2012/14: Should the Victorian government have put a temporary moratorium on fracking?
What they said...
'Coal seam gas mining can produce vast amounts of contaminated waste water, which thus far appears to be inadequately managed'
Cam Walker, Friends of the Earth Melbourne campaigns co-ordinator
'The idea stressed by fracking critics that deep-injected fluids will migrate into groundwater is mostly false'
Popular Mechanics, 2011
The issue at a glance
On August 24, 2012, the Victorian government announced there would be a temporary moratorium on fracking in the state.
It was reported that Victoria had put a hold on hydraulic fracturing, a technique used to exploit hard-to-reach gas deposits, and a halt on new coal seam gas exploration licenses.
Hydraulic fracturing, also known as "fracking," is a process in which pressurised water, chemicals and sand are pumped underground to release gas trapped in rock formations. It has been opposed by landowners and environmentalists who claim the process can pollute water supplies.
State energy and resources minister, Michael O'Brien, stated that the moratorium would remain until a national regulatory framework for regulating coal seam gas and hydraulic fracturing was put in place by Australia's federal government.
Though the move has been welcomed by farmers, conservation groups and potentially affected communities, there are those who consider it does not go far enough.
Alternately, Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration, a body which represents the coal seam gas industry, has said the policy would send 'the wrong message to investors.'
Background
Hydraulic fracturing, also known as 'fracking', is the promotion of fractures in a rock layer, using a pressurised fluid. Some hydraulic fractures form naturally and can create conduits along which gas and petroleum from source rocks may migrate to reservoir rocks.
Induced hydraulic fracturing or hydro-fracking is a technique used to release petroleum, natural gas (including shale gas, tight gas and coal seam gas) or other substances for extraction. This type of fracturing creates fractures from a wellbore drilled into reservoir rock formations.
The first use of hydraulic fracturing was in 1947 but the modern fracking technique that made the extraction of shale gas economical was first used in 1997 in the Barnett Shale in Texas. The energy from the injection of a highly pressurized fracking fluid creates new channels in the rock, which can increase the extraction rates and ultimate recovery of hydrocarbons.
Proponents of fracking point to the economic benefits from vast amounts of formerly inaccessible hydrocarbons the process can extract. Opponents point to potential environmental impacts, including contamination of ground water, risks to air quality, the migration of gases and hydraulic fracturing chemicals to the surface, surface contamination from spills and flowback and the health effects of this contamination. For these reasons hydraulic fracturing has come under scrutiny internationally, with some countries suspending or even banning it.
Fracking in Australia
In recent years, coal-seam gas (CSG) has transformed Australia's energy market and stimulated the country's economy.
In the six years to 2010, production of CSG increased 22 times. Gas from coal seams now supplies about one third of eastern Australia's gas. David Knox, chairman of the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association, an industry body, says the CSG bonanza, on top of Indian Ocean gas, means Australia is likely to overtake Qatar as the world's leading LNG exporter by 2020 (it is now fourth).
However, the debate over hydraulic fracturing has intensified since November 2011 following a report that fracking conducted by Cuadrilla Resources (which is 41% owned by Australian drilling company AJ Lucas), was the cause of two earthquakes near the British town of Blackpool in April and May. Environmentalists like the Lock the Gate Alliance are calling for a rigorous regulatory approach to shale gas fracking in Australia.
Hydraulic fracturing has been suspended in New South Wales and now Victoria; however, it is being widely developed in Queensland. A Senate committee recently called for a moratorium on all future coal seam gas fracking in the Great Artesian Basin in Queensland and New South Wales.
In December, 2011, health officials from the United States Environmental Protection Agency warned a Wyoming town that their groundwater contained hydrocarbons from fracking in their wells. Greens senator for Queensland, Larissa Waters, has argued that the Wyoming case should be a wake-up call for Australia.
The Queensland Government has introduced legislation banning the addition of chemicals benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene and xylene in fracking operations.
Internet information
Quit Coal is a Melbourne-based lobby group, which campaigns against the expansion of the coal industry in Victoria. It is opposed to the exploitation of coal seam gas.
