THE chairman of the Great Artesian Basin Coordinating Committee says that while coal seam gas extraction has the potential to detrimentally impact on underground water resources, calls for a moratorium on the development of gas mining in the GAB are unwarranted.
Jeff Austin, an engineer from Walgett, NSW, chairs the Great Artesian Basin Coordinating Committee, which is made up of 20 representatives of local, State and Federal Government departments and agricultural, mining and environmental groups.
The committee’s role is to oversee the sustainable “whole of basin” management of the GAB, a vast and complex system of aquifers that contains 6500 million megalitres of water and spans 20pc of the Australian landmass.
The committee is also involved in the strategic coordination of the 15 year, $500 million Great Artesian Basin Sustainability Initiative (GABSI), which involves capping and piping flowing bores to restore pressure throughout the basin.
Mr Austin said that while the GAB was an asset of national significance, so too was coal seam gas, and both had to be developed in harmony without impacting on the other.
Coal Seam Gas was an energy source that was relied upon by Australians to support their economy and social wellbeing, he said, and calls for a blanket moratorium on CSG developments went too far.
“There are groups out there that are hell bent on saying stop it all together, but I think you need to take a rational approach and not assume that extractive industries are doing the wrong thing,” he said. “They are being scrutinised pretty closely.
“We’re very conscious that GAB water is a nationally significant asset that needs to be considered in line with the extractive industries as a national asset as well, and one should not be given priority over the other.”
Asked if the potential development of thousands of new CSG wells throughout the Great Artesian Basin could undermine the restorative work of the $500 million bore capping and piping scheme, Mr Austin said a lot depended on where CSG work was being conducted.
“You need to be very careful about where those activities are taking place,” he said.
“We’re aware for example in Queensland that some coal seam measures are overlying GAB aquifers, so for an overall perspective, you need to ask yourself what the significance of that is.
“You need to do a proper risk assessment to satisfy yourself that these activities will not have the catastrophic impact that has been suggested.
“ I think in some cases, where the coal seam is very shallow and overlying the GAB aquifers, it is a completely different kettle of fish to some that I have been made of aware of in NSW, where the coal seam underlies the GAB aquifers.
“To me, that is completely different because they need to not only drill through, but they also need to extract through, the GAB aquifers, and that is where you get concerns about contamination, the chemicals being used in the CSG industry and interactive leakage.
“So you have to look very carefully at the areas likely to be impacted, you can’t just have a blanket moratorium over the whole issue.”
In the Surat Basin coal seam gas companies are extracting water from the Walloon Coal Measures, a coal seam that lies directly below the Condamine Alluvium, the highest allocated groundwater supply in Queensland.
Mr Austin said there was a lack of knowledge surrounding groundwater impacts from CSG extraction, and there was not enough evidence that companies knew enough about potential impacts.
“The evidence to date is showing it is a secondary issue to the companies, and that is evidenced by the co-produced water being left on the ground in evaporation ponds.
“Some companies are being open and honest and looking for assistance on how to address water impact issues, but some are already going and haven’t given adequate consideration to water issues.
“The fear is that to them that is all it is, a consideration, and they don’t have an answer as to what they will do when there is an impact.
“You can understand the angst landholders are feeling over this.”
The GABCC met in Longreach last week to analyse draft national water guidelines developed for the Council of Australian Governments, and to provide feedback to Federal Ministers on GAB issues relating to the impacts of extractive industries on GAB waters.
The committee wanted water policy to be “tightened up” in about five sections of the draft guidelines, he said, particularly in terms of how co-product water was re-used and how extracted salt was managed.
The committee was advising Federal ministers’ “in no uncertain terms” about the community angst that exists on the issue, he said, and the need for further information relating to potential groundwater impacts.
Mr Austin said it was vital that gas developments proceeded in a “responsible manner.”
“These are two natural resources issues of national significance, and neither one can be ignored,” he said.
“Our extractive issues should not proceed without knowing what impact it is going to have on the other national asset in the GAB. Both are in the national interest and should be linked together so that one proceeds whilst protecting the other.”
Email a friend