Narrabri Gas

Here are my 5 reasons to oppose the Pilliga CSG project:
1. It is safehaven for threatened wildlife
The Pilliga is one of 15 nationally listed `biodiversity hotspots' and is vital to the survival of threatened species like the koala, spotted-tailed quoll, black-striped wallaby, eastern pygmy-possum, pilliga mouse and south-eastern long-eared Bat.
2. Coal seam gas fuels dangerous climate change
Methane is by far the major component of natural gas, and is a greenhouse gas 72 times more powerful than CO². CSG fields contribute to climate change through the leakage of methane during the production, transport, processing and use of coal seam gas.
3. It risks our clean water
The Narrabri gasfield poses a real risk to our two most precious water resources: the Great Artesian Basin and the Murray-Darling Basin. The area of the Great Artesian Basin with the highest recharge rates is almost entirely contained within the Pilliga East forest.
4. The Gamilaraay Traditional Custodians are opposed
There are hundreds of cultural sites as well as songlines and stories connecting the Gamilaraay to the forest and to the groundwater beneath. Gamilaraay people are deeply involved in the battle against CSG, and have told Santos they do not want their country sacrificed for a coal seam gas field.
5. Bushfire risk will rise
Methane flare stacks up to 50m high would be running day and night, even on total fire ban days. The Pilliga is already prone to severe bushfires, this project will increase the risk of ignition.

I do not support CSG mining in the Pilliga. The Pilliga is home for endangered wildlife and plants, an important cultural area and most importantly the project risks contaminating Australia's largest groundwater aquifer.

The Narrabri gasfield poses a real risk to our two most precious water resources: the Great Artesian Basin and the Murray-Darling Basin. The area of the Great Artesian Basin with the highest recharge rates is almost entirely contained within the Pilliga East forest. In a worst-case scenario, the water removed for CSG extraction could reduce water pressure in the recharge areas--potentially stopping the free flow of waters to the surface at springs and bores across the whole Great Artesian Basin.

Creeks in the Pilliga run into the Namoi River--a part of the Murray Darling Basin. This system is vulnerable to contamination from drilling fluid spills and the salty treated water produced from the proposed 850 wells.

The local Indigenous Australians, local
Community and farmers do not support the project.

The project appears to be driven by economics and has not fully investigated or addressed risk to the environmental, cultural and social values of the region and Australia as a whole.

To whom it may concern,
This submission has been written to draw attention to the unacceptable impacts of Santos current plan with light pollution from their upcoming 850 gaswells and flares near Siding Spring Observatory. It is a simple solution, as recommended by the NSW EPA to enclose all flares, not just for emissions and cleaner burning, but also to reduce the amount of unnecessary light pollution from giant flames lighting the night sky.
Siding Spring Observatory is Australia's only unique science research facility using the largest optical telescopes for astrophysics and astronomy. First established in Coonabarabran NSW, on the Warrumbungle Ranges in the 1960's it was built here because of the dark skies in this region. While there is historic value of this site from telescopes established over 50 years ago, this observatory hosts the largest optical telescopes from national and international universities and research entities. Not only hosting the largest, this site hosts the second, third, fourth, fifth largest telescopes etc in Australia, playing a key role in science research across the Southern Hemisphere. Over 50 telescopes are listed across the site being used by over 30 universities, institutions and private businesses using cutting edge technology, with some of the most advanced telescopes being used is astrophysical research. Future plans include another 50 telescopes to be built on site within the next decade. All this is reliant on keeping the dark sky dark! If this area was to lose the dark sky, this observatory would not be replicated again in Australia, but moved elsewhere in the Southern Hemisphere.
From 2013 onwards light emissions from the Santos gasfield exploration have increased to the point that, just the Bibblewindi large flare and unmanned facility alone, creates more light pollution than the entire town of nearby Coonabarabran with over 3500 people residing there. Santos have listed plans to triple the amount of pilot flares and double the amount of large flares including constructing 50 metre high flare stacks, with an average 30 metre high flame above it. Nowhere do they list the EPAs recommended practice to enclose flares, as has been done in NSW areas such as Gloucester. Enclosing flares is the only acceptable mitigation to protect the scientific community from the unnecessary light pollution they plan to emit. Siding Spring Observatory already has to deal with light pollution from existing mining and regional towns. Even Sydney itself, from over 400kms away can affect research from its light glow. Santos are a lot closer than this. Every bit of extra light pollution is making it more difficult to continue the leading scientific research, and while each pollute in different levels, most consider they aren't doing any damage. But it's the combination with the existing light sources, adding a cumulative effect which is becoming worse as more pollution is created.
In summary, this is a simple fix in this case, as while Santos building infrastructure is willing to comply with shielded lights for buildings, they need to go a step further and enclose all current and future flares as the NSW EPA recommend. It is the only acceptable solution.
Thanks,
Jonathan Kelly

1. It is safehaven for threatened wildlife
The Pilliga is one of 15 nationally listed `biodiversity hotspots' and is vital to the survival of threatened species like the koala, spotted-tailed quoll, black-striped wallaby, eastern pygmy-possum, pilliga mouse and south-eastern long-eared Bat.

