User:Mohebbee/sandbox

Coal seam gas is a form of natural gas extracted from underground coal seams. The gas released from the coal seams is predominantly methane, which is used for electricity generation both domestically as well as industrially. The extraction of coal seam gas professes to be an economical and environmental benefit reducing greenhouse gases but also attracts vast environmental and social concerns. Coal seam gas is a non-renewable energy resource that is a by-product of coal (Hepburn, 2012). It is a form of non-toxic gas and therefore has created great commercial attention. The extraction of coal seam gas includes several processes before it becomes available for commercial and residential use. At a rich coal seam gas site the ground beneath is constructed of many different aquifers, however the gas lies deep underground below most of the aquifers used for drinking water and irrigation ABC News, 2012). The gas is trapped in the microspores of the coal in what is known as coal ‘seams’ or ‘cleats’ and is enclosed within the seams by large quantities of water (Hepburn, 2012). Therefore in order to extract the gas a mix of water and chemicals is pumped at high pressure down a well into the coal seam creating an array of cracks in the coal (Australian Pacific LNG, 2013). This procedure allows for the gas and water to be released from the coal and the water is now known as ‘associated water’. The two are subsequently separated and sent for processing, though this water has high levels of salinity and toxic chemicals from both the fracturing process as well as those naturally present in the coal seam (Hepburn, 2012). Not all coal seams require this process of hydraulic fracturing as some coal may be permeable and consist of natural cracks (Australian Pacific LNG, 2013). At the end of the cycle coal seam gas is transferred into liquefied natural gas (LNG) whereby permitting the exportation of LNG. The coal seam gas industry is thriving in Australia. In the past decade the industry has developed and profited drastically with the advancement of technology and promises to further growth with the prediction of more reserves in Eastern states (Australian Pacific LNG, 2013). This boom is expected to increase with the demands for domestic and export market on the rise. The estimated export value of the LNG (Liquid Natural Gas) industry is reported to have increased fourfold in Australia over the last decade to now worth almost $11 billion (ABC News, 2012). For this reason coal seam gas production is currently a critical issue in Australia requiring precise development and a balanced regulatory framework that has the ability to evaluate the economic, environmental and social issues surrounding its production (Hepburn, 2012). Fundamentally CSG production is said to be no different to any other development of our landscapes as they all do display risks to the condition of water, soil, and vegetation and have the potential to decrease the capacity of our natural resources Williams & Stubbs, 2012). State governments such as Queensland have promised that the expanding industry is creating thousands of jobs with a forecast of 18,000 jobs estimated in Queensland (ABC News, 2012). Statistics have been collected from three projects namely Origin Energy/Conoco Phillips, Santos and QGC, all which have received state and federal approval in 2010/2011 (ABC News, 2012). These companies estimate $16.3 million projected for 2014-2015 for LNG exports to the Asia-Pacific region, which is Australia’s major export market. The Australian federal government is promised a piece of the cake with $40 million worth income taxes to be generated, clearly depicting the importance and relevance of this issue for the economic state of the government (ABC News, 2012). With an industry as fast growing as the CSG industry the economic benefits are manifold however this issue has raised immense concern on Australia’s most valuable resources, water. It involves the removal of large amounts of water from deep within the ground in order to release the gas, however the insertion of chemical additives is likely to pass into the water as well as heavy metals (Osbourne, 2012). The formation of ‘associated water’ that is produced in the extraction process of coal seam gas contains increased levels of salinity and may contain other chemical elements throughout the process, which is why it is crucial that it must be disposed of cautiously. The possibility of leaking polluted water entering domestic water supplies as well as those used by farmers has been reported, clearly illustrating why this issue is significantly crucial and relevant for environmentalists, landowners and communities affected (Lowe, 2013). This results to catastrophic environmental concerns impacting aquifer levels and may exhaust them completely (Osbourne, 2012). Furthermore the reduction of groundwater can also affect agricultural and rural industries that depend upon the water supply, including those in New South Wales and Queensland whereby the coal seam gas mining is predominant (Osbourne, 2012). Case description The introduction of coal seam gas mining was recognised in the early 1900’s when the coal mining industry initiated (Hepburn, 2012). It further developed with the advancement of modern technology to become a key transition fuel allowing for lower carbon emissions. The state of Queensland allowed for CSG discovery in 1976 in the Bowen Basin, however commercial production merely started in 1996, depicting the great growth this industry has in Australia (Australian Pacific LNG, 2013). Coal seam gas currently provides 90% of Queensland’s gas usage and 15% of the state’s entire electricity generation.