This is total hyprocrisy! How can this woman point the finger at anyone when it was HER Government that started this mess - not just in St Peters (where it suits her political whim to comment) but in the Hunter, Gloucester, Liverpool Plains, Northern Rivers, Upper Hunter etc. I am totally disgusted by this cheap political rubbish. Grow up KK! Lock the Gate http://lockthegate.org.au/

Hi Peter, Thanks for your comment. Would you like to write a piece for Streetcorner about what you think should happen next? Regards Streetcorner

I think if health is at all important to anyone, this industry should be halted everywhere. If permitted in St Peters , the whole of Sydney may be affected - fugitive emissions, traffic, toxic chemicals, noise and light pollution will have a profound effect on the health and well-being of thousands of people. Fraccing can affect building foundations - you can kiss property values goodbye - would you buy a house in the vicinity of a gas drill site?? The activity runs 24 hours a day. Drilling into the aquifers is such an unknown - scientsts and even the proponents admit that some effects will be probable - unknown and unknowable until after the event. How do you repair an aquifer 600metres underground? Woops, sorry Sydney, we've lost your drinking water. It beggars belief that our Govt is allowing these industries to carry out this toxic industry all over Australia, putting at risk our precious water and our future food security for a quick buck for shareholders and company executives. We do NOT need Coal Seam Gas - it's all earmarked for export to China and with a 5 year royalty holiday, the dim-witted State Govt may never collect a penny. Wake up Australia.....

If KK's government party had not sold off state electricity, and imposed a carbon tax, then we would not be forced into CSG (a so called cleaner energy source). Energy has got to come from somewhere ... no body seems serious about solar or wind. Gas a clean source of energy is the biggest lie of the century.

I agree, it is total hypocrisy since not only did KK's govt sanction the wholesale rape & pillage of NSW via CSG, she was notoriously SILENT on the matter when the community tried to lobby her support prior to the last election. But any opposition to CSG has to be welcomed I guess. The issue with potential mining in St Peters is worrying indeed (& I am concerned because I live in a neighbouring suburb) but it is just the tip of a nasty big ole iceberg, with CSG posing serious risks to water (drilling in our water catchments for crying out loud, in our dry and drought-prone country!), food producing lands, national parks and wilderness areas, near other residential areas as well. It is greedy, lazy insanity to take this route. CSG is not green, clean, sustainable or a suitable 'alternative' energy at all - it is just another finite fossil fuel. All our efforts should be focused on supporting and implementing renewable energy industries RIGHT NOW and not trying to gain some time with so-called 'transition' power like CSG. Mining CSG will only bring short term benefits to the energy corporations and some state revenue, but the community and environment will have to pay the price in the long term. BAN it now.

What a joke I don't care if she's got a new haircut she can't change her spots. She had a big part in helping coal seam gas and mining get a hold of valuable farmland and allowed the miners to walk all over us. I repeatedly wrote to her about my fears of coal seam gas and she ignored me every single time. Now she cares when its popular! Chuck her out along with the other ecociders!

LOCK THE GATE! CSG is sooo last century. Everyone's talking renewable energy now!

I thought that Dart had publicly committed to no fraccing. You should all cool down at look at the facts. Comments like fraccing will damage building foundations and fugitive emmissions (of methane) will effect the health of the population of Sydney (profoundly no less)are excessive. Concentrate on the real issues such as land values and noise, not the negative fantasies of a doomsday scenario or your concerns will be dismissed by the wider public.

No Michael you need to educate yourself on the real dangers of CSG extraction and production and that includes the real fact that drilling and fraccing causes damage to aquifers that can never be repaired. Around 50% of Coal Seam gas wells need to be fracked according to data released by mining companies. When Dart tells you it's committed to no fraccing it means during the exploration phase and it retains a license to frac and will frac during production when they need to stimulate the flow to commercial levels. Money will dictate what they do, fraccing will happen in at least half the wells, more at lower depths when they get there as higher levels are depleted. Fraccing is not required to damage aquifers, just the drilling will do it, especially horizontal drilling. And just releasing the pressure in the coal seams by pumping out millions of litres of salt water allows many types of toxic substances to migrate into neighbouring aquifers via faults and fissures, and yes cracks caused by fraccing.

