Briefing Paper : RADIOLOGICAL IMPLICATIONS of POTENTIAL SEABED SUBSIDENCE SEISMICITY & “FAULT RE-ACTIVATION” beneath The CUMBRIAN MUD PATCH: INDUCED BY “MASS REMOVAL”, RAPID EXTRACTION & VOID SPACE CREATION

Solway Sunset

A Briefing Paper on radiological implications of West Cumbria Mining’s plan has been sent to councillors ahead of their coming decision on whether to allow the plan for the first deep coal mine in 30 years to continue.

The author of the paper, Tim Deere-Jones is an Independent & non-aligned Marine Pollution Researcher & Consultant whose clients include: WWF, The UK Wildlife Trusts, European Climate Foundation, Greenpeace International, European Coastal Local Authorities and many others.

This comprehensive report concludes that the plan by West Cumbria Mining should be abandoned.  The introduction and Major Conclusions are reproduced below…..

Introduction:                                                                                                                                                        This Briefing offers a review of the possible seabed morphological changes and marine pollution implications of the sub-sea coal mining venture proposed by West Cumbria Mining (WCM) at their Woodhouse Colliery site near St Bees Head.

WCM have designated and identified a sub-sea mining zone of the Irish Sea lying to the west of St Bees Head and extending at least 8kms offshore and southwards to within about 8km of the Sellafield site.

The WCM extraction proposals, using continuous mining methods, predict the extraction of approximately 3 million tonnes of coal per year over a 50 year period. This extraction rate will eventually generate a huge subterranean void space of approximately 136 million cubic metres (a volume greater than that of Wastwater Lake).

This briefing considers the impact of the creation of such a sub-sea void space on the possibility of sea bed subsidence in the area of the WCM designated sub-sea mining zone, and the subsequent potential for marine radiological pollution as a result of the subsidence induced re-suspension of the heavily radioactively contaminated sea bed sediments of the Cumbrian Mud Patch and surrounding sea bed areas.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….  

Major Conclusions

It is noted that there is a lack of data about the status of the existing historical galleries and workings of the West Cumbrian Coalfield. It is noted that there is a lack of accurate data about the history and status of any subsidence seismicity in the coalfield.  It is noted that the BGS have concluded that the coalfield is heavily faulted and has a long history of subsidence and that it appears that there are no plans to monitor for any subsidence prior to, during the operational phase or in the post operational phase of the Woodhouse Colliery.  It is noted that sub-sea monitoring equipment is available and could be deployed in the region in order to monitor for any subsidence effects arising as a result of the proposed Woodhouse Colliery “mass removal” extraction.

It is concluded that there is a real potential for subsidence to occur as a result of the “mass removal” and the creation of extensive sub-sea void spaces, and it is noted that such subsidence could generate earthquake and liquefaction effects which may extend onshore as far as the Sellafield/Moorside sites.

It is concluded that any seabed subsidence in the WCM designated sub-sea mining zone would generate re-suspension of Cumbrian Mud Patch heavily radioactive seabed sediments. It is noted that such an event would generate elevated doses of man-made radioactivity to coastal zone populations and sea users along both the Cumbrian coast and at “downstream” regions further afield.

Given the potential for such a radiological effect and the delivery of increased doses of radioactivity to relevant coastal zone communities, some of which have already been identified by the authorities as Coastal Critical Groups, the Woodhouse Colliery proposal (especially in the absence of any precautionary mandatory subsidence monitoring) is strongly contra-indicated and should be abandoned

The FULL REPORT can be READ HERE

12 thoughts on “Briefing Paper : RADIOLOGICAL IMPLICATIONS of POTENTIAL SEABED SUBSIDENCE SEISMICITY & “FAULT RE-ACTIVATION” beneath The CUMBRIAN MUD PATCH: INDUCED BY “MASS REMOVAL”, RAPID EXTRACTION & VOID SPACE CREATION

  1. Reblogged this on and commented:

    Briefing paper sent today to councillors – this comprehensive report by Tim Deere-Jones is testament to why we are so vehemently opposed to a new deep coal mine so very close to Sellafield. Approving this plan would run counter to the Council’s own Local Plan which has to take heed of the impacts including the cumulative impacts of hazardous installations….and it doesn’t get more hazardous than this!

    Like

  2. Mavis Aitchison

    I endorse the finding of the report & add in addition to disturbance of nuclear waste elements iin the sea bed with consequences to the health of the local population there is also pollution from spent ordnance from the Eskmeals proof & Experimental Establishment..

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Pingback: Another Excellent Letter of Objection to the Coal Mine Plan – WRITE TODAY! – Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole

  4. Pingback: STOP THE COAL MINE IN CUMRIA -PETITION – Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole

  5. Pingback: Coal and nuclear in Cumbria -

  6. Pingback: Article in the Ecologist Exposes Links between West Cumbria Mining and Radioactive Waste Management – Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole

  7. Pingback: No Worries! Nuclear and Coal In Close Proximity – is ALL OK according to Council Planning Officers in their Recommendations – Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole

  8. Pingback: Who is Responsible for the Cumbrian/Sellafield Mud Patch which lies above the Coal Mine Plan? – Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole

  9. Pingback: Developers Ask Coal Authority for License to Drill – Tell Kwasi Kwarteng To Veto The Diabolic Plan (or at least call for a public consultation) – Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole

  10. Pingback: the issue around possible Geological Disposal Facility (GDF) in Cumbria – DESIGN INFORMANTS

  11. Pingback: Earthquake Traffic Light System for Coal Mine – If Not Why Not? Why Preferential Treatment for Coal Mine Over Now Banned Fracking? – Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s