Senate Select Committee on Unconventional Gas Mining PO Box 6100 Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600

Transcription

1 Senate Select Committee on Unconventional Gas Mining PO Box 6100 Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600 Dear Sir/Madam 22 February 2016 Please find attached a personal submission to the Senate Select Committee on Unconventional Gas Mining. In December 2015 I was awarded a doctorate by Charles Sturt University for my research thesis Mining Coal Seam Gas: An Exhibition in the Divine Art Gallery. This thesis explores, inter alia, the legislative, regulatory and policy frameworks surrounding the Coal Seam Gas (CSG) industry in Australia (Chapters 5 & 6). It draws primarily on developments in Commonwealth, Queensland and New South Wales jurisdictions. My submission recommends that there should be a comprehensive study of the impact of CSG mining on human health (TOR 1b), together with a discussion of the application of the precautionary principle to health issues. I have reached this conclusion in view of the forecast exponential growth of the CSG industry and the lack of a substantive exploration of CSG-related health issues. This recommendation addresses a significant gap that needs to be given attention in the policy development process. It is also consistent with the 1992 COAG Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment and the 2013 National Harmonised Regulatory Framework for Natural Gas from Coal Seams developed by the COAG Standing Council on Energy and Resources. My concern is for both those whose health may be affected by CSG mining and the potential cost to the taxpayer if, at some point in the future, governments in Australia are found to be negligent in failing to follow through sufficiently well on the health concerns that continue to surround CSG mining. I regret that, for personal reasons, I was unable to lodge this submission before the Committee s first public hearing in Dalby, or to attend that hearing. I would be pleased, however, to respond to any matters arising from it that Committee members may wish to follow up with me. I commend the issues raised in this submission to the Committee s attention. Yours sincerely Dr Chris Dalton SenateCSGInquiry DaltonSubmission 1

2 Senate Select Committee on Unconventional Gas Mining Submission by Dr Chris Dalton 22 February 2016 The context for further investigation of health issues Nobody has authoritatively answered the question Is it safe for my family to live in a gas field?. There has been no comprehensive and independent examination in Australia of CSG mining and its potential impact on human health. In 2012 the Queensland Department of Health investigated health complaints in the Tara region. It concluded that: A clear link cannot be drawn between the health complaints by some residents in the Tara region and the impacts of the local CSG industry on air, water and soil in the community. 1 It also commented that and This assessment is one step to providing a consolidated point of feedback in regard to residents health complaints and available environmental monitoring data. However, this observation needs to be considered into the future in regard to the overall governance of the CSG industry from a community perspective. 2 The available data were insufficient to properly characterise any cumulative impacts on air quality in the region, particularly given the anticipated growth of the industry. It is necessary to assess those impacts according to health-based standards which are relevant to long-term exposure. 3 I have bolded some text to emphasise that the Tara Report itself anticipated the need for further study in the context of the ongoing regulation of an industry that has potential for exponential expansion within Australia: The Tara Report was based on an investigation of 9 sites 4 and complaints made by 56 people. 5 The Tara Shire covers 11,682 km 2 and is located in the Surat basin that covers 270,000 km 2. The Basins where CSG is found cover up to 400,000 km 2. 1 Queensland Health, Coal Seam Gas in the Tara Region: Summary Risk Assessment of Health Complaints and Environmental Monitoring Data., Fortitude Valley: State of Queensland (Queensland Health), 2013, 18 2 ibid 3 ibid 4 ibid, 7 5 ibid, 5 SenateCSGInquiry DaltonSubmission 2

3 Production of CSG in Australia in 2012 (when the Tara Report was written) was petrojoules, just 0.1% of Australia s potential underground CSG resources, but up 10.8% in just 12 months. 6 Further, the Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association provides the following overview of CSG in Australia: Australia s coal seam gas resources The coal basins of Queensland and NSW hold large coal seam gas resources. Parts of South Australia and Victoria have smaller potential resources. Australia has an estimated 203 trillion cubic feet (TCF) of proven coal seam gas resources (enough to power a city of 1 million people for more than 4000 years) and 391 TCF of total proven gas resources (from sandstone and shale rocks). Once contingent resources are taken into account, the country has more than 800TCF of likely gas resources. More discoveries are considered likely. In 2013, the entire Australian economy consumed only 1.1 tcf of gas, with a further 1.1 tcf exported. 7 6 C. J. Dalton, PhD thesis, Mining Coal Seam Gas: An Exhibition in the Divine Art Gallery, (Charles Sturt University), 2015, See retrieved 17 February 2016 SenateCSGInquiry DaltonSubmission 3

