While the fracking risks are obvious the likelihood that they …

Comment on Gas: It doesn’t get much bigger by Richard Bentley.

While the fracking risks are obvious the likelihood that they will eventuate in the NT is difficult to predict.
Whatever the potential for damage, we will know only when it happens- I for one would prefer we did not take that risk.
Pumping CO2 into the atmosphere will result in increasing average temperatures and more catastrophic weather events. We have over 100 years of records clearly demonstrating this, supported by models that confidently predict what might happen in the future if we maintain current levels of CO2 emissions.
Producing and burning more gas will contribute to a business as usual approach.
So while fractured rocks and chemicals might damage our environment, CO2 is damaging it now.
The wind blows and the sun shines and we now know how to capture and use the energy contained in these natural forces.
The cost is now accepted as being equivalent or less than carbon sources so leave the gas in the ground and get on with utilising renewable sources as an absolute priority.

Recent Comments by Richard Bentley

Bangtail Muster draws big crowd on glorious day
You missed the electric vehicles editor. Otherwise a great story.
[ED – Thanks, Richard. Yes, they were there.]

Flood report a trickle, not a banker
@ Tru But: I think you will find the causeway is a minor impediment and the major issue is the narrow Gap itself. If you wanted to reduce the risk you might widen the Gap by a 100 metres or so. I am sure that would be a popular move.
It would seem that the town was built in the wrong place so whatever you do will be expensive and possibly have limited effect.
Following the surveys it may be possible to identify a site for a retention basin which holds water back temporarily rather than building a dam. It would be equivalent to building another Gap above the town.
Maybe every home should have a life boat.

Gas, fracking: potential benefits to Aborigines enormous
@ Steve Brown: Calling persons apposed to fracking loonies does not add anything to your view point. I think both sides have good cases to make with no doubt if even half of the theorised potential was realised and prices stayed high then the NT and local landholders be they pastoralists or native title holders stand to benefit substantially.
However the gas is not going anywhere so I do not see what the urgency is. One report said this resource would last 200 years. If we damage water resources and then have to find a new resource anyway we have been short sighted.
The renewable resources are rapidly becoming competitive and likely within 10 years will make any decision now to exploit gas seem very short sighted.
Secondly mining and burning gas will add greenhouse gases to the atmosphere and add to the global warming problem. This is something we should avoid at all cost.
A four year moratorium is a small price to pay. It should be 10.

Sick of the weather? Join the club.
Is it weather or is it climate? It is interesting that climate change predictions were for increasing droughts 10 years or so ago and now we seem to be getting more wild storms and heavy rain.
The reason being that the sea is warmer and hence moore evaporation and more moisture in the atmosphere. What is almost certain in Central Australia is that following rain will be fire and smoke.
And watch out for that piece of ice about to fall off Antarctica.

Climate change from an Alice perspective: Time to act.
You will know your arguments are cutting through when Centralian Petroleum invests in solar. The time is right for them to jump into the solar market.

Be Sociable, Share!

A new way to support our journalism

We do not have a paywall. If you support our independent journalism you can make a financial contribution by clicking the red button below. This will help us cover expenses and sustain the news service we’ve been providing since 1994, in a locally owned and operated medium.

Erwin Chlanda, Editor