Narrabri Gas

No to CSG mining anywhere, no to all fossil fuel mining, time for renewable energy now.

I am very much against the development of the Narrabri Gas Project.
This is a project that is bad for the environment and does not take into consideration the future of our natural environment for our children, grandchildren etc...
Australia should be a safe and beautiful country, coal seam gas projects are not conjusive to this.
We are destroying the planet.

Can't eat coal. Coal doesn't filter air and reduce carbon... So you know what does? Trees and forests. Don't make a dumb, short term decision. Protect our future and leave coal in the ground.

Now is a critical moment to protect the Pilliga forest against Santos' Narrabri Gas Project.
Santos has filed its Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) with the NSW Government.
Please,this is the last remaining CSG proposal in NSW, and it's essential we make our powerful opposition clear.
The local community of the Pilliga has spearheaded a powerful campaign against this project for years.
Please protect our future wand stop this project

I am concerned about many aspects of this project. I am concerned about the damage to the environment both from the use of the contaminating chemicals used to drill coal seams and the potential pollution of both underground and above ground water.
I am also concerned that the Pilliga and the biodiversity within it will be irreparably damaged by this project.
I am tired of hearing about big business' interests being more important than those of farmers and other landowners in situations (such as this) where the project causes such damage that the individuals' properties and their businesses are severely affected.
And it seems just plainly silly to allow a project which could severely damage our major very costly astronomical observatory.

I OBJECT TO THIS PROPOSAL
There is a number of reasons why I object to this proposal
Climate change: We cannot approve any more fossil fuel projects. We must go to renewables now. Global warming will be devastating on the Earth & something like this project will have a significant impact. Fugitive methane emissions are being shown to be more significant than previously thought which again means that the impact will be greater.

Biodiversity and the Pilliga: The gasfield will clear breeding habitat for Pilliga Mouse, which lives nowhere else. The endangered Regent honeyeater and koalas, which are already in decline in the Pilliga will also be significantly impacted on this proposal. The fragmentation of the forest is known to have a devastating effect on our native fauna with issues around breeding & loss of habitat. The Pilliga is also the largest temperate woodland in New South Wales. Santos propose clearing nearly 1,000ha of the Pilliga, this is outrageous. Without specific information about where the wells and lines will be located, a proper ecological impact assessment can't be completed & until they produce this the community cannot be expected to have to fight this.

Groundwater and the Great Artesian Basin: Santos' project is expected to remove 37.5GL of groundwater over the life of the gasfield, mostly in the early years. The coal seam needs to be dewatered to release the gas, but this aquifer lies beneath the Pilliga Sandstone, part of the Great Artesian Basin recharge. Santos' EIS admits that the project will result in a loss of water from the GAB recharge aquifer over time. CSG in Queensland has drawn down GAB aquifers already. We can't afford to risk this crucial resource.

Salt: The water removed from the ground by Santos will be treated, but this creates another problem: what to do with the salt? Peak salt production at Narrabri CSG will be 115 tonnes per day, or two and a half B-double truckloads per day. In the peak year, this would mean the creation of 41,900 tonnes of salt for disposal, which Santos says will take place in landfill.

Dark sky: light pollution from flares, compressor stations and the water treatment plant will ruin the dark sky needed by the internationally renowned Siding Spring Observatory.

Air quality: The air quality assessment fails to include health-damaging fine particulate pollution with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less (known as PM2.5). With diesel generators at each well pad and at the water treatment and gas compression plants, there will be significant PM2.5 emissions. The air quality assessment and greenhouse section also fail to model the likely substantial escape of fugitive methane emissions
Cultural heritage and the Pilliga: The Pilliga is a spiritual, cultural and social icon for Gomeroi/Gamilaraay people. Fragmentation and industrialisation cuts people off from their heritage and connection to country. Why are the needs of the traditional owners being so badly overlooked, again.

