News 
 National Rural News 
 Opinion 
 Comment 
 CSG an opportunity too good to let slip by 

CSG an opportunity too good to let slip by

28 Dec, 2011 08:31 AM
The not-in-my-backyarders could force NSW to miss out on a golden chance, writes the Director for Deregulation at the Institute of Public Affairs, Alan Moran.

New technology has allowed coal seam gas to become prominent as an energy source. In the US over the course of 10 years, CSG, together with shale gas, has grown from zero to 20 per cent of gas supplies and new export terminals will reverse the country's position as a gas importer.

Australian east coast reserves of CSG may comprise 275,000 petajoules, far more than the 160,000 petajoules estimated for conventional natural gas. They are set to supplement the already substantial North-West Shelf gas exports unless governments strangle the industry with regulations and that peculiarly Australian device of rolling ''moratoriums''.

In most of eastern Australia, gas prices have been relatively unaffected by global prices due to the lack of an export link. Australian east coast prices have averaged about $3 per gigajoule while overseas prices have ranged up to $10 and more, but the global recession has brought prices sharply down.

Once Australian CSG export facilities are built, local prices should converge with those overseas (though Australian consumers will benefit from avoiding ocean shipping and liquefaction costs).

Gas would receive a competitive lift if there is a carbon tax. It is already a cheaper source of electricity in countries that do not have Australia's low coal prices but for it to become cheaper than coal in Australia would require a carbon tax of about $50 per tonne.

However, even without a carbon tax, according to work by ACIL Tasman, if CSG is approved, not only will Australia gain valuable export markets but gas prices will fall by 6 per cent in Queensland and 15 to 20 per cent in the southern states.

The promise of CSG riches has brought anti-growth activists and the not-in-my-backyard NIMBYs campaigning against development. Much misinformation has accompanied these campaigns. Some activists have even suggested that the water used to pressurise the gas out of the coal seams could threaten to deplete the Great Artesian Basin. In fact, this would require the peak development of coal seam gas to be sustained for 600 million years.

Added to these concerns are those of people who want to preserve areas for farming and hobby farms and are mistakenly of the view that gas recovery is incompatible with this.

Confronted by NIMBY groups and a strong campaign from Alan Jones, the NSW government has been highly resistant to the industry. NSW politicians generally are placing increasing numbers of reviews, delays and special regulatory barriers in the path of any development. The opponents clearly see these as measures that will add costs to development and perhaps see it stopped entirely.

Already the inhospitable political approach in NSW has allowed Queensland to forge ahead. Gladstone is set to become one of the world's most prominent gas hubs, with BG, Santos, Origin and Shell all building export facilities. As a result, Queensland rather than NSW stands to gain hundreds of millions of dollars in royalties as well as the investment the industry attracts.

Any successes of the CSG industry's opponents will adversely affect Australian prosperity. Even if projects are allowed to proceed, the increased regulatory measures by states and the Commonwealth will assure that the costs of development are excessive and doubtless thwart some otherwise valuable projects.

CSG seems to be facing the same chorus of dissent that all too frequently thwart novel opportunities. Opposition towards new ventures by Australia's southern urban elites is contributing to areas outside of the north and the interior of the continent becoming the two-speed economy's slow gear.

The politically powerful in the southern capitals are holding back potential developments with rafts of regulations. Though primarily targeted at urban and near-urban areas, much of this regulatory morass also affects resource projects in the more remote areas, endangering the resource-based resilience that has so far helped us weather the international recessionary storms.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
I watched an old 4 Corners program on Wittenoom asbestos & health problems

It reported a doctor advised Company & regulators of dust problems & dangers Regulators wrote the Co about dust problems -But neither Govt NOR Co acted adequately

EEMAG Inc's evidence shows regulators don't PROPERLY enforce regulations and science can be slanted in favour of a project.

CSG won't go away Adverse impacts MUST be FULLY & FEARLESSLY assessed PRIOR to development.

We should not be stampeded.

Potentially affected landholders & water supplies should NOT be sacrificial lambs.

Posted by Heather, 28/12/2011 10:42:35 AM
Indeed, much IPA misinformation has accompanied these campaigns. NFF would of course prefer open slather on CSG.

First thing exporting gas from the Eastern States did was to substantially increase ES gas prices to world market levels, typically paid by people who derived no benefit from the exercise. Left to themselves, the CSG firms would be just like Asia’s logging companies – loot, pay a pittance if necessary, then go.