The group's Internet site gives a detailed account of fracking in Victoria, explaining the process and where it is currently intended to employ it. This can be accessed at http://quitcoal.org.au/fracking-in-victoria/
Quit Coal also produced an information sheet encouraging Victorians to call on the Baillieu government to place a moratorium on coal seam gas development. This can be accessed at http://quitcoal.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/CSG-moratorium-factsheet.pdf
Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association (APPEA) has a section of its site given over to explaining how coal seam gas is extracted and arguing that the risks associated with it are minimal and controllable.
This section of the Association's Internet site can be accessed at http://www.appea.com.au/csg/about-csg/what-is-csg.html
On May 2, 2010, the ABC's rural affairs program, Landline, telecast a report titled 'Pipe Dreams'.
The report looks in detail at both the advantages and disadvantages of coal seam gas production, placing a particular emphasis on its impact on rural Queensland communities.
A full transcript of the program and a link to a video cast can be accessed at http://www.abc.net.au/landline/content/2010/s2888078.htm
In 2011 Practical Mechanics published a piece titled 'Is Fracking Safe? The Top 10 Controversial Claims About Natural Gas Drilling'.
The piece examines ten claims made on both sides of the debate and attempts to demonstrate how much validity there is in each.
It can be accessed at http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/coal-oil-gas/top-10-myths-about-natural-gas-drilling-6386593#slide-1
On March 9, 2012, Crikey published a report by Brian Barnisch titled, 'CSG and the land: straight from the farmers' mouths' which looks at the advantages and disadvantages of coal seam gas (CSG) from the perspective of farmers. It includes detailed background information and gives numerous comments from affected farmers.
The full text can be found at http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/03/09/csg-and-the-land-straight-from-the-farmers-mouths/
In April, 2012, the ABC established an Internet site titled 'Coal Seam Gas by the Numbers'.
It supplies detailed background information on the economic advantages coal seam gas offers; how companies drill for coal seam gas and how the fracking process works; the amount of water used in the process and the salt and chemicals produced as by-products. ABC news reports dealing with fracking are included as links and regularly updated. The site can be accessed at http://www.abc.net.au/news/specials/coal-seam-gas-by-the-numbers/
On June 20, 2012, The Los Angeles Daily News published an opinion piece by Dave Quast, the California director for Energy in Depth, a public outreach campaign launched by the Independent Petroleum Association of America. The piece claims that opponents of fracking make unsubstantiated claims.
The full text of the comment can be accessed at http://www.dailynews.com/opinions/ci_20890934/fracking-is-perfectly-safe-petroleum-industry-says
On June 28, 2012, the BBC published a Science & Environment news report detailing the conclusions of a joint report from the Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering which states that fracking is safe if firms follow best practice and strict regulations are enforced.
The full text of this report can be accessed at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18611647
On July 13, 2012, The Western Slope Watchdog published a comment and background piece by Ron Bain, arguing that many claims made both for and against fracking are unsubstantiated. The piece also looked at some earlier abuses in the history of coal seam gas development which, it suggests, may help to account for popular distrust.
The full text can be accessed at http://westernslopewatchdog.com/2012/07/fear-of-fracking-emotional-anecdotes-not-science-dominate-debate/
On July 22, 2012, AP released a news report claiming that many scientific experts believe that both opponents and supporters of fracking mislead the public with simplistic, unsubstantiated claims.
The full text of this report can be accessed at http://bigstory.ap.org/article/experts-some-fracking-critics-use-bad-science
Friends of the Earth Melbourne is a lobby group opposed to the production of coal seam gas. The group has an Internet site on which it publishes regular updates of coal seam gas developments in Victoria and gives background information on the industry.
The site can be accessed at http://www.melbourne.foe.org.au/?q=node/908
On August 24, 2012, ABC News carried a report of the Victorian government's decision to impose a moratorium on further coal seam gas development in the state pending the federal government's release of guidelines for the industry.
A transcript of this report can be accessed at http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-24/government-expected-to-announce-fracking-moratorium/4220040
On August 24, Australian Mining published a news report titled, 'Victoria bans fracking'. The report includes comment critical of the ban currently imposed in New South Wales and supportive of the policies adopted in Queensland.