* CSG currently produces a major proportion of Australia’s natural gas supply, alongside the Australia Pacific LNG Project which provides the largest CSG resources in Australia (Australian Pacific LNG, 2013). The case of coal seam gas mining has polarised all those involved including residents, environmentalists, lawmakers and farmers. The debate intensifies as more is thrown into the issue forcing governments to create reforms and initiatives such as the Independent Expert Scientific Committee (Australian Government Dept of SEWPC, 2012). The Australian government is acknowledging the importance of research to further understand the processes of the CSG industry and its environmental impacts. This initiative is an investment of $150 million that helps the committee to provide scientific advice to governments about CSG approvals and where they may have significant impacts on water and the means to minimise it (Independent Expert Scientific Committee, 2012). Discussion The coal seam gas mining industry is flourishing astonishingly with the seal of approval from state governments of Queensland and more recently New South Wales (Hepburn, 2012). Research from CSG companies such as Arrow and Origin depict a flawless report sheet of the processes and benefits of the booming industry for the future of Australia, however further research depicts the enormity of the environmental issues that are yet to be addressed. Unfortunately the portions of land that would potentially give way to exploring for CSG occur to be some of the most productive agricultural land sites in Australia (Hepburn, 2012). A crucial point that is put forward by landholders is their concern that independent science has failed to keep pace with the growing development of CSG, predominantly its long-term impacts on water (ABC News, 2012). However the big mining companies say this is a great opportunity, “Look at this water. It is a fantastic opportunity for Queensland”, states the managing director of QGC Richard Cottee (ABC News, 2012). The proposed idea suggests that the excess water that is extracted in the process of obtaining the coal seam gas can be utilised for irrigating farmland and boost river flows (ABC News, 2012). Though first the water has to be treated to extract salts, chemicals and heavy metals that are naturally present in the coal seams. Desalination plants are then used to create waste brine for disposal and the treated CSG water can be put to ‘beneficial use’ where it may be available for irrigation, river discharge and drinking (ABC News, 2012). Environmentalists say it’s not as simple as replacing coal-fired electricity with the production of coal seam gas because even though there could be a huge reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, the process is far more precarious (Australian Government Dept SEWPC, 2012). Consequently it is reported that often CSG proposals liquefy the gas, transporting it long distances and converting the gas into electricity whereby the gas inevitably leaks into the atmosphere (Lowe, 2013). Subsequently as a result of the gas production the greenhouse benefits are diminished (Australian Greens Policy Initiative, 2013). In the Australasian Science report Dr Williams, former Chief of CSIRO Land and Water has concluded that CSG requires adequate regulation like other land uses and further mentions the environmental risks apparent (Carey & Doherty, 2011). One such risk requires the aquifers to be recharged once production is over, however by then mining companies would have disposed of the extracted water causing all those involved concerned (CSIRO, 2011). Governments have shown a display of responsible evaluation in regards to regulating and taking precautionary measures by establishing a series of research projects, commissioned by the Commonwealth and state governments to improve assessments of CSG proposals (Australian Government Dept of SEWPC, 2012). Such measures include the National Groundwater Assessment Initiative, which is formed to assist in groundwater knowledge gaps (Australian Government Dept of SEWPC, 2012). Advocates believe the CSG industry will be prosperous for Australia by creating jobs, diversify rural economies and boost the national economy. Nevertheless the benefits put Australia’s food security at danger, lead to pollution and diminish underground aquifers as well as putting