The NT government has lifted its fracking moratorium despite fierce opposition, reflecting the war of attrition being waged by gas companies

'Not safe, not wanted': is the end of NT fracking ban a taste of things to come?

'Not safe, not wanted': is the end of NT fracking ban a taste of things to come?

When the Northern Territory government announced a moratorium on fracking in 2016, it was a victory for those fighting the expansion of the unconventional gas industry.



That elation was replaced with shock and disappointment in April, when the chief minister, Michael Gunner, said the practice could resume following a 15-month scientific inquiry.

“Most Australians are unaware that huge areas of the country are being transformed into industrial gas fields,” says Mark Ogge, principal adviser at the Australia Institute.

“The Northern Territory is the latest chapter in the oil and gas industry’s relentless expansion.”



Sign up to receive the top stories from Guardian Australia every morning

Most unconventional gas produced in Australia now comes from coal seam gas reservoirs in Queensland. Between July 2016 and June 2017, 1358 petajoules of gas was produced from about 6,000 wells.

But the industry has sought to expand its reach into areas covering the forest country of the Pilliga in the north-west of New South Wales, Western Australia’s Canning basin, the Coonawarra wine region of South Australia, and vast swathes of land in the Northern Territory.

There has been a remarkable level of resistance to this from the public because of fears about the impact of unconventional gas production on water resources, farmland and regional economies once the short spikes in production reach their end point.

Q&A What is fracking in Australia? Show Hide Hydraulic fracturing, known as fracking, is injecting a mix of water, sand and chemicals into underground rock to fracture it and stimulate the flow of gas or oil to the surface. Not all coal seam gas deposits require fracking, but shale and tight gas do .

Alliances have been formed across groups that have traditionally been at odds – the environment movement, Indigenous groups and conservative regional and farming communities.

These groups have had successes including government buybacks of exploration licences, the establishment of public inquiries, moratoriums on fracking or even outright bans in some states.

But organisations such as Lock the Gate, which emerged from grassroots opposition to coal and unconventional gas mining on Australia’s east coast, say the industry is fighting a “war of attrition” and the recent lifting of the moratorium on fracking in the Northern Territory is indicative of its ability to push ahead.

I’m disappointed in people who are willing to take a risk and destroy the earth Eleanor Dixon

“That’s an indication of the power of the gas industry,” says the Lock the Gate NSW coordinator Georgina Woods.

“Like other extractive industries, they have a lot of reach, a lot of money, a lot of power – and governments in Australia do tend to eventually concede to extractive industries.”

Pressure from the top

Before the NT decision, Queensland was the only state with no restrictions on unconventional gas exploration and development (excluding the Australian Capital Territory, which has no gas reserves).

Fracking is banned in Victoria and there are moratoriums in place in Tasmania and Western Australia. In NSW, there have been buybacks and cancellations of exploration licences, and the industry is now concentrated in the north-west of the state and Camden in south-west Sydney.

Following the recent elections in South Australia, the new Liberal government put in place a moratorium on fracking in the Limestone coast region in the state’s south-east.

The West Australian government has prohibited fracking in the Perth, Peel and south-west regions of the state but an inquiry is exploring the risks of opening up other parts of the state to production. They include the Canning basin in the Kimberley, where Mitsubishi Corporation and Buru Energy hold tenements.

An unconventional gas boom: the rise of CSG in Australia Read more

The WA inquiry has received 10,000 written submissions and its chairman, Tom Hatton, says the committee hopes to present its report to the premier, Mark McGowan, and the Labor state government by the end of the year.

There has been tremendous federal pressure on state and territory governments to lift the bans on fracking (hydraulic fracturing).

Last year, the federal Coalition, seeking to avoid long-term gas shortages, warned it could use the GST carve-up to force states and territories to lift fracking bans.

At a speech in September, the prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, called on Gunner – who was in the audience – to “pull the trigger ... we need that gas down here”.

A week after the NT ended its ban in April, the treasurer, Scott Morrison, gave the territory an extra $260m to make up for its low GST share, as well as an extra $550m over five years for remote Indigenous housing. He denied the timing of the decision was linked to the lifting of the moratorium.

Yet for all the enthusiasm for new unconventional gas production at a federal level, the industry remains unpopular among the broader Australian public.

In its final report summary, the NT fracking inquiry’s committee, led by Justice Rachel Pepper, wrote: “It must be noted that the strong antipathy surrounding hydraulic fracturing for onshore shale gas demonstrated during the consultations did not abate.