The full text of this report can be accessed at http://www.miningaustralia.com.au/news/victoria-bans-fracking
On August 24, 2012, Channel Nine News carried a report detail the support of farmers and conservation groups for the Victorian government's moratorium on fracking.
A full transcript of this report can be accessed at http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8521496
On September 5, 2012, Mining Australia carried a report of the CSIRO's rejection of a claim made by the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association that CSIRO research shows no connection between coal seam gas extraction and groundwater contamination.
The full text of this article can be found at http://www.miningaustralia.com.au/news/csiro-rejects-appea-claims
Arguments in favour of a temporary moratorium on fracking
1. There is no federal plan regulating fracking
The Victorian Energy and Resources Minister, Michael O'Brien, has stressed that the moratorium has been put in place while scientific studies are undertaken and the national plan is finalised.
The Minister is concerned that developers not proceed until the full regulatory climate has been established. The Government is concerned that it may give approval to developments that would later be found to be contrary to yet-to-be-developed federal regulations.
Mr O'Brien has stated, 'This approach will help to avoid a situation where applications for hydraulic fracturing works might be approved now, only to be inconsistent with new standards to be set in the near future.'
Since 2010 the Federal Government has used the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act to regulate operational CSG projects in Queensland, and the one operational field, the Camden project, in NSW.
In late 2011, in a deal with Tony Windsor as part of the carbon trading scheme, the Federal Government introduced the National Partnership Agreement for the Regulation of Coal Seam Gas (NPACSG). This provides national oversight of CSG projects in areas where the Federal Government has (limited) regulatory authority under the constitution.
The formal establishment of the federal Independent Expert Scientific Committee on Coal Seam Gas and Large Coal Mining Development is still pending.
2. Landowners are concerned about potential damage to drinking water, the environment and structural stability
Fracking uses massive amounts of water. The Federal Government "Water Group" estimates, based on existing permits, that 5400GL of water could be used in fracking each year, almost three times the 1872GL used by all the households in Australia combined.
The technique also creates micro-seismic events (mini earthquakes), which cause the connection of naturally separated geological layers. This process can contaminate ground water with volatile organic compounds, methane, other gases, heavy metals, enormous quantities of salt as well as naturally occurring radioactive material.
When fracking fluid is used only between 20 and 80% of the toxic mixture is recovered to the surface, while the rest remains under ground. It can, and often does, find its way into ground and surface water, endangering the health of local communities and ecosystems that rely on this water. The regulation in Australia does not require companies to list the chemicals they use in fracking fluids. However, it has been clamed, experience in the United States of America, Queensland and New South Wales shows the use of known carcinogens as well as other chemicals including: ethylene glycol, which affects kidney function, the lungs and heart; the BTEX group (Benzene, Toluene, Ethyl Benzene and Xylene), which affect bone marrow, the blood system and cause leukaemia; and other toxins that affect hormone regulation and the reproductive system.
On August 24, 2012, Friends of the Earth Melbourne campaigns co-ordinator, Cam Walker, claimed, 'Coal seam gas mining can produce vast amounts of contaminated waste water, which thus far appears to be inadequately managed. In addition, extraction of coal seam gas can cause damage and depressurisation of aquifers during in the drilling process.'
3. Farmers are concerned about the contamination of the food they produce
Some opponents of fracking note that Australia is an important food producer and that food production is threatened by widespread fracking.
In the Darling Downs in Queensland massive tracts of land have been taken over by fracking infrastructure, displacing farming activities and restricting Australia's capacity to produce food.
In Victoria, the exploration licenses granted cover some of the most productive agricultural land. Quit Coal is a Melbourne-based collective, which campaigns against the expansion of the coal industry in Victoria. The lobby group has stated, 'There is a dangerously high risk that contaminated air and water will directly impinge on our ability to produce healthy, clean food.'
There is also the issue of what to do with the salt produced as part of the fracking process. It is estimated to amount to millions of tonnes. The ABC site Coal Seam Gas by the Numbers reports the amount of salt to be generated as up to 31 million tonnes, enough to fill the Melbourne Cricket Ground 15 times.