2. Coal seam gas fuels dangerous climate change
Methane is by far the major component of natural gas, and is a greenhouse gas 72 times more powerful than CO². CSG fields contribute to climate change through the leakage of methane during the production, transport, processing and use of coal seam gas.

3. It risks our clean water
The Narrabri gasfield poses a real risk to our two most precious water resources: the Great Artesian Basin and the Murray-Darling Basin. The area of the Great Artesian Basin with the highest recharge rates is almost entirely contained within the Pilliga East forest.

4. The Gamilaraay Traditional Custodians are opposed
There are hundreds of cultural sites as well as songlines and stories connecting the Gamilaraay to the forest and to the groundwater beneath. Gamilaraay people are deeply involved in the battle against CSG, and have told Santos they do not want their country sacrificed for a coal seam gas field.

5. Bushfire risk will rise
Methane flare stacks up to 50m high would be running day and night, even on total fire ban days. The Pilliga is already prone to severe bushfires, this project will increase the risk of ignition.

In Baradine, my neighbours are like family and we look out for each other.
The Pilliga forest is also my neighbour and I respect and love it's natural beauty.
Of course I will raise my voice to support and protect my neighbour!

I am a health researcher, epidemiologist and ecologist with forty years experience. I have published widely in peer-reviewed scientific journals and am well respected by my research collegues. As such, I have spent some five years deeply researching the pros and cons of unconventional gas mining in the Australian environment. During that time I have become increasingly alarmed by mounting evidence of multiple long-term risks associated with gas mining that involves frackking.

These risks are evident at the local, regional and global level. The list is growing daily as new research emerges. Here are just a few, as they relate to the Santos EIS.

One of the primary risks is that of fugitive methane release, which starts at the time of fracking, increases during peak production, is reduced when wells are first capped. However, it then escalates again as the casings of capped wells inevitably breakdown. Research in British Columbia showed that 10 years post-capping, 27,000 (of 500,000) capped wells were already leaking methane into the atmosphere, some at frightening rates. The study predicted that all capped wells will start to deteriorate and leak methane after ten years and that repair, even when possible, is prohibitively expensive. (http://www.hydrorelief.org/frackdata/references/65704543-Casing-Leaks.pdf)

It is also becoming increasingly clear that such costs frequently fall to the government of the day and therefore the tax-paying community, after mining corporations dissolve or are subsumed by others.

Another insurmountable problem is the release of radioactive compounds into the surface and atmospheric environment. The EIS states: "The produced water that would be extracted under licence would be treated and beneficially reused, primarily for agricultural irrigation. Around 82 per cent of treated water would be beneficially re-used in irrigation during the produced water peak and around 71 per cent would be beneficially re-used in irrigation during average produced water production."

The concept of 'beneficial use' of treated water in irrigation is seriously flawed and totally irresponsible because dangerous carcinogenic and genetically-mutating radionucleotides including: Uranium and its decay products, Thorium and decay products, Radium and decay products, Potassium-40, Lead-210/Polonium-210 remain in the fully treated water. In fact the US EPA has clearly warned that they can be concentrated by the treatment process! (https://www.epa.gov/radiation/tenorm-oil-and-gas-production-wastes)

With regards to the solid salt product, the EIS states: "The solid salt product would be stored on site prior to being removed for off-site disposal at a licensed facility. Residual distillate would also be recovered by thermal evaporation and recombined with the treated water."

The concept of safe disposal of salt product is ludicrous when volumes of 47 to 115 tonnes per day are considered over a period of 4 years! Furthermore, there is no recognition or admission that this highly concentrated mix contains a huge array of toxic compounds which, once disposed of in a 'licensed facility', will dissolve and contaminate all downstream ecotones including all subterranean aquifers to which they are inevitably connected. Again, this would involve unacceptably high levels of radioactive solutes, previously buried deep below the earths crust and any living ecosystems.

A further risk with produced water is that it also contains toxic BTEX compounds also previously locked well away from living biota. These will greatly augment the recognised hazard of BTEX inadvertently 'lost' into the environment as a component of the many tonnes of chemicals that are never recovered from the well and surrounds, in the actual mining process. (http://www.ntn.org.au/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/UCgas_report-April-2013.pdf)

All in all the idea that produced water can simply be treated to produce clean, safe, useable water for release into the surface environment via irrigation, is flawed and is being increasingly question by the scientific community.