“For a significant majority of the people participating in the inquiry, the overwhelming consensus was that hydraulic fracturing for onshore shale gas in the NT is not safe, is not trusted and is not wanted.”

Facebook Twitter Pinterest In April, Northern Territory chief minister Michael Gunner lifted the ban on fracking. Photograph: Gregory Roberts/AAP

The NT inquiry found that fracking risks could be reduced to acceptable levels – provided 135 recommendations were implemented and certain areas, including conservation parks and Indigenous Protected Areas, were declared no-go zones for exploration.

In announcing that the NT government would allow fracking to resume, Gunner promised that all 135 recommendations would be implemented in full, clearing the way for 51% of the territory to be opened up to the unconventional gas industry.

The potential NT reserves cover a region that stretches from Katherine, south-east of Darwin, down to Elliott and out to Borroloola, west of the Queensland border. They include the so-called Beetaloo sub-basin, an area within the McArthur basin about 500km south-east of Darwin. They also cover some parts of Arnhem Land and regions surrounding Alice Springs.

For Eleanor Dixon, a Mudburra woman from the remote NT community of Marlinja, 700km north of Alice Springs, the government’s announcement came as a shock.

Dixon’s community lies within the southern part of the Beetaloo sub-basin. The basin is bordered by the town of Elliott in the south and Mataranka, home to the Mataranka thermal springs, in the north.

The community, which is not within an Indigenous Protected Area, is concerned about the potential impact of unconventional gas exploration on their water catchment.

Fracking – the reality, the risksand what the future holds Read more

“I felt really betrayed. I felt really disappointed ... disappointed in people,” Dixon says.

“Because at the end of the day, it doesn’t matter what title people hold or what status they have, or what reputation they hold, it doesn’t matter. I’m disappointed in people who are willing to take a risk and destroy the earth.”

During the inquiry, the committee identified a total prospective gas reserve in the Northern Territory of about 257,000 petajoules, with almost 70% of this in the Beetaloo sub-basin.

It’s a resource larger than any of the North West Shelf conventional gas resources, the Cooper/Eromanga basins, or the Canning basin. The report compared the Beetaloo to some of the big shale gas basins in the United States.

How much of the potential reserve is eventually extracted will depend on technical and economic factors, including production costs and gas prices. Origin Energy, Santos and Pangaea Resources are among the companies that hold licences for the Beetaloo and McArthur basins.

The problem with the water trigger

The climate impact of opening new gas tenements, the commercial viability of any new industry, poor environmental regulation and the effects on groundwater were among the concerns voiced during the inquiry.

In a place like the NT, which gets 90% of its water supply from groundwater, people are particularly conscious of any potential risks.

“People are well and truly aware of the impact that contamination of water has,” says Jimmy Cocking, chief executive of the Arid Lands Environment Centre.

“Darwin has a dam. Everyone else needs their groundwater.”

In its final report, the committee said it had been unable to make definitive assessments of the risk of unsustainable groundwater use, unacceptable contamination of groundwater, or unacceptable impacts on aquatic eco-systems because “of a lack of baseline information and knowledge of the surface and groundwater systems and the aquatic ecosystems”.

Quick guide What is the water trigger? Show Hide What is the water trigger? The water trigger identifies water resources as a matter of national environmental significance in relation to coal and coal seam gas developments. Australia's national environment laws – the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act – were amended to include the trigger in June 2013. Under the water trigger, coal and coal seam gas developments must be comprehensively assessed at a national level by an independent scientific committee to determine whether a development is likely to have a significant impact on a water resource.

One of its 135 recommendations was that such baseline data be acquired before the NT government grants any more production approvals for onshore shale gas.

Cocking also sits on the Alice Springs town council, which passed a motion calling for its water catchment to be off limits to unconventional gas. He believes acquiring such data could take years.

“There’s not a lot known about how the surface water and groundwater interacts and there’s a lot of studies to be done to reduce that risk,” he says.

The NT decision, along with the prospect of industry expansion in South Australia and Western Australia, depending on the outcome of its inquiry, highlights what conservationists and scientists say are weaknesses in Australia’s national environment laws as they apply to water.

Under the country’s national environment laws – the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act – water resources are a matter of national significance only in relation to coal seam gas and coal mining development.

In 2013, the Gillard government, with the independent MP Tony Windsor, introduced a water trigger after a boom in coal seam gas development on the east coast of Australia and following concerns for the Great Artesian Basin.