Social and health impacts: As a Registered Nurse I am again appalled at the lack of understanding or indeed care factor for the health of the local community. Santos' social impact assessment is three years old and utterly inadequate. We know there is mounting concerns for water contamination & respiratory illness, let alone the damage that is done to humans caused by stress.
In Narrabri, this project will have negative impacts on cost-of-living, the labour and housing markets. The latter is cited in as a benefit of the project but it will not benefit low-income renters. The effect of the project on cost-of-living in the Shire needs to be modelled, assessed and considered, as do the labour dynamics of the project.
The project entirely surrounds Yarrie Lake, and Santos propose that wells might come as close as 200m from the Lake. The Government must insist that Santos conduct a proper health impact assessment.
The lack of detail: Santos' EIS is very short on detail. It does not provide maps indicating where these 850 wells and the lines and infrastructure that run between and around them will go. Santos is seeking a blank cheque consent for this gasfield on the promise that it will decide where the wells will go afterward using a "Field Development Protocol." No project has ever been assessed this way before in NSW and the constraints Santos propose are weak and subject to change later on. This is not an appropriate way to assess the largest development project ever undertaken under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act and the Government must insist that Santos release details to the public about the placement of its wells, pipelines and some other infrastructure.
Groundwater and the Great Artesian Basin: Santos' project is expected to remove 37.5GL of groundwater over the life of the gasfield, mostly in the early years. The coal seam needs to be dewatered to release the gas, but this aquifer lies beneath the Pilliga Sandstone, part of the Great Artesian Basin recharge. Santos' EIS admits that the project will result in a loss of water from the GAB recharge aquifer over time. CSG in Queensland has drawn down GAB aquifers already. We can't afford to risk this crucial resource.
& finally
There's no justification: The significant harm on the social, environmental and economic values of the Narrabri Shire and New South Wales that this project will inflict needs to be weighed against the economic justification for the project, but there is no such economic justification. Santos is one of several large gas companies that threw the east coast gas market and the industries that rely on it into turmoil by opening up CSG fields in Queensland and contracting to sell more gas than those fields can produce to overseas customers. They drove up the price of gas and are plundering supplies previously available to manufacturers and power stations.
The gas produced at Narrabri might be as little as 4.9% of the volume contracted for sale out of Gladstone. It's not going to bring down prices. In fact, it will force prices up, because unconventional gas like CSG is so expensive to produce and yields are so low. Research undertaken by gas company AGL shows that gas from the Pilliga would be the most expensive gas of anywhere in the current east coast gas market. The number of jobs the project will support once the construction is over is just 145. Weighed against damage to the land, and the Great Artesian Basin, this makes no sense. We need sustainable jobs, not plunder for profit.
This proposal must be stopped, please don't accept it

This is a submission to the Santos Narrabri Gas EIS.

I am writing this submission as I am vehemently opposed to this proposed Santos Narrabri Gas project and recommend that it be rejected.

* Any project which could seriously affect and pose a risk to our greatest water resource, the Great Artesian Basin is preposterous.
A proposed CSG project in the Pilliga forest, a recharge aquifer of the Great Artesian Basin, would place this water resource at high risk from the processes involved in CSG extraction.
Unless 'zero harm' can be ensured by Santos, the Government can not be serious about allowing gas extraction in such a vitally important agricultural region which relies totally on the water from the Great Artesian Basin for it's survival.
Santos admit themselves that the proposed project will result in a loss of water from the GAB recharge aquifer over time.
We already know CSG extraction in Queensland has drawn down the GAB aquifers so why on earth would we be adding to the problem here.
At a time when our water resources are under stress from extreme climatic events the decision to commence extraction in NSW would surely only exacerbate our existing problems with water usage.


* The problem of salt-115T of salt a day!!!
Ten years ago Santos initially waved this problem away by reassuring the community that they will be putting the 'brine' water in holding ponds using plastic lining. Also they were proposing to suggest the agricultural benefits of treated waste water could assist the growing of crops.
Already Santos has been in breach of environmental laws regarding unacceptable levels of dangerous metals found in groundwater.
The assurances given by Santos that CSG drilling is perfectly safe and doesn't contaminate water are totally misleading.
Only due to community outrage and protest has some of these industry practices been challenged and modified. Where would we be today if intelligent, common sense members of our communities have not stood up to this CSG industry to ensure at least some minimal changes to their practices?
If this project is allowed to commence companies will be self-regulating with very little, if any, over site from regulatory bodies.
I wonder where all the brine water, salts and minerals from CSG extraction in Qld have gone after Cyclone Debbie? No doubt they have spread out onto surrounding farm land, into rivers and ended up polluting oceans and causing further damage to the Great Barrier Reef.

