CSG dilemma hijacked by the economy and academia

Speaking at last night's Brisbane seminar
(L-R) Prof Garnett, Deb Kerr, Dr Beck,
Tony Wood and Prof Sandiford.

A strange disquiet overwhelmed me as five highly intelligent and literate people discussed “Unconventional gas – energy saviour or environment problem?” last night at Queensland’s State Library in Brisbane.

It appeared the challenges and difficulties of coal seam gas (CSG), of which there are many, had been hijacked by the economy and academia.

Missing from the conversation, but not entirely, was what the accessing of this unconventional gas would mean to people, their communities, Australian society generally and, importantly, our environment.

Societal and environmental difficulties were discussed, but the fact that the pursuit of CSG could disrupt and render whole districts impotent for traditional human use, seemed unimportant.

Last night’s conversation appeared methodology – how to access the gas safely and how it would impact on the local economy and its influence on world events.

The fact that CSG would remain a part of the modern landscape, although many actual landscapes would be ruined, appeared to be an accepted fact. Business as usual prevailed.

Chair at last night’s discussion, attended by more than 200 people, was the Director of the Centre for Coal Seam Gas at the University of Queensland, Professor Andrew Garnett, who quickly explained that his department was not an advocate of CSG, rather a place where it was studied and investigated.

On the discussion panel were the Energy Program Director with the Grattan Institute, Tony Wood; deputy chair of the ACOLA working group on engineering energy, Dr Vaughan Beck; the Natural Resource Manager, National Farmers’ Federation, Deb Kerr; and the Director of the Melbourne Energy Institute, Professor Mike Sandiford.

Robert McLean