Extract from The Guardian
Shale gas not covered in by existing water regulations in ‘glaring omission’, Labor’s environment spokesman says
Regulations on unconventional gas development across Australia would be tightened up if Labor wins the next election.
Labor’s minister for the environment Tony Burke says the party, if elected, will keep the commitment it took to the 2016 election to broaden the “water trigger” to include other forms of unconventional gas extraction. The current water trigger, introduced by the Gillard government in 2013, assesses water resources as a matter of national significance only in relation to coal seam gas and coal mining.
It means that much of the country isn’t covered by the legislation, even though the process used to extract shale and tight gas is similar to that used for coal seam gas mining.
Labor’s minister for the environment Tony Burke says the party, if elected, will keep the commitment it took to the 2016 election to broaden the “water trigger” to include other forms of unconventional gas extraction. The current water trigger, introduced by the Gillard government in 2013, assesses water resources as a matter of national significance only in relation to coal seam gas and coal mining.
It means that much of the country isn’t covered by the legislation, even though the process used to extract shale and tight gas is similar to that used for coal seam gas mining.
“It could be that it all stacks up, but at the moment, without the water trigger being extended, those checks to see what the impacts are simply aren’t being done at a national level.”
"Underground hydrology is complex and you really need a robust scientific process to understand what the impacts might be"
Burke said concerns about the impacts of mining developments on water resources were not limited to the east coast and the Great Artesian Basin.
The Greens, who pushed for shale and tight gas to be included as part of the water trigger when it was introduced, said “anything that mandates closer examination of impacts on water or anything else is always welcome”.
But the party’s environment and biodiversity spokesman Andrew Bartlett said there were other issues that also ought to be considered, such as greenhouse gas emissions and the impacts of projects on climate change, as well as the effectiveness of Australia’s existing environmental protection framework.
“Anything that looks more closely at water and climate issues is good, but I think there are much wider things to be looked at,” he said.
“We’re pushing for an overhaul of environmental laws.”
Conservationists, scientists and regional communities are calling for renewed consideration of water protections at a national level, amid growing concerns about the legislative scope of the water trigger as well as the 2017 revelations of systemic non-compliance within the Murray-Darling Basin framework.
Burke’s comments come after the Northern Territory Gunner government’s decision to reopen up to half of the territory to the unconventional gas industry, pending the implementation of some 135 recommendations from an inquiry into fracking.
Up to 90% of the territory’s water supply comes from ground water and the bulk of its gas resource is shale, to which the water trigger doesn’t apply.
One of the architects of the original water trigger, former independent MP Tony Windsor, says he would not have a problem with Northern Territory developments being captured by the water trigger, but he was wary that making the trigger too broad could render it meaningless.
“There’s been a number of attempts to either remove or make meaningless the water trigger,” Windsor said.
“If you apply the water trigger to every water resource everywhere, the practicalities of doing that make it meaningless anyway.
“If you make every water reserve subject to it, they’ll [the government] just hand it back to the states.”
The effectiveness of the water trigger is one of the terms of reference for the current senate inquiry into water use by the extractive industry.
A statutory review of the trigger in 2017 found it was operating effectively within its legislative scope, including the application of independent scientific expertise to the consideration of the impacts of coal and coal seam gas mining on water.
The Coalition does not support expanding the trigger and, in response to questions, environment and energy minister Josh Frydenberg said: “The effectiveness of the water trigger legislation was independently reviewed in 2017. No legislative changes were recommended.”
No comments:
Post a Comment