But the water trigger does not apply to shale or tight gas development, which are the substrates found in the NT and WA, and also in parts of Queensland and South Australia.

Governments in power tend to allow it to happen. Opposition parties, responding to community concern, tend to oppose it Craig Wilkins, Conservation Council of South Australia chief executive

It’s a technicality that means much of the country is not covered by the water trigger, even though the process used to extract shale and tight gas is similar to that used in coal seam gas mining.

In the NT inquiry, the committee recommended that the trigger be expanded to onshore shale gas development.

Conservationists want stronger national laws that offer protections and assessments at a federal level for any nationally significant water resources, and not just east coast resources affected by coal or coal seam gas development.

But there are questions over what the best approach is – whether it involves extending the water trigger to include shale and tight gas or developing a new framework of national environment laws that require ministers to consider climate and water impacts when assessing development proposals.

The state director for the Wilderness Society in Western Australia, Jenita Enevoldsen, favours the latter, noting that the water trigger – now being examined as part of the Senate inquiry into water use by extractive industries – has not prevented coal seam gas development or fracking on the east coast.

“We are calling for the next federal government to enact new laws for nature and climate, which would protect our significant water resources for future generations from risky industries like fracking,” she says.

“Due to the overwhelming evidence that the risks of gas fracking far outweigh any benefits to our communities, we are advocating for a legislated ban on fracking in WA.”

Enevoldsen says strong national protections for water would be significant for the Kimberley, where ecosystems, such as the national heritage-listed Fitzroy river, rely on groundwater, but little is understood about the surface and groundwater interactions.

“These ecosystems can last the whole way through the dry season, so six months or even longer without a drop of water, and they rely on being fed by groundwater,” she says.

Guardian Australia asked the environment and energy minister, Josh Frydenberg, if the government would consider extending the water trigger to shale and tight gas developments, and was told no legislative changes had been recommended after a review of the trigger in 2017.

Asked how the government felt about the expansion of the unconventional gas industry in the Northern Territory, and potentially in WA in future, and if it was concerned about potential risks to water and the broader environment, he said: “As the chief scientist has made clear, the unconventional extraction of gas can be done safely and should be assessed on an evidence- and scientific basis.

“The Turnbull government welcomes the decision by the Northern Territory government to develop their gas resources as a means of delivering a more affordable, reliable and lower emissions energy system.”

Facebook Twitter Pinterest More than 200 people, including about two dozen on horseback, went to the Northern Territory house of parliament on 15 September 2015, to protest against fracking and mining in the NT. Photograph: Helen Davidson/The Guardian

Gunner has said in a statement that his government has met its election commitment to conduct an independent scientific inquiry and either ban the practice or allow it in “highly regulated circumstances in tightly prescribed areas”.

“We have accepted the key finding of the report – that if all the [135] recommendations are implemented, we can protect the environment, water, existing jobs, sacred sites and create new jobs,” he said.

“We have also accepted the inquiry’s advice about no-go zones. There will be no fracking in national parks, conservation areas, Indigenous Protected Areas, towns, residential and strategic assets, and areas of high cultural, environmental or tourism value.”

The industry continues its push

The Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association (Appea), representing the oil and gas industry, rejects the suggestion there is widespread opposition in the areas it operates.

The Guardian view on the future of fracking: keep it in the ground | Editorial Read more

Appea’s Northern Territory and South Australia director, Matthew Doman, points to a 2014 CSIRO study which found that 9% of those in the Western Downs communities of Tara, Chinchilla, Miles and Dalby in Queensland opposed the coal seam gas industry.

However, the same study found that only 6% felt the community was improving because of the industry and almost half were not coping or only just coping with the changes, while the rest were adapting.

A more recent CSIRO study of local attitudes toward coal seam gas in NSW’s Narrabri found that 30.5% opposed it, 27% tolerated it, 13% approved of it and 14.8% embraced it.

“The industry is committed to listening and responding to the genuine questions and concerns held by many in the community, just as we are committed to exposing the false and exaggerated claims made by others,” Doman says.



“We will continue to do that as long as we seek to maintain the community’s support for the safe and sustainable development of Australia’s natural resources.”



A spokesman for Origin Energy says the company plans to resume work in the Northern Territory as soon as practical, and gain the necessary approvals to complete the rest of its exploration work in the Beetaloo sub-basin. Before the moratorium, the company had drilled four wells and fracked one.