4 In other words, the industry is still on its starting blocks in terms of its total production potential. 2.2 TCF of gas represents less than 0.3% of Australia s likely gas resources. In the three years since the Tara Report was written there have been continuing complaints about health issues, some of which are documented in other submissions to this Inquiry, but no comprehensive investigation of the impact of CSG mining on human health has been conducted. If a linkage is subsequently identified, however, might governments then be held to be negligent in their oversight and regulation of the CSG industry, particularly in the context of a forecast exponential growth in the CSG industry in Australia? Analysis of this question is assisted by consideration of the precautionary principle with regard to the potential impact of CSG mining on human health. Precautionary principle Some guidance is provided by the 1992 Agreement on national environmental policy signed by the Heads of Government of the Commonwealth, states and territories of Australia and by the Australian Local Government Association. 8 Section 3 of this Agreement specifies four principles of environmental policy that should inform policy making and program implementation (Clause 3.5). One of these principles is the precautionary principle: precautionary principle where there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation. In application of the precautionary principle, public and private decisions should be guided by: 1. Careful evaluation to avoid, wherever practicable, serious or irreversible damage to the environment; and 2. An assessment of the risk weighted consequences of various options. In 2013 the COAG Standing Council on Energy and Resources referred to the precautionary principle in its National Harmonised Regulatory Framework for Natural Gas from Coal Seams. 9 This Framework makes the following statements about the precautionary principle within the context of ecologically sustainable development, risk management and adaptive management: Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD) is widely used in state and federal legislation that regulates activities such as mining and environmental impacts. ESD aims to balance the environmental, economic and social costs and benefits of a proposed activity. However, the appropriate balance can be difficult to achieve when there is uncertainty about the costs and benefits of particular developments. 8 COAG, Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment, Commonwealth of Australia, Standing Council on Energy and Resources, The National Harmonised Regulatory Framework for Natural Gas from Coal Seams. (Council of Australian Governments), 2013 SenateCSGInquiry DaltonSubmission 4

5 The precautionary principle complements the objective of ESD in situations where there is significant scientific uncertainty about potentially serious impacts. (It) suggests that regulators should take cost effective action to remove the potential for negative impacts, even where scientific evidence is not conclusive. However, the absence of scientific certainty is not a reason to prevent all activity. Risk management is a necessary addition to the precautionary principle. The application of the precautionary principle should be a proportionate and reasonable response to: the level of potential impact (e.g. the principle is most applicable to potential catastrophic or irreversible harm); the likelihood of a potential impact occurring (is the risk plausible and reasonably likely to occur); and the costs of regulatory action, and the opportunity cost of not proceeding. While the regulatory response should be proportionate to the likelihood of the risk, where there is limited evidence to assess the likelihood or otherwise of a particular risk, adaptive management can be a useful approach. The precautionary principle in conjunction with adaptive management is part of a hierarchy of risk control measures that apply to all aspects of the development of natural gas from coal seams. 10 Adaptive management has been described as an approach which tracks the progress of activities, and allows for a change or cessation of those activities as risk thresholds or triggers are realised. 11 So, if adaptive management was to be applied to health issues, what risk thresholds or triggers would need to be set, and how would they be monitored? I am not aware of any systematic monitoring of health complaints in areas where CSG is mined. I also note that adoption of adaptive management is a subtle, but significant, dilution of the precautionary principle. The principle endorsed in the 1992 Agreement requires no scientific prerequisite to be satisfied for environmental protection activities to be undertaken, whereas the Framework only requires corrective action when pollution levels exceed pre-determined levels. In other words, adaptive management introduces a reliance on scientific proof (that a specific pollution level has been exceeded) before any corrective action can be required. This re-orientates environmental protection strategies away from prevention towards remediation. 10 ibid, NSW Chief Scientist & Engineer, "Managing Environmental and Human Health Risks from CSG Activities," (Sydney: NSW Government, 2014), 1. SenateCSGInquiry DaltonSubmission 5