* Santos's EIS, although huge in volume offers very little detail.
In a newspaper article in 2015 Santos General Manager Energy NSW, Peter Mitchley said,
'Documents will describe exactly what we are planning to do in the Pilliga and the maximum footprint in terms of water, ecology, noise, visual amenity and the social fabric of the neighbourhood etc.
When people are armed with that information I would encourage them to come forward and debate the facts at the time."
Unfortunately we haven't been given that information in any detail especially those communities who will be directly affected.
Since Santos first came into this region 10 years ago they have NEVER been open and transparent regarding the details of this project. Community groups have been calling for these details regarding the placement of wells, pipelines and other infrastructure for the past decade and nothing has been provided.
This in itself, is reason NOT to grant them approval.

* The hype over the projects answer to our energy needs is a desperate attempt by Santos to push ahead with this project.
Even gas experts admit we don't need more gas drilling in NSW.
There is apparently enough gas in the Bass Strait to head off any supply shortages in NSW.
It appears that Santos' own CSG activities in Queensland have caused gas prices to rise thus causing supply to become unpredictable.
Our Government has used this issue to deflect attention away from their woeful inadequate handling of this energy debate instead of concentrating on constructive alternatives to meet our energy needs both now and into the future in ways that are not detrimental to our environment.
The promise that CSG extraction will be the saviour of our energy shortfall is just ridiculous.

* The social and health issues of this proposed Narrabri EIS are an enormous concern.
Looking at factual studies and data from other countries where CSG is extracted must ring alarm bells for all communities and governments.
The long term health costs is another reason to halt this industry in its tracks.

* The great connection of our first peoples to the land is another reason why this project should not be seriously considered. For thousands of years the Gomeroi and Gamillaraay people have had a great attachment to this land but their views and opinions regarding this industry have been totally pushed aside and disregarded.

* Recently the very successful ABC TV program Stargazing Live drew attention to the Sidling Springs Observatory capturing the interest of many amateur astronomers world wide, reaching 16 million viewers in the UK alone.
What will the light/dust and pollution threat be to the Siding Springs Observatory if the planned Narrabri Gas project commenced?
We have this wonderful facility requiring dark night skies and we are seriously proposing to jeopardise this leading astrological facility?
What will happen if the Narrabri Santos project commences flaring its wells as planned?
The light which can be seen kilometres from the sight will surely hinder and affect the Observatory's research.

A project of the size and scope of the Santos proposal should only be considered if in the best interests of NSW in every category-social, economic, cultural, spiritual and environmental.
This project definitely should not go ahead.

I would just like to finish with this quote from 'Cry the Beloved Country' by Alan Paton regarding our need to take care of our land and water.
" Keep it, guard it, care for it, for it keeps men, guards men, cares for men.
Destroy it and man is destroyed."

enough is enough.please stop plundering our country for short term profits.it is a disgrace what gov't's[ who are responsible for caring for our environment] are getting away with in the name of prosperity. an enormous shift is required in the way our country is being managed.

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 gas wells 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 gas field 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,

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 gas wells 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 gas field 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,
Tevor Oates

I would like to submit my opposition to the Narrabri Gas Project proposed by Santos on the basis of concerns outlined below.

A. Environmental concerns

Santos already has a poor environmental record in the Pillaga recording 20+ pollution events with:

* waste spillage
* ongoing leaks from evaporation ponds and
* groundwater contamination.

Australia is the driest continent on Earth and water is its most precious resource. Endangering this resource by allowing unnecessary fossil fuel development projects such as the Santos Narrabri Gas Project is a hazardous and backward step; particularly in a country as well positioned as ours to become leaders in the renewable energy industry.

