economy and improve the affordability of infrastructure such as power and transport.

What about fishing concerns?

Our mining permit area – covering less than 1% of the Chatham Rise - is not a fishing area. The research predicts sediment effects will be confined to a few kilometres of our mining area, about 250 km from the Chatham Islands.


The Deep Water Fishing Group is concerned about possible impacts on commercial fishing. The key environmental effect will be sediment plume from the return of the fine material to the sea floor.

Modelling predicts those sediment plume effects will be very localised, with sensitive organisms affected up to 7 km from the mining ship. Scientists predict silt and clay concentrations higher than 100 mg per litre will last for no more than a few days in the immediate mining area. Sediment won’t rise more than 50 m above the seabed – well below the most biologically productive part of the water column where most fish are.


Chris Castle
Chief Executive Officer
Chatham Rock Phosphate Limited
Email: chris@crpl.co.nz
Cell: +64 21 558 185
Skype: phosphateking
www.rockphosphate.co.nz

[easy money]

Tell me Mac..if there is a change of govt this election...do you know what view the labour party has taken with this project...

[MAC]

Tell me Mac..if there is a change of govt this election...do you know what view the labour party has taken with this project...

Hard to say, I would have thought all the political parties would probably have better fodder than a net environmentally friendly venture like CRP.

Hypothetically though if the next government, whatever that may be were to alter the EEZ legislation, the existing marine consents would likely roll over into whatever replaced it. Similarly the RMA has seen governments come and go without consent holders needing to re-seek approvals.

It’s a fixed timeline now and the EPA must make their ruling by November, so an approval is anticipated before a next government can be formed from a November election, likely in the new year.

CRP have a few things in their favour politically too over the Trans Tasman venture, and IMHO if Trans Tasman do receive their approval tomorrow, I would say CRP will have no trouble whatsoever.

The Chatham Island farming community (most of the population) will benefit, the proposal is net environmentally friendly, and probably most significantly it has a positive impact on the dairy industry in NZ and political concerns over the dairy industry effects on the environment.

A Labour/Greens coalition might even score some points for promoting organic, low cadmium, low runoff fertiliser over the present and ever expanding dairy industry practices. Perhaps even more points for a tariff on imported high runoff fertilisers.

[easy money]

Thanks for your reply..on paper it makes sense to just about all parties involved...very little down side if any in the long run..good luck with your submission..

[sommelier]

Looking for a quick plummet in CRP again. Last time support was 17c, it could easily hit that again.

[MAC]

Appears the EEZ has some teeth as TTR is denied a permit today! I'd guess there is less uncertainty (the main reason for the refusal) about CRP as the company appears to have done it's homework. Perhaps a landmark now as they could be the first to receive a pass?

http://www.epa.govt.nz/EEZ/trans_tas...s/default.aspx

I agree Moosie, you can't compare the enormous amount of environmental research that CRP have undertaken or rather that Trans Tasman have neglected.

If the good environmental folk at the EPA wanted to show who was boss, they probably now have got that out of their system. If anything, it probably provides for a positive bias for the next one.

[ziggy415]

I agree Moosie, you can't compare the enormous amount of environmental research that CRP have undertaken or rather that Trans Tasman have neglected.

If the good environmental folk at the EPA wanted to show who was boss, they probably now have got that out of their system. If anything, it probably provides for a positive bias for the next one.

if you upset the good people at kasm...the local iwi...the marlbourgh muscle farms...the maui dolfins and right down to the sunlight from disturbed sediment upsetting the phyto plankton ...getting past the good people at EEZ was not going to be easy when the only benefit to nz was money. as TTR found out........the Chattams on the other hand is further away ...deeper...no dolfins.....and the local iwi are keen and the environmental foot print for nz farming looks good....the phyto plankton might be a bit peeved but 99 out of 100 is not bad......still not a guarantee to get the license ...still not sure if todays refusal is good for the chattams or not

[Bobcat.]

There's a lot of Orange Roughy down there -- I suppose they could put up a fight....

otherwise, yes, CRP has a much better chance of getting the required EEZ approval.

[MAC]

The Chatham rise rock phosphate due to it's natural physical properties will help reduce runoff into waterways and the phosphorus levels just like this.

http://www.3news.co.nz/Water-Care-re...1/Default.aspx

I would anticipate that many environmental groups may well support this marine consent application.

Not to mention the recreational users, fish and game, water sports groups, 100% pure tourist lobby, parks conversation groups, rural iwi, federated farmers, etc.

In years to come we may even see high runoff fertilisers disincentivised potentially leaving CRP quite well placed.