6 Nevertheless, the Framework s discussion of the application of the precautionary principle to environmental matters is instructive. Even though its advocacy of a hierarchy of risk control measures dilutes the application of the precautionary principle, the existence of the discussion highlights the lack of a similar discussion with regard to health matters other than by the NSW Chief Scientist & Engineer (see below). This policy gap is further compounded by a lack of a substantive, comprehensive and independent presentation of facts surrounding CSG mining and human health. Is this an acceptable foundation upon which to develop a sound, defensible policy addressing CSG-related health issues in an industry that is still in its infancy? Does the Tara Report s conclusion that a clear link cannot be drawn between the health complaints by some residents in the Tara region and the impacts of the local CSG industry on air, water and soil adequately negate the need for a more comprehensive health study? Is this a reasonable and defensible exercise of risk management by governments? Is, for instance, reliance on health remediation strategies an acceptable policy approach? Indeed, should the precautionary principle be applied to matters relating to the potential impact of CSG mining on human health? If so, how? Managing Human Health Risks The only substantive discussion of an approach for managing human health risks arising from CSG mining in Australia that I have found is in a 2014 report by the NSW Chief Scientist & Engineer. This was prepared as a part of her Independent Review of Coal Seam Gas Activities in NSW. 12 This report notes that Published peer-reviewed studies on this issue are limited and determining whether there is a causal relationship between a CSG-related activity and human health is difficult 13 Most of the studies on unconventional gases are from the US. These studies cannot be directly compared to Australian scenarios Further work is required on both mental and physical impacts. 14 The NSW Chief Engineer & Scientist also discusses adaptive management and different approaches to trying to determine potential health impacts that may arise from CSG activities, including (i) epidemiological studies and (ii) performing an environmental health risk assessment. She ranks the latter as a likely better approach to determining health risk NSW Chief Scientist & Engineer, "Managing Environmental and Human Health Risks from CSG Activities," (Sydney: NSW Government, 2014), Chapter 3, ibid, ibid, ibid, SenateCSGInquiry DaltonSubmission 6

7 She concludes that: In the context of environmental and health risks from CSG activities, the key features of a risk-based and outcomes-focused regulatory system would include: a set of environmental and human health (my emphasis) objectives set by Government for any given project, with the ability to regularly review and optimise these flexibility to encourage uptake of new technologies and innovation ability to manage cumulative impacts as well as project impacts a comprehensive knowledge base. 16 This Report highlights the limited information base about the potential impact of CSG mining in Australia on human health, and the need for an appropriate and considered application of the precautionary principle with regard to health risks arising out of CSG mining. This might best be implemented nationally. Concluding comments The Framework notes that the successful development of the CSG industry depends on achieving a balance in environmental, social and economic outcomes, and that governments must provide the policy and regulatory framework to maximise benefits to the community while protecting the environment and human health (my emphasis). 17 The precautionary principle should therefore be applied to human health protection strategies as well as environmental protection strategies. The 2014 Report of the NSW Chief Scientist & Engineer gives some guidance on how this might be implemented. Further, the Framework asserts that Australia cannot reap the benefits of this development if the industry s social licence to operate 18 and community confidence are not established and maintained. 19 Community confidence would be greatly assisted by an authoritative, well-researched response to the question Is it safe for my family to live in a gas field?, if based on a comprehensive study of CSG mining and human health. Recommendation That the Senate Select Committee on Unconventional Gas Mining recommend that a policy discussion paper be prepared that addresses the exercise of the precautionary principle with regard to CSG mining and human health, informed by a comprehensive study of the potential links between CSG mining and human health, and the associated risks. 16 ibid, Standing Council on Energy and Resources, 6 18 A social licence to operate has been described in terms of an organisation achieving ongoing acceptance or approval from the local community and other stakeholders who can affect its profitability. See J. Lacey, R. Parsons, and K. Moffat. Exploring the Concept of a Social Licence to Operate in the Australian Minerals Industry: Results from Interviews with Industry Representatives, (Brisbane, CSIRO, 2012), 1 19 Standing Council on Energy and Resources, 6 SenateCSGInquiry DaltonSubmission 7