The coal loading company should have simply accepted the court's decision concerning the fine and tightened security. Why did they think they had a hope of getting a half mil out of those guys?

All the action did was give our corerspondent a reason to draw attention to an otherwise forgettable effort by a tiny group of activists to stop a coal export operation for a time.

It also gave her an excuse to add a couple of items to the industry's indictment. Lung cancer? Asthma? Our well informed correspondent is confusing CO emissions (which are undoubtedly rising) with particulate pollution over cities which has been falling over decades.

Curmudgeon, as far as I understand it, the mining process kicks up dust and teh dust is the pollutant that causes asthma. There was a very good TV program that looked at coal minings impact in the Hunter Valley last year and a local GP's study that featured would support this.

Hopefully the case won't succeed. I'm not a lawyer but it could have wider reaching implications for anyone who want's to take issue with a company or the Government that just this case. Imagine if suddenly the council approved a huge block of flats against it's own policy across the road from you and you knew that the person who had approved it from the council had been sleeping with the developer - this scenerio may not be to far removed from reality given what happened in NSW not so long ago.

So after failing to get the media's attention by the usual methods you and your neighbours chain yourself to a bulldozer as work begins. There is no safety issues as the workers are alerted straight away. Strapping yourself to your front gate while legal to publicise the issue just won't cut it! It stops the work for half a day. You manage to get the media and public's attention. Outrage ensues and the project is stopped. But if this coal mining case is successful then if you are charged and found guilty of trespass, then the company, even if you were in the right about the flats being built may be able to hit you for compensation. TBC

Or what about when something is clearly unethical and should be stopped at all costs. A company in Canada was hoping to get approval to mine and ship Asbestos to the third world, even though it's not legal to use it in Canada, where they would have some chance of controlling the hazards associated with the material. There would be fat chance of making sure it was used safely offshore. This was simply about greed, not community benefit. I think that anyone who blockaded such a thing would be a hero. But if such a case happened in Australia and this coal case succeeds, it might be open slather on people acting in real public interest.

Environmental issues at Hazelwood power station in Victoria which needs to be shut down because of it's emmissions would not have got publicity without people entering the grounds. Some old Growth forest would not be there if it weren't for people prepared to take direct action while the courts and public opinion took time to decide in their favour.

The coal mining industry is getting a lot of support from the various Australian Governments. That means that through the government they are getting support from the taxpayers. If some of those taxpayers and Australian citizens want to challenge the industry, they should be able to do so without fear of the industry using it's huge financial advantage against them.

"If it wasn’t coal; leaving in its wake destroyed farmlands and aquifers, lung cancers and asthmas from the particulate dust and exporting with it, the huge potential for climate changing pollution, then you’d be proud of his contribution to our prosperity."

Gosh, yes. If only it was inert rock, that wouldn't burn, couldn't run fires and cookers, couldn't produce hot water, warm homes, factories and office buildings, keep power stations running and provide heat and light for millions of people; if only it wouldn't extend the working day and allow people to read, play games and carry out their hobbies at night instead of huddling in the dark. If only he was exporting something utterly useless and valueless, then we could be proud of Shaun Stears; alas, as it is, we hang our heads in shame.

Sell people something that they want? How DARE he?!

JL Deland - dust from coal mining causing asthma??

Bbbwwwhahahahah!

Is there, in fact, any evidence of any increase in particulate pollution over settled areas due to coal mining, or coal loading, and never mind the Hunter valley TV program. What about the atmosphere in the immediate vicinity of the coal loaders or coal mines? You may find an increase, but you also won't find any homes.

In fact, as you should have been told long along, there is a theory that the cleaner air is supposed to cause more asthmas. Something to do with immune systems not being challenged, but I have only a vague grasp of it myself. Its findable online. I know the green fraternity hate this inconvenient theory but there it is..

As noted particulate pollution in urban areas has been falling for decades, for reasons that have nothing to do with coal mining. Think just how many house still have fire places (probably long walled up), and imagine what the atmosphere would have been like when all those fireplaces were being used. Remember also that heavy industry has been resited and cleaned up.

These are all long-standing trends which would have also been a major factor in all the areas covered by your program. Sorry but the astham business is straight, green fantasy.

I'll leave my comments on the morality of civil disobedience to another time.

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/mine-air-pollution-breaches-safety-limits-20100713-109ij.html

Phrases like civil disobedience are used when one disagrees with the cause. As JLDeland wrote, how many native forests would be standing without the efforts of environmental groups sometimes including very public protests like the Franklin Dam. How many more polluting activities and environmental disasters without these sorts of activists, even if one does not always agree.

The farmers and citizens of the Liverpool Plains protested about the risk of increasing coal mining in the area due to potential effects on groundwater and they were not tarred as 'greenies' but in effect the 'sit ins' were the same.