Dr Merryn Redenbach from Doctors for the Environment Australia has stated, 'Coal seam gas and tight gas drilling inherently risk the contamination of land and groundwater by releasing salt, methane, and naturally occurring carcinogenic chemicals from the coal seam. These chemicals can leak from the seam or drill holes into land and ground water during the extraction process and pose a risk to human and animal health as well to crops, land and water.'
In response to these risks to the state's food production capacity, the Victorian Farmers Federation has said it supports the state's ban and wants farmers to be given veto power over future mining activity on their properties.
4. There is general concern about a reduction in land values
In a Landline report televised in May, 2010, it was stated that the Queensland Valuer General had found that even one well could mean a reduction of 12% in the value of a property.
On March 9, 2012, Crikey reported, 'The situation appears not to have improved, but is complicated by a depressed property market and insufficient sales data to provide definitive evidence about the impact of CSG operations on land values. The interim Senate inquiry report was told that compensation agreements do not take into account potential loss of land values, only loss of annual production.'
Darling Downs farmer Jim Baker stated, 'No one will buy a gas farm.
Our land which was very valuable grazing country has depreciated in value very significantly.'
Landholders have consistently reported that the cost and availability of labour has also been adversely affected with reports of a 50% increase in costs.
Anna Bassett, of Jenavale, Roma, 'They've got a business [the coal seam gas producers]; we've got a business. It's unfair if their business impacts ours. And so they have to pay correctly just the same as any other commercial arrangement.'
Robert Loughman, the Mayor of the Maranoa Regional Council, has stated, 'I won't name which companies are paying more or less than others, but it's certainly at the lower end. The lawyers not so long ago were extracting more out of every transaction or every document than the landholders were, and you haven't got the balance right when that's happening.'
Many farmers have indicated that they do not believe they are receiving a fair compensation. The compensation regime at the moment makes no allowance for the social impacts and no allowance for the compulsory nature of the imposition.
5. Fracking will discourage the development of other more environmentally friendly power sources
There are many who are concerned that the widespread development of fracking will halt investment in other more environmentally friendly power sources.
Fatih Birol, chief economist for the International Energy Agency (IEA), has stated that the threat to renewables was plain. Fatih Birol has noted, 'Renewable energy may be the victim of cheap gas prices if governments do not stick to their renewable support schemes.'
The International Energy Agency has warned that a 'golden age of gas' spurred by a tripling of shale gas from fracking and other sources of unconventional gas by 2035 could stop renewable energy in its tracks.
Gas is now relatively abundant in some regions, due to the massive expansion of hydraulic fracturing - fracking - for shale gas, and in some areas the price of the fuel has fallen. The result is a threat to renewable energy, which is by comparison more expensive, in part because the greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels are still not taken into account in the price of energy.
An American study conducted in January 2012 concluded, 'Growth in alternative energy projects may slow materially since low gas prices adversely affect their economic viability, particularly solar and wind, although it does reduce the cost of backup power needed to improve their reliability.'
The Socialist Alliance's policy on coal seam gas states, 'The gas industry is rapidly increasing its scope in the Australian energy market. Gas is talked up by some as a clean energy source, or as a "transition fuel", while we develop renewable energies. But gas is a fossil fuel. Burning it creates carbon emissions.'
Critics of coal seam gas maintain that only renewable energy sources such as sun and wind should be being developed.
Arguments against a temporary moratorium on fracking
1. If properly managed, fracking is a safe technology
It has been claimed that with appropriate regulations and management on the ground fracking is a safe means of gas extraction.
A 2012 report from the Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering has stated that the technique is safe if firms follow best practice and rules are enforced.
The report's chair, Professor Robert Mair from Cambridge University, has stated, 'Our main conclusions are that the environmental risks of hydraulic fracturing for shale can be safely managed provided there is best practice observed and provided it's enforced through strong regulation.'
Professor Mair has further stated, 'The UK regulatory system is up to the job for the present very small scale exploration activities, but there would need to be strengthening of the regulators if the government decides to proceed with more shale gas extraction, particularly at the production stage.'
