Peabody Energy to pay $500K for Royal NP Pollution
In September, 2022, Wild’s editor James McCormack discovered pollution from a coal mine upstream flowing into the Royal National Park. His discovery set in train a chain of events that has resulted in Peabody Energy being required to pay more than $500,000 in fines and legal costs.
(Banner image caption: Coal-contaminated water entering the Hacking River from Camp Gully Creek. Credit: James McCormack)
Wild Magazine has long played an important role in campaigning for Australia’s wilderness and environmental issues. From its advocacy in documenting and promoting the Franklin Dam campaign in the early 80s to its ongoing work supporting the preservation of national parks and rainforest, Wild is much more than your average adventure mag.
Another chapter in this important history was written recently with the NSW Land and Environment Court’s verdict against Peabody Energy, the operator of the Metropolitan Mine in Helensurgh, a small town halfway between Sydney and Wollongong.
For those who follow Wild’s social media accounts, you may recall that our editor, James McCormack, uncovered filthy, coal-contaminated water in the fragile waterways of the Royal National Park (the world’s second oldest national park) back in 2022 while travelling through a rarely visited section of the reserve. The source? A discharge from the nearby Metropolitan Colliery, a coal mine operated by Peabody Energy, the world’s largest private-sector coal company.
Thanks to James’ sharp eye and unwavering commitment to truth and conservation (initially the EPA and the mine were unconvinced the event was worthy of examination, believing the pollution to be remnants of another less serious event) the issue was brought into public view. His multiple reports of the toxic sludge eventually ignited a chain reaction, drawing national media attention and prompting an investigation by the NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA).
In an important ruling handed down two weeks ago by the NSW Land and Environment Court, Peabody Energy was found guilty of polluting waterways within the Royal National Park and breaching its environmental licence. The mining giant has been ordered to pay over $500,000 in fines and legal costs—a decisive moment for environmental accountability in Australia. The fines themselves amounted to $196,560 ($150,000 of which will go to the National Parks and Wildlife Service for water quality monitoring), while a further $304,806 must be paid towards the EPA’s legal and investigation costs.
Still this fine should have been bigger, argues James. “This fine is manifestly inadequate,” he says. “I’ve done the sums. For a US-based multinational company like Peabody (the owner of Metropolitan Mine) with 2024 revenue of $4.2 billion USD, (ie $6.36 billion AUD) it’s literally the same as fining someone who makes $80,000 just $2.47.”
In addition to monetary payments, Peabody was ordered to publish a notice of its offences in specified media outlets, including Wild Magazine, both in print and online [see wild.com.au/news/metropolitan-court-ordered-notice-2025].
A Catalyst for Change
The contamination was traced to the discharge of coal-laden water from the mine’s sedimentation ponds. This toxic runoff flowed into Camp Gully Creek, a beautiful, rainforested waterway which flows through Garawarra State Conservation Area before eventually feeding into the pristine Hacking River. Both waterways form vital components of the ecosystem within the national park, with the Hacking River being home to the much-publicised platypus colony, having been reintroduced to the park after roughly fifty years’ absence. Independent scientists and government officers confirmed the damage to the local ecology, citing elevated pollution levels and clear ecological harm.
James’s work wasn’t just journalism—it was environmental activism in action that typifies the work of Wild. His findings catalyzed a full-scale EPA investigation, and ultimately, legal action. In many ways, it’s a reminder of the critical role that journalism can play in protecting wild places.
“It’s often easy to be cynical about the media, but this is a textbook example of how it can defend the planet,” said James. “Our wild places don’t have voices. It’s our job—Wild‘s job—to speak up for them.”
The Court’s Findings
The Land and Environment Court’s judgment provided a detailed account of Peabody’s environmental breaches. The court found that between July and October 2022, Peabody discharged polluted water on multiple occasions, exceeding the limits set by their environmental protection licence. The judgment highlighted Peabody’s failure to implement adequate measures to prevent such discharges, despite prior warnings and the foreseeable risk of environmental harm.
Justice Robson noted in the judgment: “The defendant’s conduct demonstrated a disregard for its environmental obligations and a failure to take reasonable steps to prevent pollution of a highly sensitive and valuable ecosystem.”
A National Park Under Threat
The Royal National Park, founded in 1879, is not just a popular hiking and swimming destination for Sydneysiders. It’s the second-oldest national park in the world, an ecologically significant haven for native flora and fauna. Its proximity to an active coal mine has long been a source of concern for conservationists.
Peabody’s operations have come under scrutiny before, but this ruling is the first time the company has been formally found guilty of environmental offences in NSW. The court acknowledged that Peabody had failed to implement effective management systems to prevent pollution, despite multiple warnings and prior incidents.
Our wild places don’t have voices. It’s our job—Wild’s job—to speak up for them.
A Win for the Wild, But Work Remains
But while the ruling was a win, the outcome could have been better. Initially Peabody was facing five charges, with fines for each potentially up to one million dollars. Had the maximum been imposed, a five-million-dollar penalty would have sent a strong message. Sadly, that did not transpire. Nonetheless, the ruling is still a victory, and should be celebrated. That said, environmental groups, local communities, and Wild Magazine stress that more must be done. Many are calling for stricter enforcement of existing regulations, improved monitoring of industrial sites adjacent to natural reserves, and a national conversation about the place of fossil fuel operations near protected areas.
In particular, notes James, in the Woronora Dam catchment to the west of Helensburgh, there are reports of subsidence cracks causing upland wetlands and swamps to be drained, threatening these precious ecosystems. But unlike his discovery in the Royal NP, where members of the public had no problems accessing, the areas of concern within Woronora’s catchment lie within Sydney Water’s exclusion zone; a $44,000 fine awaits any member of the public who wishes to venture in to inspect for damage. Holding Peabody to account in this area is incredibly difficult.
James and the Wild editorial team remain committed to covering these issues. In fact, this case underscores the very reason Wild exists—to explore not only the breathtaking beauty of Australia and New Zealand’s wild places, but also the threats they face and the people fighting to protect them.
What Comes Next?
Peabody has not yet indicated whether it will appeal the decision, but environmental advocates are already pushing for broader reforms. The EPA’s successful prosecution marks a turning point, but vigilance remains essential.
For Wild, the story doesn’t end here.
We’ll continue to investigate, report, and stand up for the ecosystems that make Australia and New Zealand unique. As adventurers and environmental stewards, we believe protecting the places we explore is just as important as enjoying them.
Because the wild can’t defend itself—but together, we can.
You can read more about this case and the work that led to its discovery in the upcoming print edition of Wild Magazine, Issue 196, which will also include a notice of Peabody’s offences by order of the Court.
Note: This article has been updated to include details from the Land and Environment Court’s judgment.