There is a plethora of other well-documented risks associated with gas mining. For now, I am submitting the above few highlighted ones, as justification for my total opposition to allowing Santos to mine for any form of unconventional gas in the Pilliga region. To support such an activity would be environmental vandalism on a grand and long term scale. It must not be allowed.

n9

I object to the approval of the Narrabri Gas Project for a number of reasons:

Our country is becoming increasingly popular with the burgeoning middle class from Asia (particularly China) which presents a fantastic opportunity to display our land as an attractive tourist destination. In my personal experience, having travelled China extensively and made many Chinese friends, they love the countryside of Australia, our clean environment and air. Furthermore, they love the produce that our farmers produce, which can only be produced with the help of the great Artesian Basin.

The development of this gas project is short term thinking, that may provide some jobs in the short run, but will tarnish our strong reputation as a clean environment, and tourist destination with our friends from the South East Asian and East Asian region.

Therefore, I am strongly opposed to this project, as it will destroy the local environment and our reputations globally.

Moreover, Bloomberg figures have now shown that renewable energy, such as solar is cheaper than coal and soon to be cheaper than gas. In order for our country to stay ahead of the pack, we need to employ forward thinking and not look to the same tired of methods of generating growth through coal seam gas mining.

I propose that the Narrabri Gas Project, and any other proposed CSG projects be completely denied and quashed. The removal of CSG from the earth is COMPLETELY unnecessary, and very danergerous to our limited water supply. Putting our water at risk puts our country at risk and this is unacceptable, especially when there are more than adequate sustainable and harmless forms of energy already available at our fingertips.

Thank you for the opportunity to write a submission. I write on behalf of my children , grandchildren and great grandchildren and, for myself. I cannot with a clear conscience not oppose the Pillaga CSG proposal. The writing is on the Earth's wall that this energy supply source's days are numbered. Reasons being, we are pillaging the earth and with this pillaging come negatives to wildlife, the environment, clean water and Australia's future . I STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS DEVELOPMENT. LET'S SHOW SOME MORAL LEADERSHIP.

Sincerely,
Alison Zinsli

I am gravely concerned about any further fragmentation of woodlands in NSW on small animals such as the Pilliga Mouse. The network of roads pushed through will provide predators of small vertebrates to hunt more successfully, favoring foxes and cats over native wildlife. Small creatures avoid open areas such as roads for this reason, so any fragmentation will lead to less genetic movement through the landscape, lowering the genetic diversity and resistance to diseases.

I have issues with the fauna survey effort undertaken for the EIS. The number of pitfall nights targeting reptiles and small mammals was woefully inadequate given the scope and spread of the project. As an ecologist I understand that no fauna survey is entirely comprehensive but there should have been at least double the pitfall-trapping effort given the resources available. Similarly, the spotlight survey effort was completely inadequate given the scope and scale of the project- at least 100 hours of survey effort should have been undertaken.

The increased traffic through this area as a result of the mining activities threatens Koalas, Pale Headed Snakes and inland Carpet Pythons. The use of contaminated water for wetting roads threatens local waterways and any frog that comes in contact with it.

I do not believe the monitoring and containment of fugitive emissions of methane has been adequately addressed. Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas and agriculture is already being affected by climate change. This is a huge risk to an agricultural industry already struggling with climate change.

I am gravely concerned that in spite of widespread community opposition to this project the government is still pushing for it, which suggests that the government is not listening to the overwhelming majority of its constituents. Given the political risk, this suggests that corruption may be taking place, and it would not be the first time this has happened. This undermining of democratic process is further demonstrated by the increase in fines against peaceful protestors whilst the fines against non-compliance of environmental conditions, (which threaten intergenerational livelihoods of farmers and residents) are reduced so the fines against corporations become smaller- so small, in fact that they act as no commercial disincentive for non-compliance whatsoever.

The majority of the mining activities are taking place deep underground. There are not enough independent assessors to confirm or deny the gas company's assurance that everything is going well. Casings fail. The risk of contamination of the Great Artesian Basin is enormous, -if not immediately, 20, 30, 40 years in the future. And for what? The CSG industry is pushing prices of gas up to such an extent that households and Australian manufacturing can no longer afford it. This is occurring at a time when climate-friendly solar and wind combined with storage is coming down fast- so fast that in another five years the CSG industry will have collapsed, and the CEOs taken their money and run, and the citizens of NSW will be left with a massive bill to clean it up and a climate and water disaster.

The short-term profits of shareholders are not worth the long-term environmental and economic consequences of the contamination of groundwater, loss of biodiversity and the threat to the climate and all that entails.