B) No economic justification

NSW's supposed `gas supply shortage' that Santos was using as economic justification for the project has been disproven. [As assessed by leading industry expert and RMIT senior industry fellow Alan Pears: The electricity shortfall due to limits on gas supply, in the near future, is very small. The Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) estimates 363 GWh in 2020-21 - that is 0.2 per cent of the present 183,000 GWh consumed in the national energy market. The shortfalls are quite modest, and AEMO notes that they could be supplied from existing gas fields if the producers received appropriate `incentives'. So the short-term picture does not justify a rush into more coal seam gas or other new development.]

C) Technical uncertainty

The Narrabri Gas Project has already been delayed for years due to the geotechnical difficulties. Ongoing technical uncertainty at Narrabri remains high and reserves were recently written down by 32%.

D) Widespread community opposition

Neighbour to neighbour CSG surveys show 96% of people across 3 million+ hectares of land in North West NSW object to CSG development and wish to remain gasfield free.

o 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 gas wells 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 gas field 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.

Thank you

S. Anderson

I object to energy giant Santos' plans to industrialise the Pilliga - threatening this natural refuge, our precious groundwater, and the communities who rely on it. This water is the life-blood of farming communities throughout the southeast and inland Australia.

As a resident of regional NSW, I oppose this development for the following reasons:


1. It is a 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.

To Whom it may concern,

I have the profound privilege of living in Australia and being a Contemporary Aboriginal Artist I see first hand the culture and have even been lucky enough to attend cultural events and was a Cultural Arts teacher at the Canberra Institute of technology so I have a very good understanding of how culture is so important and impacts so many peoples lives.

There needs to a better outcome that is for the community, this land NEEDS to better taken care of so that the Basin can continue to be cherished by future generations to come.

This is an important site for the Aboriginal people and sites like this are very rare in Australia, when they have been found they need to be preserved and looked after for future generations to come.

The people of NSW need their special place preserved and treated with respect. How do you think you would feel if your special place was being contaminated? Does the community benefit from this decision I think not. We have offered an apology and yet we still keep ignoring their cries for preservation of ancient and significant sites it really is appalling. I ask you to please step up and make this change for the community and generations to come.

This is a recourring issue and needs to be addressed now so that more places like this can be preserved not destroyed.

I think the gap can be filled by putting a system in place to preserve the area.
A management system should be in place so that the community that wish to see the spirit of the place thrive and can contribute in their own little ways to look after it. The community needs to be heard and have a right to choose the outcome of such important cultural history.

Enough is enough,

Please re-evaluate your plans, this needs to stop!

Thank you
Mirree

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 gas wells 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 gas field 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,
your name

Phillip Angilley

I object to the proposal by Santos to develop *any* coal seam gas mines in the Pilliga area. The reasons are manifold:

1. First and foremost it would be totally irresponsible to endanger the aquifer, as this mining would. We can live without gas, but not without clean water, and any risk to this in Australia's dry conditions is unthinkable.
2. As has been demonstrated in other places, notably Queensland and the USA, coal seam gas production has resulted in major health issues for surrounding communities, and particularly done immense harm to children.
3. Environmental concerns involve the protection of wildlife, which is rapidly diminishing in NSW, and the excessive production of salt involved.
4. There are very good reasons why Victoria has banned CSG mining, and there are equally good reasons for NSW to follow suit. Ask the farmers.
5. Renewable energy is already cheaper than fossil fuel energy, and we need to wean ourselves off gas, not produce more, especially in such a sensitive area.

Ms Sarah Hunt
9 Palm Court, 42 Bayswater rd
Rushcutters Bay 2011


17 April, 2017

The Hon. Gladys Berejiklian, MP
Premier of New South Wales
SYDNEY NSW 2000


Dear Premier,

I wish to express to you in the strongest terms my lack of confidence in the ability of the NSW Department of Planning and Environment to assess the NARRABRI GAS PROJECT.

