Territory Stories

Scientific inquiry into hydraulic fracturing in the Northern Territory

Details:

Title

Scientific inquiry into hydraulic fracturing in the Northern Territory

Other title

Scientific inquiry into hydraulic fracturing of unconventional reservoirs in the Northern Territory; Interim report into hydraulic fracturing; Final Report: Scientific Inquiry into Hydraulic Fracturing; Final Report Appendices: Scientific Inquiry into Hydraulic Fracturing; Draft Final Report : Scientific inquiry into hydraulic fracturing; Draft Final Report Appendices : Scientific inquiry into hydraulic fracturing; Summary of Draft Final Report : Scientific inquiry into hydraulic fracturing; Background and issues paper; Fracking implementation plan; Fracking implementation plan Parts 2 - Recommendations

Collection

E-Publications; E-Books; PublicationNT

Date

2017-07-01

Description

The report sets out the work undertaken by the Inquiry to date in assessing the impacts and risks associated with any potential onshore unconventional shale gas development in the Northern Territory. The report explains the method by which the Inquiry proposes to gather and then assess the evidence relevant to the issues that have been identified and discussed with the public. Where appropriate, the Interim Report makes some preliminary assessments about the likelihood of some of those risks eventuating as well as the methods to mitigate the risks. Finally, the report de4scribes the future work of the Inquiry that will be undertaken prior to the release of its draft Final Report by the end of the year.; Made available via the Publications (Legal Deposit) Act 2004 (NT).

Notes

The Inquiry is Chaired by Justice Rachel Pepper. The panel comprises 10 eminent scientists across a range of disciplines. Includes bibliographical references : pages 161-170. Publication spans 2017-2018; Made available via the Publications (Legal Deposit) Act 2004 (NT).

Table of contents

Executive summary -- Purpose of the Inquiry -- Work of the Inquiry to date -- Evidence and risk assessment methodology -- Summary of discussions at community forums and the revised list of issues -- Shale gas development and management -- Shale gas in Australia and the Northern Territory -- Water -- Land -- Greenhouse gas emissions -- Public health -- Aboriginal people and their culture -- Social impacts -- Economic impacts -- Regulatory reform -- Future work of the Inquiry -- Appendices 1-14

Language

English

Subject

Gas wells -- Hydraulic fracturing; Coalbed methane -- Environmental aspects -- Northern Territory; Coalbed methane -- Economic aspects -- Northern Territory; Shale gas

Publisher name

Hydraulic Fracturing Inquiry; Northern Territory Government

Place of publication

Darwin

Format

10 volumes : colour illustrations, colour maps ; 30 cm.

File type

application/pdf.

ISBN

9780648127604

Copyright owner

Check within Publication or with content Publisher.

Related links

frackinginquiry.nt.gov.au

Parent handle

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/267188

Citation address

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/444282

Related items

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/444277; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/444275; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/444278; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/444280; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/444284; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/444287; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/444289; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/444290; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/444291

Page content

SUMMARY OF THE DRAFT FINAL REPORT - SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY INTO HYDRAULIC FRACTURING IN THE NORTHERN TERRITORY 41 The Gale scenario delivers the greatest economic benefits for the NT over the 25 year modelled period, with real output estimated to be $17.5billion greater than under the Baseline scenario (at an average of $674.4million per annum), an additional 13,611direct and indirect FTEjobs (524FTE jobs per annum) being created, and an additional population growth of 32,252persons. Over the 25 year modelled period, the Government would collect an additional $3.72billion in taxation revenue($143.2million per annum), which includes $1.79billion in additional royalties, and the Commonwealth would collect an additional $1.75billion in tax receipts. In the Wind scenario, NTreal output is estimated to increase by $12.1billion over the 25 year modelled period(at an average of $466.4million per annum), with an additional 6,559direct and indirect FTEjobs(252FTEjobs per annum), and an additional population growth of 15,480persons. Over the 25 year modelled period the Government would collect an additional $2.09billion in real taxation revenue($80.6million per annum), which includes $894.6million in additional royalties, and the Commonwealth would collect an additional $4.58billion in tax receipts. In the Breeze scenario, NTreal output is estimated to increase by $5.1billion over the 25 year modelled period(at an average of $196.5million per annum), with an additional 2,145direct and indirect FTEjobs(82FTEjobs per annum), and an additional population growth of 5,061persons. Over the 25 year modelled period the Government would collect an additional $757million in real taxation revenue ($29.1million per annum), which includes $309.2million in additional royalties, and the Commonwealth would collect an additional $1.31billion in tax receipts. ACILAllen was also required to model the impact of any onshore shale gas industry on existing industries in the NT. Many submissions that the Panel received suggested that the development of an onshore shale gas industry would have significant adverse impacts on business operations, particularly in the pastoral, agricultural, horticultural and tourism industries. The main concerns were that these industries would have fewer resources available for productive use (land and water, for example), additional competition for skilled and unskilled labour, increased use of infrastructure (such as roads), and an impact on visual amenity and reputational risk. It is acknowledged that any onshore shale gas industry could put additional pressure on infrastructure. Potential funding options to mitigate this pressure are discussed in the Chapter. ACILAllens assessment indicated that there are likely to be minimal industry coexistence risks because prospective shale gas regions have significant groundwater reserves and the land area used by the industry would be very small under all development scenarios. The Panel considered ACILAllens modelling and policy analysis and the issues raised by the submission in developing its recommendations. The recommendations aim to balance the twin goals of maximising the local benefits (locally, regionally and across the NT) of the development of any onshore shale gas industry, while not disrupting the efficient allocation of resources(such as capital and labour) that will be necessary to make the industry competitive. The Panels key recommendations identify the need for early and ongoing engagement between all stakeholders to identify the risks and opportunities that may be associated with any potential onshore shale gas development. There is a clear role for the Government to work with stakeholders to develop and implement pathways to mitigate risks and to resolve conflict between stakeholders, especially where agreement between the parties cannot be reached (recommendations regarding land access agreements to resolve conflict are discussed in Chapters 11 and 14). The Panel is also of the opinion the Government should work with all stakeholders to maximise localised benefits from any onshore shale gas development, including local employment opportunities, and opportunities for existing and new local businesses to supply goods and services to any shale gas projects. While not being prescriptive with respect to how the Government uses any additional revenue from any onshore shale gas development, the Panel recommends that in developing its annual budget the Government consider the source of royalty revenue and ensures source regions benefit through greater infrastructure and services expenditure. Regarding infrastructure, the Panel recommends that the Government, together with all stakeholders, including the Commonwealth Government, identify potential bottlenecks and any additional economic, social and civic infrastructure requirements. Where gas companies capture the benefits of infrastructure, it is reasonable that they fund it. Where there are broader societal benefits, there is a role for Government to support infrastructure development. There may also be opportunities to leverage Commonwealth Government infrastructure funding to assist in funding any new infrastructure that may be required.


Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are advised that this website may contain the names, voices and images of people who have died, as well as other culturally sensitive content. Please be aware that some collection items may use outdated phrases or words which reflect the attitude of the creator at the time, and are now considered offensive.

We use temporary cookies on this site to provide functionality.
By continuing to use this site without changing your settings, you consent to our use of cookies.