A report by JP Morgan noted risks of reduced water supplies, reduced water quality, and of gas migrating to existing bores.

Posted by R. Ambrose Raven, 28/12/2011 12:08:39 PM
Interesting comment that "science can be slanted in favour of a project". A good example would be human induced climate change?
Posted by Michael B, 28/12/2011 1:33:57 PM
I am surrounded by mostly larger acerage plots all with "Lock the Gate" produly affixed to their "gate".

I was against CSG because, all my peers where, the more I read about the more it appears it makes sense to go ahead.

My objections come down to

1. Lack of rights for landholders in Aus. Reform is needed here

2. Invariably the monitoring bureaucracy in charge will do an ordinary job, being hamstrung by politics.

Cross well seepage could be identified if the fracking agent had a unique marker for each commercial entity. That would also help with accident identification.

Posted by Valley_guy, 29/12/2011 9:54:30 AM
When weighing up the Pros & Cons of the CSG industry all those like this Deregulation "Director" form this dodgy Pro-industry "institute" that can see no impacts to his life, his heath, his invested land wealth or the heath of his local environment so it must be a great opportunity? Those of us fighting this CSG roll out are real people with a lot to lose not some minority group out to ruin his Gas friends party.

Money doesn't justify anything so get a grip and face the truth this industry is a train wreck waiting to happen to our lives on our land and water far from your city town house.

Posted by Liesandmorelies, 29/12/2011 4:29:45 PM
Institue of What? paid for by Whom? Let the slag host a compresor station and produced water pit in her backyard then. Treacherous witch.
Posted by Wybong Action Inc, 3/01/2012 10:08:22 PM
This squabble is purely about sharing of the rewards, and not about the so-called damage and risks to agriculture.

If a magic wand were waived, and the future profits were to be shared equally by miners and property owners, the "problem and objections" would disappear inside five minutes.

As usual, RARAs are not honest enough, confident enough or brave enough to openly declare their real objections and their real objectives.

Incidentally, property owners do not deserve more than they currently receive. Any change would fundamentally change our public ownership of minerals etc for the worse.

Posted by Bushie Bill, 4/01/2012 12:09:28 PM
What rot! This is a filthy out of control industry wanting access to our home paddocks. Properties are instantly devalued if they are able to be sold at all. Hydrogen sulphide and methane wafting through the air, toxic chemicals injected into our aquifers! For God sake Man, get a grip. This is Australia. Land of drought and flooding rain. We're not desperate for gas, Asia is. Pull your head out of the sand and consider the reality of the legacy you will leave for future generations. Australians aren't as gullible as you think and we're certainly not desperadoes.
Posted by Joy, 24/02/2012 7:45:45 PM
Mr Moran's Institute of Public Affairs is funded by private individuals and businesses. Among these businesses are ExxonMobil,WMC Resources, BHP Billiton, Phillip Morris, Murray Irrigation Limited & Visy Industries. IPA donors include Clough Engineering, Caltex, Shell and Esso, electricity and mining companies, as well as British American Tobacco. Their money talks. Imagine what good they might do if they promoted and invested in clean and renewable energy! Happy 2012 to us all... Year of the Farmer! My gate is locked to greedy multinational mining corporations.
Posted by Joy, 24/02/2012 8:22:51 PM
I have read case after case of how the coal seam gas companies come in and force themselves onto the farmers property by waiving a contract in front of them and but threatening with endless court costs if they don't sign to allow them to frack drill on their land or lay pipelines. Family after family has had their properties underground water (often their only source), contaminated causing them rashes, cancers and even death. This happening in the Tara estates to the children and adults and will only happen more because of the mining's sloppy practices with leaky pipes and holding ponds.
Posted by No CSG Australia, 24/02/2012 10:01:42 PM
1 | 2  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
12 December, 2011
27 November, 2011
21 December, 2011
14 December, 2011
POLL
Q: What did you have as your main meal this Christmas?

Pork
(14.2%)

Ham
(23.6%)

Turkey
(23%)

Chicken
(7.4%)

Beef
(6.1%)

Lamb
(8.1%)

Seafood
(12.8%)

Vegetarian
(2.7%)

Other
(2%)

Total Votes: 148
Poll Date: 28 December, 2011

Most popular articles

Advertisement



Queensland Country Life







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...