As you may know, plans for the re-pening of the lime quarry on Robben Island are progressing well. An international firm of limekiln manufacturers has acquired the rights to excavate the quarry and transport processed lime off the island. An environmental-impact assessment (EIA) concluded that, while there should be some noise intrusion to the nearby visitor centre and prison, the impact will not be severe and will definitely not be heard from 18:00 to 06:00, as the quarry operation will not operate during these times.

In similar vein, the construction of the new railway line from Klerksdorp to Orkney will bypass the Vredefort Dome by at least 500 m. Vibration effects have been calculated not to harm the Vredefort Dome, according to an EIA.

The construction of a coal mine, Vele, which will result in 300 heavy coal trucks passing 1 km south of the Mapungubwe National Park each day, has also been subject to a positive record of decision, following an EIA.

Okay folks, which of the above is not true? Yes, there are no plans to mine on Robben Island and no railway line will pass the Vredefort Dome. This is because they are both United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisa-tion World Heritage Sites, of which South Africa has eight in total. But the story about the Vele colliery is true. And the Mapungubwe National Park is also a World Heritage Site. The Vele colliery has just obtained environmental approval to start construction. And you can see a representative coal truck scattering dust in its path at https://www.miningweekly.com/article/coals-vele-colliery-receives-enviro-nod-for-plant-upgrade-2015-01-27 .

The Vele colliery is the brainchild of Coal of Africa Limited (CoAL). Five years ago, the Endangered Wildlife Trust (EWT) asked me if I would assist by looking at the EIA of the Vele quarry, noise impacts especially. I read the report and other legal documents relating to noise impact and I wrote a reply in which I stated: “In effect, the report, the letter, the annexure and the reply by the respondents: provide noise contours maps which are only approximately accurate, do not address the effect of wind on noise from the west pit, do not take into account the effects of terrain, and do not take into account the effect of temperature inversion.”

On the basis of the above, the report cannot be accepted as a basis for determining noise effect on the World Heritage Site.

“However, having written all the above, the main matter, that this sort of thing should not happen – 300 heavy trucks a day, 1 km from the World Heritage Site – seems to have escaped the authorities and CoAL. Mapungubwe is an astonishing site. It was a precolonial culture of about 5 000 people, who traded in ivory, gold and agriculture and were seemingly associated with the people of Great Zimbabwe.

Anyway, back to me and the EWT. The EWT fought the granting of a positive record of decision and CoAL fought back. Clearly, CoAL has now won. This is not because it has a better case or (I think) because it is going to address the environmental impact of noise, and so on, but simply because it has more cash than the EWT.

Thus, it would seem in this case that the future ‘sense of place’ of a World Heritage Site is decided by businesspeople with deep pockets.

Is this unusual? Well, not. I recall being asked to do an EIA for a major State-owned company, once. My report noted that what they planned was way, way beyond what they could do legally. The parastatal called me in and tried to get me to tone down my report and then to state that my report was probably wrong. I did neither and was asked to leave the professional team. Somebody else was hired. That person was not professionally registered but boy did he write a smooth report. I think the Vele case is a clear example of what should not be happening, environmentally. But, unless the people who undertake EIAs stay faithful to the truth, it will just be that money buys the EIA you want. Which is plain awful.