I'm sorry but I can't see how pumping water out of a coal seam, thus lowering the pressure causes the migration away from it into other places, such as an aquifer, of anything. Surely releasing the pressure causes fluids from other areas to move in. What are these many types of toxic substances? If they are already in the coal then shouldn't we demand from the government that they prevent people from drawing drinking water from coal seams?

The water pressure is keeping the gas locked in the coal seam. When they pump the water out it releases that pressure and the gas migrates. Some of it goes up the well, much of it escapes via cracks and fissures. Along with the gas, chemicals that are naturally present in the coal seam are also released. Chemicals such as BTEX chemicals. These chemicals can also be present in the water from the coal seam that's pumped to the surface and left in giant evaporation lakes which flood into surface waterways. No one drinks the water from a coal seam, it's fossil water, it's been sitting in coal for millions of years and is very salty and ca have the above BTEX chemicals in it. The companies cannot deal with this water. Even if they could get the toxic substances out, what will they do with all the salt? All the BTEX?

A lot of farming communities draw water from coal aquifers. This happens especially where the coal is close to the surface, for instance, near Dalby and around Moranbah near Mackay. The 60 minutes program showed someone lighting up his bore which was tapping coal. Shouldn't the government stop people from drinking this water if it is poisonous? What are the limits for BTEX in drinking water and how much is present in our drinking water already?

No, farmers do not draw water from a coal aquifer. Coal seams are basically aquifers, yes, but the water is very salty and is of no use for farming. Are some farmers polluting the earth with badly drilled bores? Hell yes but does that mean everyone should be allowed to do it? We're talking 40,000 gas wells over the next few years in NSW alone.. Thats a lot of damage! The ones in Sydney now are just test wells, in full production they are spaced 500 meters apart, from here to the horizon and beyond. Have a look at some aerial photos of the gasfields in QLD if you doubt me.

No one should be allowed to badly drill bore holes, especially through aquifers. I thought that there are regulations which specify the quality of wells to be drilled under the Mines & Energy Regs (casing strength, cement strength, pressure tests). I agree that these stringent specifications don't apply to water wells drilled by farmers, which is why millions of litres of water a day is flowing out of the great Artesian Basin every day from free flowing artesian wells, but, with good drilling practice and responsible monitoring by the government surely the risk of damage can be controlled. BTW I thought that the 40,000 wells was a figure for the QLD industry not NSW. I haven't heard of a figure from the industry for this state

This type of extraction requires lots of wells drilled into the same reserve to capture as much gas as possible when they release the pressure, otherwise they lose it.. where does it go? Think of a whole bunch of straws stuck down into a layer cake which has air pockets of cream. The straws being shoved down into the cake cause the chocolate layer to mix with the strawberry layer below and it also leaks into any cream airpockets that the straw goes through. voila you got yourself mush and that's what's happending where there is unconventional gas mining. There isnt any monitoring so we don't know if there are good drilling practice, it's self monitored and the regulations are set by inept government departments that refer to industry provided documents and studies that do not include data for independant verification.

But there is a legal requirement to monitor all wells and to report on the integrity of the cement sheath around the casing which isolates the coal from the overlying formations. If what you say is true then all drilling would cause the same damage. I'm sure that you are not opposed to drilling as such, just the size of the development. If the problem is drilling then the same argument extends to all wells, including oil and gas, CSG and yes, farmers' bores - of which there are hundreds of thousands. What is gas mining???

How can you test the integity of the concrete sheath? No they don't monitor and test the abandoned wells. No the concrete sheath doesnt extend to bottom of the well, it,s impossible, especially in horizontal drilling, the well twists and turns, up and down and how long do you think it'll stand up to ground movement or say an earthquake? Do you know that emptying all that water from the seams causes ground subsidence? What happens to the concrete sheath then? Did you know that steel rusts? Water bores are SHALLOW, they drill thousands of wells for unconventional gas up to 8km below the earths surface, through aquifers into the coal seam. You can,t compare the two. And no one said farmers bores shouldnt be better regulated, it doesnt give the excuse for miners to drill. And do you want the 11km long, 10 m high, 30m wide pile of salt that is produced from ONE CSG project on your property? No thats right it would bury your tiny little city property wouldnt it? They,ll come dump it out here on the farms won't they?

