Metgasco Limited holds an exploration licence PEL 426 (38 blocks about 8 km NNE of GRAFTON) and Clarence Morton Resources Pty Limited holds exploration licences PEL 457 (10 blocks about 23 km WNW of YAMBA) and PEL 478 (12 blocksabout 21 km NW of GRAFTON) in the Clarence Valley.
These tenements cover a large part of the valley.
To date both Metgaso and Clarence Morton Resources have drilled test wells in PEL 426 and PEL 457 respectively.
Valley communities face an uncertain future until they know a) if these companies intend to proceed with gas production; and b) if the NSW Government will prohibit gas production in the Clarence Valley local government area.
There have been many news articles reporting on Queensland gasfields and a significant number of these contain disturbing information/opinion.
This is one such article from ABC News 19 September 2014:
The CSIRO says the results of a survey its conducted on the Western Downs will help authorities develop better long-term plans for mining communities.
The survey is the second phase of a three-year study the CSIRO is conducting in conjunction with major coal seam gas (CSG) producers.
Four-hundred residents across the Dalby, Tara, Chinchilla and Miles districts were asked to rate the wellbeing of their communities and how resilient the region will be over the life of the gas industry.
Lead researcher Andrea Walton says respondents were worried about the impact the industry is having on roads, the environment but also on community cohesion.
"Important elements to this sense that where they live offers a good quality of life that it is a good place to live," she said.
Dr Walton says most were worried about the future.
"Fifty per cent of people think their community is struggling to cope with coal seam gas development," she said…..
According to the CSIRO; The Western Downs local government area in southern Queensland is in the Surat Basin where most of Australia’s coal seam gas (CSG) reserves can be found and where most CSG development activity is presently taking place.
The CSIRO survey of Community Wellbeing and responding to change: Western Downs region in Queensland report released in September 2014 is; the second stage of a three year project entitled “Impacts of Coal Seam Gas mining on communities in the Western Downs: How features, resources and strategies of a community affect its functioning and well-being” (or the Community Functioning and Wellbeing Project).
It is
Australia Pacific LNG and QGC both have gasfields in the Western Downs region.
The Alliance Agreement between these three parties allows the potential for the CSIRO to derive income from any commercialisation flowing from research results.
Excerpts from the study [my red bolding]:
* 1. Sub-regional differences
Tara reported significantly lower levels of satisfaction with eight of the fifteen dimensions of community wellbeing including personal safety, community spirit, income sufficiency, community cohesion, social interaction, services and facilities, community participation, and employment and business opportunities, with the latter three reporting unsatisfactory levels. They were also dissatisfied with planning, leadership and access to information. Residents of Tara community also reported lowest levels of overall community wellbeing and lowest levels of place attachment.
On average, people who lived in Tara had mid-line attitudes and feelings towards CSG development in their region.
Dalby reported dissatisfaction with four of the fifteen dimensions of wellbeing including levels of employment and business opportunities, environmental management, decision making and roads.
Employment and business opportunities were significantly lower than Chinchilla.
Residents were also 26-dissatisfied with planning, leadership, and access to information.
They had relatively high levels of community wellbeing, and the highest le-+vels of expected future wellbeing and place attachment, which were significantly higher than Miles and Tara respectively.
On average, people who lived in Dalby had negative attitudes and feelings towards CSG development in their region.
Chinchilla reported dissatisfaction with three of the fifteen dimensions of wellbeing including levels of environmental management, decision making, and roads. They were also dissatisfied with planning and leadership but unlike the other regions were satisfied with levels of access to information. They reported the highest levels of employment and business opportunities compared to the other sub-regions, and higher levels of community spirit, income sufficiency, when compared to Tara.
Their wellbeing was relatively high and higher than Tara.
On average, people who lived in Chinchilla had positive attitudes and feelings towards CSG development in their region.
Miles reported dissatisfaction with three of the fifteen dimensions of wellbeing including levels of environmental management, decision making and roads, with their view towards roads the lowest in the region.
They had the highest levels of personal safety and community participation.
They had lower levels of satisfaction with their built environment, and their employment and business opportunities when compared to Dalby and Chinchilla respectively.
Residents were also dissatisfied with planning, leadership, and access to information. Their overall wellbeing was moderately high and higher than Tara, but their expected future wellbeing was the lowest of the sub-regions and significantly lower than Dalby.
On average, people who lived in Miles had negative attitudes and feelings towards CSG development in their region, which were the lowest and significantly lower than Chinchilla.
* 2. Location of residence differences
Compared with people who lived out of town, people who live in town reported higher levels of satisfaction with social interactions, services and facilities, and employment and business opportunities than people who live out of town.
They also reported higher levels of overall wellbeing and expected future wellbeing. People who live in town had more positive attitudes and feelings towards CSG development. On average these views were favourable whereas the views of out-of-towners were unfavourable.
* 3. Age related differences
Younger people reported higher levels of income sufficiency and higher social interaction. Younger people feel lower satisfaction with services and facilities
Older people felt higher satisfaction with the built environment, higher satisfaction with the level of services and facilities, higher satisfaction with the environmental quality, higher satisfaction with the roads, higher levels of overall community wellbeing, and higher perceptions of community resilience. Older people experience lower levels of social interactions
Middle-aged people felt the lowest levels of health, lowest levels of satisfaction towards the built environment, lowest levels of satisfaction towards the environmental quality, lowest levels of satisfaction towards the roads, lowest levels of overall community wellbeing, lowest levels of satisfaction with community resilience (the way the community is responding to change), lower levels of social interactions, and lowest levels of income sufficiency.
* 4. Gender related differences
Females, relative to males, felt lower levels of personal safety, less satisfied with the environmental quality, less satisfied with the services and facilities provided within the community, and less satisfied with the management of the environment for the future. Females felt there were higher levels of community spirit, and experience higher social interactions.
* 5. Income related differences (see Appendix E for detailed Table)
The lowest income people (less than $40,000) felt least satisfied with their income sufficiency, least positive about employment and business opportunities, and most negative about coal seam gas development in the region.
The lowest income people felt most satisfied with the built environment and the roads.
The highest income people (greater than $120,000) felt most satisfied with their income sufficiency, most satisfied with their employment and business opportunities, and most positive towards coal seam gas development.
The highest income people felt least satisfied with the built environment, and the roads.
* 7. Farm ownership differences
Compared with those who did not own a farm, people who owned a farm reported higher levels of personal safety, but lower levels of satisfaction with social interactions, and environmental management.
They also had lower perceptions of community resilience and expected future wellbeing. People who owned a farm had more negative attitudes and feelings towards CSG development, and on average these views are unfavourable.
* A second effect was found when comparing those working in the CSG sector to other residents (either in or out-of-town), irrespective of sub-regions. CSG sector workers were significantly more likely to see their communities as adapting than other residents.
* Those that work in the CSG sector had lower levels of satisfaction with job security than those who didn’t work in the CSG sector (M = 4.11 and M = 3.70 respectively).
No comments:
Post a Comment