1 May 2024 To: Australian Senate Standing Committees on Environment and Communications

The net GHGs buried by the Glencore CTSCo project will likely be far lower than proposed by the project due to the carbon emissions intensity associated with the process of carbon capture from the Millmerran Power Station, transporting the CO2 by truck to the proposed injection site (a distance of 260km), and the injection of the CO2 into an aquifer 2.3km beneath the surface.35 Glencore has disclo. [...] In the case of the proposed Glencore CTSCo project, the upstream Scope Three emissions include CO2 and methane released as a result of the coal mining process and the transportation of coal to the power station. [...] The Australian Government’s decision that the project is not a controlled action under the EPBC Act and therefore does not require assessment and approval under the EPBC Act is based on a ten-day assessment process where “no public comments were received on the referral”.53 IEEFA is of the view that that the Glencore CCS project should be classiNed as a controlled action project under the EPBC Act. [...] The lack of comments may also reflect the fact that the government was supportive of the project at the time.57 However, there has been vocal opposition to the project, particularly from the agricultural community. [...] The present and future environmental and economic costs of the project as a result of the impact on groundwater sources have not been adequately addressed in the EIS.