He says the company aims to drill another five wells under its existing exploration permit and will complete a nine-well exploration and appraisal program by about 2021. But it has to do more assessments to determine if it is economically feasible to move to production.

Quick guide What's the difference between coal seam gas, shale gas and tight gas? Show Hide Coal seam gas Coal seam gas is a type of unconventional gas found in coal seams underground, where it is trapped by water and pressure. It is predominantly methane. Coal seam gas reserves are usually shallower than shale reservoirs. Not all coal seam gas requires fracking for extraction. Gas is extracted by first drilling a vertical well into the coal seam which usually also requires drilling horizontally to extract the methane. It can require fracking using a high-pressure mix of water, sand and chemicals to fracture the rock. Water found in the coal seam must be pumped out to depressurise the coal seam and allow the gas to flow to the surface. Shale gas Shale gas is predominantly methane that is found in shale rock formations. It is usually much deeper underground than coal seam gas and extracting shale gas requires more fracking to allow the gas to flow. While not all coal seam gas reservoirs require fracking, all shale reservoirs do. Fracking for shale gas is water-intensive and usually more expensive to extract than coal seam gas. Tight gas Tight gas comes from “tight” rocks, typically sandstone. The word tight refers to the low permeability and porosity of the rock. The permeability of the rock is so low that significant amounts of hydraulic fracturing are required to extract the gas.

“Ensuring environmental protections is important to Origin – so there’s common ground here that everyone shares. We are committed to exploring and producing natural gas in a responsible way without harming the environment,” the spokesman says.

“There are multiple controls and barriers to protect groundwater and the environment. When we drill, if these controls aren’t successfully met, we don’t frack.

“There is also significant distance between where natural gas is found and the shallow aquifers closer to the surface – around 2km of separation sealed off by thick intervening geological layers known as aquitards.”

A spokeswoman for Santos says it will resume its exploration in the McArthur basin as soon as it has approval.

“The independent scientific inquiry into hydraulic fracturing in the NT considered submissions from all sections of the community, including environment groups, and, based on the evidence presented, the inquiry concluded that the risks associated with onshore gas development and fracking can be managed with effective regulation that is currently being put in place by the NT government,” she says.

The bigger picture

Opponents of unconventional gas exploration say the lifting of the NT moratorium should sound a warning to other parts of the country.

In Queensland, producing gasfields already cover more than 30,000 square kilometres of the country region.

Ogge of The Australia Institute says the “insatiable thirst of Queensland’s gas export terminals” has driven the NT to open up its iconic landscape to fracking, which is now increasing pressure on Western Australia to follow suit.

“Meanwhile, the industry and federal government are increasing the pressure on the few remaining pockets resisting the expansion, particularly in Victoria,” he says.

Up in smoke: what did taxpayers get for their $2bn emissions fund? Read more

The chief executive of the Conservation Council of South Australia, Craig Wilkins, says support or opposition from governments to the unconventional gas industry does not appear to be dependent on party ideology.

Instead, the consistent factor for support is incumbency, he says.

“Governments in power tend to allow it to happen. Opposition parties responding to deep community concern tend to oppose it,” Wilkins says.

“Why? Oil and gas companies and their lobbyists work incredibly hard to convince governments to override the community’s clear opposition and let them forge ahead.”

The Lock the Gate Alliance national coordinator, Naomi Hogan, says the level of determination and organisation among the public is increasing following the NT’s decision.

She says there was anger at the result and regional communities around Australia now have “their eyes wide open to the fact that inquiries can identify risks and then try and find ways around them”.

“You can’t mitigate away the impacts of putting thousands of wells on the landscape.”

Northern Territory lifts fracking ban, opening up 700,000 sq km to gas exploration Read more

She says there are concerns about the potential presence of gas fields in pristine parts of the NT such as the water recharge area of the Mataranka Springs and Roper river in Katherine.

While the springs are in a national park that is off limits to fracking, an area south of the springs is covered by an active exploration licence owned by Gina Rinehart’s Hancock Prospecting. The company relinquished portions of the licence last year to create a 25km exploration buffer zone from the springs and the Roper river.

In Elliott and Marlinja, the water system is downstream from the Beetaloo sub-basin and continues south to Lake Woods, a wetlands area that provides an internationally significant habitat for water birds.

“Every bore is connected and that is why one of the biggest issues for us is protecting our water,” Dixon says.

“Water plays a very big part in our culture, through ceremony. It carries songlines. As people who are connected to the land, we hold a responsibility to take care of it.”