Expecting the protestors to pay back half a million is pushing it uphill a bit. Hope it doesn't turn into another corporate embarrassment such as the doomed and infamous McLibel case.

Pelican - civil disobedience is an acceptable term.. same term was applied to Ghandi's protests.. but as a matter of interest what would you call such actions?

Point well made Curmudgeon. It tends to get used as a negative - when sometimes it can be for a good cause depending of course on one's own ideological stance

There's a significant lack of climate change denial in these comments. I demand this is rectified to keep Online Opinion's reputation upheld!

Ta da! - found the program on the Hunter asthma Curmudgeon http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2010/s2867659.htm

Of couse it's by the radical leftwing ABC and OOL's reputation may never recover from the quoting of such sources, but I'll risk it and post it. I watched that program expecting to be seeing activist faces. I was wrong, and it was full of concerned people who work in the coal industry who are worried about their families.

As for not finding any homes around the mines, go for a drive around Singleton or Jerry's plains some time. At Ulan too the open cut mines are expanding rapidly into areas where there are farms and businesses. They seem to be popping up like rabbits. Hopefully they won't get into the Mudgee winery area as it would completely change the dynamic of the area from clean and green to heavy industry that many people argue is incompatible with the wineries, livestock, and tourist ventures.

Last time I was out that way, driving along the road I could see dust being pulled up by the wind and blown out of the mine. Okay to drive though once or twice, but I wouldn't want to be down-wind in the long term.

If you are very lucky and sitting out there in the Hunter and worried about your kid's health, a ABC team from 4 corners might just swing by or a member of the Government or public service who really intended to do something about the problem. I suspect you would be waiting along time though, which is why non violent civil disobience is seen as appropriate to highlight the issue.

The people of the Hunter put up with a lot from the mines, noise, dust, increased traffic, health concerns and not everyone is going to see a benefit from having the mines there. The coal company seeking compensation against individuals in this case is making it personal against opposition and is in a position of strength against the individuals who aren't. It doesn't make them a good player or neighbour in my view.

Heavens above! What a quiet tread! No one has yelled about Socialists or God yet.

Anyway another thought as to why this company in my opinion, should not be seeking compensation against these activists. This company which is making a very healthy profit from the coal business no doubt in Australia is receiving a lot of uncosted benefits. That is a stable government, a healthy, educated, peaceful, honest, work force, thanks to this being a free and stable democracy and having the worker's welfare invested in from birth to a pretty high degree on a world scale, having services such as police, fire and rescue at their call for free (which is how it should be if we allow companies to do business here), the use of our roads, rail, port services etc. Sitting in the Bylong valley once, I saw a rail repair team (presumably state rail) pulled off the work for hours waiting for a coal train. In other countries they may be having to supply a lot of these services themselves and maybe not be so secure with a stable government.

Part of living in a this democracy is the understanding that it's citizens may protest you by peaceful civil disobience. If it happens it will be understood that the police and the courts will do what is appropriate in the eyes of the government, and if we the Australian people don't like that we can vote the government out. To seek personal compensation is overkill in my opinion. The amount of money is chicken feed to the company, but huge to individuals such as a school teacher.

Anyway at least the activists in court most likely have some consolation that the bad publicity to the company is going to worth far more than the cash that is being sought from them.

While the use of thermal coal will have to eventually stop due to climate change effects, ironically the mining of coal is a non-toxic exercise, and closed mines can be re-habilitated for pastoral useage, the aquifers will re-charge etc. The Asthma thing sounds improbable and is probably a beat up...In this the protesters have committed political hara-kiri by trying to make too many points - my advice to them, just stick to the "climate change issue" - you'll make more mileage!
My main point is that the take up of rural acreage in NSW by the coal mining industry is facilitated by the marginal viability of farming in many areas. The sale of the family farm to a coal company is to many farmers financial salvation while at the same time being less than appealing to their ( former ) neighbours. Within all of these communities the rural landholders themselves seek employment offered at their local mine to supplement falling farm incomes.Policies which could lead to increased profitability of the farming sector and therefore increased land values would be reflected as a reduction in the changing land and water useage towards coal mining. Many of these policies require national technological investment in the rural sector which presently is not on the political radar.While the global coal demand is strong it can be impacted by organized protest. I think the land use and local health issues are driven by local economic and political factors, and it looks as if the local communities in NSW and QLD have already cast their votes.

One of the major points made by the author is that the coal companies wish to double their exports to China and India over coming years to meet those countries' needs. In other words, he's urging a ban on coal exports so that the 2.4 billion people in those two countries are not allowed to increase their quality of life or standard of living, instead forcing many of their citizens to continue to live in abject poverty. Sorry but I'm not prepared to deny a reasonable improvement in quality of life to these human beings. To simply call for a ban on the sale of coal to these countries without coming up with viable alternatives as to how to meet their reasonable expectations for a better future is just plain selfish. It may even be arrogant and racist.