I strongly object to any coal seam gas mining in the Pilliga region. I am an environmental scientist and well aware of the ill effects on the environment due to this mining. Native animals and plants are at risk, escaping methane gas is even worst than CO2, fire risks increase due to the methane, water tables are at risk, even indigenous people oppose it. How many wells are proposed is also ridiculous and greedy. Build a solar farm instead, our planet is so over burdened as it is.

I would like to place a submission against this proposal on behalf of our family-my husband, 6 sons and 2 grandchildren. Many reports have proven that CSG mining is dangerous and toxic and for Santos to think that it is suitable to place 850 wells into the Great Artesian Basin is incomprehensible for the damage that will be done.
I believe that all companies and politicians who support this proposal, should go and stay with the families who are currently affected by current CSG mining close to their farms. See the damage that has been done to the land, spend time with the sick families- children who have spontaneous nosebleeds and headaches since the mining has started near their homes........sit with the parents and their sick children all through the night. Go and spend time with the families who have lost beloved family members to suicide as they have seen their farms deteriorate.
Yes, I know submissions are supposed to not be emotional, but how can we not get emotional when we know these families and see the battles they face every single minute of every single day?
I could fill the submission with all of the other environmental facts, but I will leave that to others. As I said, I am a mother writing on behalf of my family and our future generations.
Thank you for your time.

I strongly oppose the proposal of the Narrabri Gas Project. There is enough scientific evidence that Coal Seam Gas is unsustainable and very polluting.
I care about the environment. There is only one planet earth and we should care for it the best we can. We should NOT hollow it out.
This project is a great risk to our water sources and the air we breathe. I do not support CSG in any form or way. We should investigate and invest in sustainable resources instead. A clean environment for everyone to live in.
I hope you will take this submission seriously. I really am concerned.

The Pilliga is the largest temperate woodland left in the whole of Eastern Australia, we simply can't let Santos and our government get away with turning it into an industrial wasteland.

Please do not allow Santos to build 850 coal seam gas wells in the Pilliga.

Please see attached

I object to this project and believe it should be rejected.


- The project will cause significant diversion of water from a recharge aquifer of the Great Artesian Basin, which is a water resource relied upon by rural communities across western NSW.

- The company has already been fined for contaminating ground water with uranium to about 20 times the safe drinking water guideline. Earlier, company was fined for a toxic spill in 2011. This is just from just a pilot. We must protect our water as a priority.

- The project will extract over 35 billion litres of toxic groundwater, much of it in the first five years. This water will be treated and in the early years will generate tens of thousands of tonnes of salt, for which there is no safe disposal plan.

- It will clear close to 1,000 hectares of the Pilliga Forest, fragmenting the largest temperate woodland in New South Wales, home to unique wildlife. We need to increase vegetation to improve our climate, not reduce it.

- It will put agricultural industries at risk, as well as causing light pollution that will ruin the dark night sky needed by the internationally renowned Siding Spring Observatory.

- It is not justified: Santos' own coal seam gas export activities in Queensland have caused gas prices to rise and supply to become unpredictable. NSW should respond to this by investing in more reliable and ultimately cheaper renewable energy, not by letting Santos inflict more environmental, social and economic harm.

- It will lead to large deliberate and fugitive emissions of methane, adding to climate change.

- It will cause more trauma to the regional Aboriginal community because the area of impact is crucially important to the spiritual, cultural and social life of Gamilaraay people.

- Coal seam gas is harmful to health. Neither the NSW Government nor Santos have investigated or dealt with the serious health effects of coal seam gas now appearing in peer-reviewed research in the United States.

I urge the Government to reject this project and make the Great Artesian Basin recharge off- limits to gas mining.

I disagree with this Project because I believe we must honor the Earth not rape and pillage it like a bunch of thugs. What kind of idiot can not see that without the Earth we will not exist? There are alternatives to the production of power without the necessity of destruction, which Coal Seem Gas extraction has proven to be.

There is an overwhelming opposition to the Narrabri Gas Project by local residents and farmers as well as people across NSW for many obvious reasons. It is inconceivable that a project like this with its many risks is considered in an area of such high agricultural value. In the past we have seen companies like Santos prosecuted for major spill events that have contaminated waterways and aquifers from their operations and they have had repeated environmental reporting failures. This is something we can again expect to occur if the Narrabri Gas Project is to proceed - something which is unacceptable. We have seen evidence of vast amounts of methane leaching from Coal Seam Gas projects in Queensland. In an era where we should be doing everything we can to mediate climate change no project like this should be considered which would compound climate change. We have endless amounts of offshore natural gas, some of which can be used by ourselves instead of being export, therefore there is no reason to undertake a project like this for supply reasons which are unfounded. Our farmers should have the security and sanctity of the land they own to be able to provide the necessary produce to consumers. The Narrabri Gas Project should not proceed.