The report concludes that the risk of gas contamination is 'very low' - provided that fracking takes place at a depth of many hundreds of metres, a long way below the level of aquifers, and that the wells are properly constructed.
Each well should be lined with layers of steel and cement; and if this stays intact, the scientists have concluded, gas leakage should not be a problem.
The report has also claimed that with good management of waste water, chemical contamination can be avoided. It is critical of the United States practice of leaving waste water in open ponds, which would not be permitted in the United Kingdom.
Regarding the likelihood of seismic disturbances, the report states that the risk that fracking will generate significant earth tremors is also low. Professor Zoe Shipton, from the University of Strathclyde, has stated, 'The actual explosions are far too small to be noticed at the surface. If the fluid moves into existing faults in the rock that are close to slipping anyway, you'll bring that slippage forward in time.
But the Magnitude 2.3 event in Blackpool last year - that is like a lorry going past your house. In fact the British Geological Survey can't measure below Magnitude 2 in towns because of the traffic.'
2. Opposition to fracking is ill-informed and emotive
It has been repeatedly stated that there is no reliable evidence to support the claims made by the opponents of fracking.
Dave Quast, the California director for Energy in Depth, a public outreach campaign launched by the Independent Petroleum Association of America has claimed that opponents of fracking make unsubstantiated claims.
In an opinion piece published in the Los Angeles Daily News on June 20, 2012, Quast stated, 'There is an enormous gulf that separates the talking points used by anti-drilling activists from the facts cited by regulators and scientists, not to mention empirical evidence.' Quast further claimed, 'A recent University of Texas study found that only one-third of news coverage actually cites science and data about hydraulic fracturing, while two thirds is decidedly negative in tone about the process.'
An article published in Popular Mechanics in 2011 claims, 'The idea stressed by fracking critics that deep-injected fluids will migrate into groundwater is mostly false. Basic geology prevents such contamination from starting below ground. A fracture caused by the drilling process would have to extend through the several thousand feet of rock that separate deep shale gas deposits from freshwater aquifers.'
If contamination is going to occur it will be through poor extraction management at well sites above ground where spillage can occur. Supporters of fracking claim the risk is not, as its opponents state, inherent to the process.
Professor Avner Vengosh, of Duke University, who is currently studying groundwater contamination, has stated, 'The debate is becoming very emotional. And basically not using science.' (Professor Vengosh has made this claim in relation to both critics and proponents of coal seam gas.)
There are those who claim that many opponents of fracking are motivated by an irrational fear of its dangers which prevents them from looking fairly at the evidence.
Mark Lubell, the director of the Centre for Environmental Policy and Behaviour at the University of California has stated, 'You can literally put facts in front of people, and they will just ignore them.'
Professor Lubell has explained that the phenomenon, which happens on both sides of a debate, is called 'motivated reasoning.' '
Professor Lubell claims, 'Rational people insist on believing things that aren't true, in part because of feedback from other people who share their views.'
3. Coal seam gas is an environmentally friendly fuel
Coal seam gas is being promoted as a relatively clean alternative to coal and oil. Its supporters argue that coal seam gas represents a cleaner energy alternative to coal-fired or nuclear power.
It has been repeatedly noted that burning natural gas is cleaner than oil or gasoline, as it emits half as much carbon dioxide, less than one-third the nitrogen oxides, and 1 percent as much sulphur oxides as coal combustion.
In 2012, the United States lobby group PennFuture claimed that natural gas is a much cleaner burning fuel, and it called gas-fired power plants 'orders of magnitude cleaner' than coal plants.
In Australia, Tor McCaul has stated, 'It's almost ironic lately that gas has been receiving such negative press, and yet it can do so much. I've lived in India and I've been through China a number of times, and the amount of wood and dirty coal that's been burnt is quite high. Consequently, the air quality in those countries can be quite bad.' Tor McCaul is the managing director of Comet Ridge, a Brisbane-based coal seam gas exploration and development company.
McCaul's comments are supported by a report by global engineering consultancy WorleyParsons. The report compared greenhouse gas emissions associated with Chinese power generators using Australian liquefied natural gas derived from coal seam gas with those using imported black coal, comparing the technologies across their entire 'life cycle'. It concluded coal seam gas was significantly less greenhouse gas-intensive for most existing, commonly employed, end-user combustion technologies and for most of the life-cycle scenarios considered.