The same leadership team, and key team members, who assessed the Maules Creek Coal mine (Whitehaven Coal PA 10_0138) which has created a catastrophic situation in the Boggabri, Maules Creek, Leard Forest and associated regions, has now been entrusted to assess the NARRABRI GAS PROJECT.

The leader of the NARRABRI GAS PROJECT assessment team, Mike Young, Director of Resource Asessments, Department of Planning and Environment has not yet been held to account over his failure to take due care in assessing the Maules Creek project. The calamitous situation there is having severe negative ongoing economic, environmental and social impacts to this region of NSW.

The Department of Planning and Environment failed to properly consider the warnings of the Office of Environment and Heritage in its submission dated 11 October 2011, where it stated that:

"The OEH continues to be concerned that the issues raised... Concerning noise, dust, biodiversity offset, mine planning (including linkages and design with neighbouring mines) have not been fully explored by the Maules Creek mine project".

Despite predictions from the OEH and community appointed scientific experts, that the noise and dust impact predictions by the proponents of the Maules Creek mine were unsound, the Department of Planning wrongly assumed that the impacts would be manageable by conditions. As the passage of time has shown, this is incorrect.

A Mandatory Noise Audit of the Maules Creek Mine has concluded that 9 Maules Creek properties are in the affectation zone that the Noise Impact Assessment did NOT predict. Findings by the Leard Forest Research Node, a community science group, suggest the number is closer to 15 properties that are over the noise limits.

The Maules Creek mine is proving to be a regulatory failure, as is well known within the NSW EPA, which has been charged with the role of regulating the unachievable conditions of consent.

The Maules Creek mine is a burden on the NSW EPA, requiring far in excess of its share of regulatory attention.

Noise impacts are reversible, however, by requiring Whitehaven Coal to cease night time operations.

Damage to the Great Artesian Basin and associated aquifers will be irreversible.

I support Narrabri Mayor Councillor Cathy Redding, who has publicly called for a peer review of the NARRABRI GAS PROJECT Environmental Impact Assessment.

The NSW Government must conduct a peer review and not to entrust Mike Young's team, which has shown from its previous track record to be unsound and unreliable for the making of a decision which will have irreversible effects on the Pilliga Forest, species preservation, possible extinction of large tracts of productive farmland, and the social fabric of the Narrabri region.

I urge you to not follow the path of the experience of Queensland's Darling Downs which has been environmentally, socially and economically calamitous to that region.

Yours faithfully,


Jennifer Gilbert
14/4/2017

Sandy Corbett
"Babbacombe"
36 McEvoys Rd
Mullaley 2379
Attn: Executive Director, Resource Assessments
Department of Planning and Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001

Dear Sir/Madam

This is a submission to the Narrabri Gas Project Environmental Impact Statement
I object to this project and believe it should be rejected.
* Many of us have seen what damage this gas extraction has done in areas of Queensland. Damage to the Environment, social and health.
* It will clear trees from a huge area of the Pilliga. A local Family owned timber mill had to close down recently because they weren't allowed to access a small amount of this timber from here anymore. Many jobs were lost. Rules for some and not for others.
* Our family farm, (which is located in one of the planned gas extraction areas) relies very much on underground bore water. This would almost certainly be affected when the aquifers are interfered with. Productive food producing land would be affected and reduced in value.
* CSG is harmful to health. This needs to be looked at more closely instead of being fobbed off.

I urge the Government to reject this project and make the Great Artesian Basin recharge off limits to coal seam gas extraction.

Signed, Sandy Corbett

I object to the Narrabri Gas Project on the following grounds
1, Coal Seam Gas extraction be harmful to health and the environment. 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
2. A large section of the Piliga forest will be clear felled fragmenting the largest temperate woodland in New South Wales, home to unique wildlife.
3. It will contribute to climate change with large deliberate and fugitive emissions of methane.
4. It will not improve the natural gas market in NSW. 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.
5. It will cause disruption of the Great Artesian Basin with significant diversion of water from a recharge aquifer. which A water resource relied upon by rural communities across western NSW.
6 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.