Michael B, You are making the common and understandable mistake that most honest Australians make in believing that what a company (and Government) says they will do, will be done. You need to take note that many of us have dealt with these companies and we have heard what should happen and seen what does happen in reality. Gas companies lie. It's their job to lie to secure the investment for their shareholders that would not be possible without the lies. If the required monitoring was done, the entire system would be unviable. Governments have no interest in regulating the industry, they want the royalties (in NSW case - five years after production starts). With the bore on 60 minutes, that bore DID NOT have gas in it prior to the nearby fraccing - with other water bores, no they are not going into coal and they are not A) pumping out huge volumes at once, B) doing it in coal where it releases the gas (now under it's own pressure) from the coal surface and C) not putting down or otherwise accessing poisonous chemicals. The two are not similar. We don't need this gas, we may in the distant future but we don't need it now. It's mainly for export and making foreign companies like British Gas richer - evidenced by the huge CSG/LNG plants being developed at Gladstone and Newcastle. It has very little to do with "turning on your light switch" as they claim. LOCK THE GATE http://lockthegate.org.au/

I'll add a few notes. "Gas Mining" is a term that the industries (mining and gas) both squeal about. Neither side wants to be associated with the other but it's an extractive industry - and in our thoughts it's mining. Many industry affiliates (mining media etc.) use the term and as it pees the gas industry off, we'll keep using it too. The gas is held in the coal under the water pressure by what is called "Adsorption". When the water pressure is released by pumping it out, the gas becomes active and pressurises to (I believe, from what AGL/Sydney Gas told us) about 20-40 psi. Yes part of the problem is other water coming in to replace what was taken, but the bigger problem is the pressurised gas now finding cracks and fissures to migrate through. Please take a close look at the processes rather than relying on the rhetoric that gas companies tell the public and politicians (via lobbyists) that is simply misleading and not the full truth.

Michael B, do you work with or are employed by,either directly or indirectly, a coal seam gas company or someone who benefits from the coal seam gas industry?

Peter: I agree, the state governments want the royalties and if the claims are true they are considerable, but that doesn't mean that it isn't interested in regulating the industry. Given the groundswell of popular interest it is crucial that the government achieve both its aims. I'm sorry but I am one of the optimists that believes in government of the people by the people and that that is largely what we get. Conspiracy theory is popular but I don't think it gets traction with the majority. (ducks tomatoes and brick bats. I am interested to know what these toxic chemicals used in CSG drilling are. Why should they be different to any in use with other wells? In fact they are not, Water well drillers use the same array of mud chemicals in their wells. I'm sorry but there is simply an overwhelming evidence base that farmers who tap into coal seams and pump water from them trigger gas desorption - and that is what happened with the guy on the programme. If his well was damaged by fraccing then it should be easy enough to establish a case for compensation and criminal prosecution. Re mining - I associate this with mines and miners, neither are present. Is Bass Straight an Oil Mine? Sorry but the term is silly, but feel free to keep using it. Forde: Hi, no. I receive no income or interest from the Australian CSG miners either directly or indirectly. I am a farmer, 50 acres of vines and small wine producer. In another life I was a geologist and have experience with drilling, mainly in the Cooper Basin. I don't think an ad-hominum line of reasoning holds any merit. I am concerned that a the campaign against CSG is loosing direction. It seems as if nothing it does is not destructive and that it is universally bad. Isn't the issue here one of conflicting land access (farmers versus explorers/miners)and diversion away from renewable energy in favour of a fossil fuel based transition? The interests of the farmers and those interested in the environmrent are not supported by wild claims that can not be supported and which are not crucial to your argument. Cheers

Michael B, Why should the farmer have to spend huge money establishing a legal case against the company that fracced his water bore? The company (and the Qld Government) tell him he has to "prove that they caused it". The story is the same EVERY time these things happen. The company has huge funding behind it for legal cases IF the landowner possibly does pursue it - unlikely given the costs. This is why we need to have a moratorium UNTIL it can be proved to be safe - in the mean time we advise landowners under threat to get independent testing of all groundwater so they have the pre-gas case established.