4. The moratorium will discourage investors and developers
The Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association (APPEA) has criticised the Victorian government's decision to put a moratorium on coal seam gas exploration, claiming, 'It sends the wrong message to investors.'
APPEA has argued that the Victorian government was ignoring examples of positive CSG development, particularly in Queensland and that the moratorium could deter investment.
It has been reported that brokers are concerned that investing in companies with coal seam operations adds an additional layer of risk. Popular objections to these developments make them seem problematic. Critics of the moratorium claim that it has added to this perception of risk as it appears that the Victorian government will halt development in the face of public opposition to these projects.
James Samson, of Lincoln Indicators, has stated, 'Coal seam gas is fast becoming a political football...The risks of investing in coal seam gas stocks are very real and very publicised.'
5. The moratorium does not offer sufficient protection
Some of the critics of the Baillieu Government's temporary ban on coal seam gas argue that it does not go far enough. Critics are particularly concerned that it is not expected to affect any current leaseholders.
The Quit Coal campaign has noted that the moratorium does not affect coal seam gas developments that have already been begun or committed to. The lobby group states, 'The announcement offers nothing for farmers in prime agricultural land in Western Victoria, in areas like Bacchus Marsh where farmers face continuing uncertainty over possible development of an export coal mine.'
There is also concern that the moratorium is only temporary and that once federal regulations are in place the industry is likely to be able to expand in the manner in which it has in New South Wales and Queensland.
Shaun Murray, a spokesperson for the Quit Coal campaign, has stated, 'While there will be a temporary halt on coal seam gas fracking, companies will still be able to drill for gas across some of Victoria's best farmland.'
Opponents of fracking are generally concerned that no regulatory structure will be sufficiently rigorous to guard against the inherent risks the fracking process poses.
Further implications
It would appear that neither side in the fracking debate has a monopoly on either truth or exaggeration.
Claims made about extensive contamination of underground water at fracking sites due to the migration of chemical-loaded injected water seem to be exaggerated. The geology is such that aquifers (natural underground water sources) are generally far above the gas-bearing strata and therefore underground water supplies are unlikely to be contaminated.
This, however, does not mean that contamination of water supplies cannot occur at other stages in the fracking process. A widely quoted Popular Mechanics article which explains why deep-level contamination of water supplies is unlikely to occur, goes on to explain that contamination can still happen in other ways. With regard to the United States, the 2011 article states, 'In the past two years alone, a series of surface spills, including two blowouts at wells operated by Chesapeake Energy and EOG Resources and a spill of 8000 gallons of fracking fluid at a site in Dimock, Pa., have contaminated groundwater in the Marcellus Shale region.'
A recent well-credentialed British report suggests that safety can only be guaranteed (and then not completely) through extremely rigorous regulation and scrupulous production practices.
The report's chair, Professor Robert Mair from Cambridge University, stated, 'Our main conclusions are that the environmental risks of hydraulic fracturing for shale can be safely managed provided there is best practice observed and provided it's enforced through strong regulation.'
Just what can happen in an improperly regulated environment was shown in the late 1960s when extraordinarily hazardous methods of extracting coal seam gas were tested in the United States.
On September 10, 1969, the United States Atomic Energy Commission, in cooperation with a couple of natural gas exploration companies, detonated a 43-kiloton nuclear weapon about a mile-and-a-half underground. This proved to be an ultimately futile effort to produce large quantities of natural gas, because the nuclear explosion irradiated all of the natural gas it liberated and made it dangerously unusable. The irradiated gas is still there, beneath a concrete cap.
Despite the now problematic nature of exploring for coal seam gas in this area applications are regularly made. The Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission requires hearings for any gas well drilling within a half-mile of the site.
Thus the Victorian moratorium while federal regulations are developed seems a wise precaution. It remains to be seen how rigorous these new regulations will be. Overseas experience suggests they need to be highly so. The standards required of companies extracting coal seam gas need to be demanding and closely monitored.
