Recently, the Dazhou Natural Resources and Planning Bureau announced the withdrawal of mining rights within the red line of ecological protection in Dazhou City. In accordance with the requirements of the Circular of the General Office of the People's Government of Sichuan Province on the Issuance of the Measures for the Classification and Withdrawal of Mining Rights within the Red Line of Ecological Protection in Sichuan Province (No.2021) and the Circular of the Office of the People's Government of Dazhou City on the Issuance of the Work Programme for the Classification and Withdrawal of Mining Rights within the Red Line of Ecological Protection in Dazhou City (No.2022). The Natural Resources and Planning Bureau of Dazhou City took the lead in organizing and carrying out 26 classified withdrawal of mining rights within the red line of ecological protection in the whole city, and the task of withdrawal has been completed. It was learned
from the detailed list of the withdrawal of mining rights within the red line of ecological protection in Dazhou City. Chayuanzi Limestone Mine of Huaxin Cement (Wanyuan) Co., Ltd. and Lishanping Limestone Mine of Dazhou Conch Cement Co., Ltd. in Dazhu County should be avoided and withdrawn.
Data show that Huaxin Cement (Wanyuan) Co., Ltd. is located in Manaoxi Village, Guandu Town, Wanyuan City, in the northeast of Sichuan Province, the hinterland of Daba Mountains and the junction of Sichuan, Shaanxi and Chongqing. As well as a set of 7.5 MW pure low-temperature waste heat power generation system and a concrete mixing production line with an annual output of 200000 cubic meters. Located in Shihe Town, Dazhu County, Dazhou City, Sichuan Province
, Dazhou Conch Cement Co., Ltd. is a large-scale cement project invested by Conch Group in Sichuan-Chongqing region. It is reported that Dazhou Conch Cement has two 5,000 t/d cement clinker production lines. Can two cement enterprises maintain normal production after the withdrawal of the
mine? In response, China Cement Network telegraphed the relevant responsible persons of the two cement enterprises mentioned above, but no reply was received as of the time of publication.