Potential for IWRM Application: Queensland, Australia

Introduction

According to an article here, a major energy project could potentially impact future water supplies in Queensland, Australia. The project is to develop coal seam gas and could be worth over $30 billion, which would make it the most significant energy project in Queensland. One man who was interviewed stated his concern over possible impacts to farmland and underground water supplies when this project is put into place. The title of the article is "Water Supply Major Concern." With a title like that, I felt it was time to investigate this a little further to see what was being done to ensure sustainable water supply for both the local farmers, the environment, and the energy needs of the state. The opposition leader John-Paul Langbroek said, "[The] onus will be on this State Government to ensure that all of the operating conditions are met by the industry to protect the communities, the farming land and water."



Background

The Queensland government has set up a coal infrastructure task force with the purpose of developing a strategic plan "for the provision of infrastructure required to meet the needs of the Queensland coal industry over the next 20 years." The responsibilities of the taskforce are to:

• oversee implementation of the Coal Infrastructure Program of Actions
• develope a long-term (20 year) strategic infrastructure plan to identify coal infrastructure and related social infrastructure needed to support increased coal exploration, mining and export
• work with coal seam gas (CSG) producers, local governments and other state government agencies to identify beneficial re-use options for coal seam gas water.

The third bullet is of interest because it could directly impact future water supplies. I looked into this a bit more and found the state has developed a policy to protect the environment and encourage the beneficial use of used coal seam gas (CSG) water. CSG operators are required to submit environmental management plans demonstrating how they plan to manage CSG water. The management plan must address 

• quantity and quality of CSG water
• proposed management of the water and criteria used to assess the management of this water
• actions taken if the management was not effective

The main thrust of the management plan is to prevent salt (produced through the CSG process) to re-enter the environment.


The original article mentioned concern over the groundwater aquifers in Queensland due to future energy projects. I looked into the work being done by the state to manage the groundwater and found they produced an information portal, fact sheet on this website, and are currently developing a statutory framework to protect the groundwater resource. The portal provides information about the groundwater levels, quality, well production, and gas production volumes.




Conclusion


It appears the government is trying to be proactive in this process. This fact was not adequately portrayed in the article. I would like to give notice to these government efforts at this time but also suggest that more might be done in regards to a more integrated approach to future water resources of the area. Rather than look only at the effectiveness of the CSG management plans in dealing with salt content, they could look to see if there are ways to benefit all parties involved, including the environment. An IWRM approach would help the stakeholders involved take a step back and look at everyone and everything that is potential affected by the CSG projects. Could an energy project actually help farmers improve their water supply reliability through conjunctive use? Could farmers make some potentially beneficial trade-offs for CSG reuse water? Could environmental mitigation strategies be included in the CSG management plans?


I wonder if the Coal Infrastructure Task Force could consider these types of questions.