Newspaper items used in the compilation of this issue outline
AUST, February 22, 2012, page 13, editorial, `Don't lock the gate on CSG'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/dont-lock-the-gate-on-csg/story-e6frg71x-1226277588522
AUST, February 20, 2012, page 1, news item by Jamie Walker, `Support for CSG collapses'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/elections/support-for-csg-collapses-queensland-newspoll/story-fnbsqt8f-1226275274873
AUST, March 7, 2012, page 6, news item by Amos Aikman, `Farmers lash out over CSG blueprint'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/nsw-farmers-lash-out-over-csg-blueprint/story-fnaxx2sv-1226291189608
AUST, March 13, 2012, page 8, comment by Andrew Fraser, `CSG anger unites natural enemies'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/elections/csg-anger-unites-natural-enemies/story-fnc6854w-1226297558648
AUST, March 29, 2012, page 12, comment by Alan Moran, `Tap our rich CSG reserves'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/tap-our-rich-csg-reserves/story-e6frgd0x-1226312892822
AUST, March 27, 2012, page 2, news item by Nick Leys, `Coal-seam radio ads axed for "inaccuracies"'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/media/coal-seam-radio-ads-axed-for-inaccuracies/story-e6frg996-1226310725052
AGE, April 12, 2012, page 5, news item by Adam Morton, `Labor calls for fracking ban'.
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/labor-call-to-ban-fracking-20120411-1wsbi.html
AUST, May 2, 2012, page 5, news item (photo of CSG protesters) by Aikman and Salusinszky, `Farmers face exposure on cash for gas'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/farmers-face-exposure-on-cash-for-gas/story-fn59niix-1226344124608
AUST, May 16, 2012, page 6, news item by D Crowe, `Farmers "deserve more of gas cash"'.
http://theaustralian.newspaperdirect.com/epaper/viewer.aspx
AUST, May 14, 2012, page 5, news item by Natasha Bita, `Coal-seam gas advisers' links to mining industry exposed'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/coal-seam-gas-advisers-links-to-mining-industry-exposed/story-fn59niix-1226354312451
AUST, May 24, 2012, page 2, news item by Salusinszky and Aikman, `Indigenous groups spark outcry over bid to tap coal-seam gas'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/indigenous/indigenous-groups-spark-outcry-over-bid-to-tap-coal-seam-gas/story-fn9hm1pm-1226364974919
AUST, June 26, 2012, page 2, news item by Roseanne Barrett, `CSG company access revoked'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/coal-seam-gas-company-access-revoked/story-e6frgczx-1226408333740
AUST, July 14, 2012, page 17, analysis (on coal-seam "fracking" and shale oil deposits) by Brad Norington, `Shale revolution takes the world back to the future on fossil fuels'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/shale-revolution-takes-the-world-back-to-the-future-on-fossil-fuels/story-e6frg8zx-1226425744364
AUST, July 14, 2012, page 23, editorial, `US unleashes energy revolution'
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/us-unleashes-energy-revolution/story-e6frg71x-1226425729528
AUST, August 8, 2012, page 6, news item by Andrew Fraser, `Shale gas mining causes "less damage" than CSG'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/shale-gas-mining-causes-less-damage-than-csg/story-fnaxx2sv-1226445137354
AUST, August 4, 2012, page 17, comment (on horizontal drilling for shale gas) by Graham Lloyd, `Sector knocked sideways'
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/sector-knocked-sideways/story-e6frg6z6-1226442473596
AUST, August 4, 2012, page 23 editorial, `Recognising a game-changer'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/recognising-a-game-changer/story-e6frg71x-1226442544494
AUST, August 2, 2012, page 14, comment by Josh Frydenberg, `Shale gas offers energy security'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/shale-gas-offers-energy-security/story-e6frgd0x-1226440696093
AUST, August 11, 2012, page 16, book extract (photo of protesters) by Paul Cleary, `One law for the mines ...'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/one-law-for-the-mines/story-e6frg6z6-1226447737223
AGE, August 24, 2012, page 3, news item by Josh Gordon, `Baillieu moves towards moratorium on fracking'.
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/baillieu-moves-towards-moratorium-on-fracking-20120823-24pd3.html