Australia’s largest water resource, the Great Artesian Basin at risk (Australian Government Dept of SEWPC, 2012). The concern of communities involved is understandable as this possible risk threatens changes to water supply and quality alike. Landowners could be in jeopardy without the reliance of underground water for their properties and industries. The potential impacts of CSG mining don’t stop at our water resources but also affect the lose and disintegration of native vegetation as a result of the surface footprint of CSG infrastructure (Williams & Stubbs, 2012). There is evidence that it threatens biodiversity, threatened species, and landscape function due to the installation of closely spaced well-head infrastructure, access road and pipelines (Williams & Stubbs, 2012). This issue is critical and requires precise regulatory management by governments, as it will have significant overall effects on landscape function and our natural resources. A well-outlined report by Doctors of the Environment Australia supports the notion that coal seam gas mining possesses immense health risks threatening drinking and agricultural use water as well as the air (Carey & Doherty, 2011). It has been reported that the toxic substances produced from the sedimentary regions that are drilled in coal seams may contain compounds that can produce short-term health risks and may later constitute to illness and/or cancer (Carey & Doherty, 2011). The proposed idea that coal seam gas reduces greenhouse emissions and is said to contain half as much as the fossil fuel footprint of coal is indefinite. A NSW Parliamentary Inquiry has concluded that though it may be unlikely to arrive at a exact conclusion, it considers that at the least, the greenhouse gas emissions of energy produced by CSG is likely to be equal to those from coal, and shouldn’t hinder its development in NSW (Carey & Doherty, 2011). Ultimately the issue of coal seam gas mining and the potential risks it has is understandably a significant issue for all Australians and requires genuine assessment and evaluation to be conducted objectively. It does undoubtedly encompass huge benefits for the national and state economy and employment sector boosting revenue and the international export market, however the risks and benefits assessed equally need to be balanced for a successful outcome.

References list: ABC News (2012) Coal Seam Gas: By The Numbers - Coal seam gas and water - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation). [online] Available at: http://www.abc.net.au/news/specials/coal-seam-gas-by-the-numbers/water/ [Accessed: 5 May 2013]. Australia Pacific LNG (2013) What is coal seam gas? - Australia Pacific LNG. [online] Available at: http://www.aplng.com.au/home/what-coal-seam-gas [Accessed: 1 May 2013]. Australian Government Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (2012) Coal seam gas - EPBC Act. [online] Available at: http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/coal-seam-gas/index.html [Accessed: 27 April 2013]. Australian Greens Policy Initiative (2013) Protecting our farms; protecting our water Regulating the Coal Seam Gas industry. [report] Canberra: p.1-3. Carey, D. and Doherty, P., et al. (2011) Submission to the Rural Affairs and Transport References Committee Inquiry into management of the Murray Darling Basin – impact of mining coal seam gas. [report]. CSIRO (2011) Improving production of coal seam gas | CSIRO. [online] Available at: http://www.csiro.au/Outcomes/Energy/Energy-from-coal/Improving-production-of-coal-seam-gas.aspx [Accessed: 5 May 2013]. Hepburn, S. (2012) The Coal Seam Gas Industry in Australia. [online] Available at: http://www.deakin.edu.au/research/stories/2012/05/08/the-coal-seam-gas-industry-in-australia [Accessed: 1 May 2013]. Independent Expert Scientific Committee (2012) Independent Expert Scientific Committee on Coal Seam Gas and Large Coal Mining Development - Home page. [online] Available at: http://www.environment.gov.au/coal-seam-gas-mining/ [Accessed: 5 May 2013]. Lowe, I. (2013) Coal Seam Gas Expansion Ignores Serious Issues. Australasian Science, 47 (34), p.1. Available at: http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/docview/1265617729 [Accessed: 1 May 2013]. Osbourne, K. (2012) Is Coal Seam Gas Polluting Groundwater? . Australasian Science, 22-25 (33), p.1. Available at: http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/docview/1040856956 [Accessed: 26 April 2013]. Queensland Government Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (2013) Environmental legislation (Department of Environment and Heritage Protection). [online] Available at: http://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/management/non-mining/environmental-legislation.html [Accessed: 1 May 2013]. Williams, J. and Stubbs, T., et al. (2012) An analysis of coal seam gas production and natural resource management in Australia. Australian Council of Environmental Deans and Directors. [report] Canberra, Australia: John Williams Scientific Services Pty Ltd, p.30-71.