I'm sorry Michael but being being a geologist in another life isn't proof that you know what you're talking about, not at all. Start by reading this and come back and give us your opinion on the Australian National Toxic Network "wild" claims. http://ntn.org.au/wp-content/uploads/201... Then I'll give you another reference to more of what I'm saying. Can you give me references to any studies that prove your assertions that this industry is safe and well regulated? Something other than mining company media releases and investor brochures of course.

Hi Farmer: I agree. I was simply responding to the question about if I had an interest in the CSG industry. As I said I don't believe that an ad hominum argument has any worth. Really, I haven't made any assertions so there is nothing I have said that I am asking you to believe. When I used the term "wild claims" I wasn't claiming that all claims made were wild, but that wild claims do not help. This is a paper on fraccing chemicals. Dart Energy state that they will not fracc so it is not relevant to what is going on with them. I'll go through the material slowly and let you know but on a very fast pass it doesn't impress me - just for a start mineral oil is not used in CSG fracs at all. Most of the referances are from the media, youtube and also Gaslands gets a mention. It's formated like a serious paper but the detail looks amateurish. But as I say, I'll read it and let you know. Regarding proof of safety - what would that consist of? By definition there can be no proof of the non-existance of anything and that applies to risk as well. Risk can be quantified however. Unfortunately, the EI statements which do this have all come from industryand have been assessed by governments so I can predict the response from the anti lobby. However, that is not the fault of the industry, it is the fault of the government if the assessment is not scrutinsed adequately. There are techniques which can positively test the adequacey of casing cement (cement bond log, leak off tests)and formation integrity (vertical interferance testing for one). If you like I can send some technical references to them. I'd argue that formation isolation needs to be adequate before any reservoir is produced (be it water, gas or oil) and that such adequacy needs to be tested and verified. Wells that fail can be repaired or even plugged with cement and remediated. Is this the best place to continue this dialogue?

Peter, yes the law puts an onus on the claimant to make his claim and to cover his costs to the point of a judgement being made. This as you say applies to all such claims for damage, but I would have thought that a good claim would have enough legs for a legal firm to mount a case and recover costs on a win only basis. Surely Shut the Gate and the Australian Greens can see an opportunity here as well. No, the claim simply has no basis in terms of a reasonable hypothesis and the folk whoi would contest this in court know it. I'm sure that the company concerned would settle out of court if there was any merit in the claim.

You didn't answer the question :) The farmer just wants to farm his land. The gas company comes onto his land and does this with or without his consent under the way the law works, fracks up his water supply and then HE has to prove they did it against enormously funded gas companies that can pitch 10 QCs against him. How can that be right? LOCK the Gate... not Shut - and we're not looking for opportunities, we're looking for a just outcome. A moratorium until the industry can prove that it will be safe, at this point the evidence is not in their favour. THEY have to prove it - they are the ones making money out of it.

My answer was full I thought. This is the law for all people making a claim for damages. Is a special provision being sought for claims being made against CSG operators? Perhaps a provision to allow any wild claim to be made or frivolous case to be made and the defending company would have to fund the claim? This flies in the face of natural justice, and no matter what you think of large industry it still deserves that. As I recall, the farmer had no CSG activity on his land. No this is a frivolous case and does not do the anti-gas lobby any good. As for evidence, there seems to be a lot of scenarios painted but little actual damage. Just because a scenario can be put proposed does not justify the halting of development. A reasonable hypothesis needs to made and as far as I can tell that has not happened. All this discussion on gas migrating upwards is simply incorrect. Any halfway trained reservoir engineer would tear than suggestion to pieces

This inforamtoin is off the hizool!

http://www.coachfactorybag.net/ Coach Factory http://www.get-coachoutletonline.com/ Coach Outlet Online http://www.coachoutletusaonline2012.com/ Coach Outlet Online http://www.coachoutletpursea.com/ Coach Purses Outlet http://www.coachoutletsonline-purse.org/ Cheap Coach Handbags http://www.coachoutlets2u.org/ Coach Outlet Store Online http://www.louisvuittonpurseoutlet-s.net/ louis vuitton bags http://www.coachsoutlets-canada.com/ Coach Outlet Online http://www.coachfactorystoresa.com/ Coach Outlet Store http://www.coachoutletusashop.net/ Coach Outlet Online http://www.buycoachoutletsinfactory.net/ Coach Factory Outlet Online

http://www.cookdress.org/prom-dresses.ht... prom dresses deals