DOCSLIB.ORG

Senate Inquiry Into Environmental Offsets

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Senate Inquiry Into Environmental Offsets Kathryn Kelly 9 April 2014 The Secretary Senate Standing Committee on Environment Inquiry into Environmental Offsets PO Box 6100 Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600 Senate Inquiry into Environmental Offsets Thank you for the opportunity to submit the following to the Senate Inquiry into Environmental Offsets. My comments are written primarily using the Alpha coal mine project a case study. The Alpha coal mine is in the Galilee Basin, Central Queensland, north‐west of the town of Alpha. I was an objector to the Alpha coal mine project in the Land Court in Queensland and some of the information in this submission was derived through preparation and participation in that process. The Alpha case provides a valuable case study of the use of offsets as a justification for federal approval of a project. The judgement for the Alpha mine was delivered on 8 April 2014, giving approval to the mine conditional on the grant of a water license taking into account the precautionary principle. I refer to the relevant terms of reference (in bold) which I will address with my comments, as follows: “The history, appropriateness and effectiveness of the use of environmental offsets in federal environmental approvals in Australia, including: • the principles that underpin the use of offsets; • the processes used to develop and assess proposed offsets; • the adequacy of monitoring and evaluation of approved offsets; • arrangements to determine whether promised environmental outcomes are achieved over the short and long term; and • any other related matters That in conducting the inquiry the committee consider the terms of reference in (1) with specific regard to, but not restricted to, the following projects: • Whitehaven Coal’s Maules Creek Project; • Waratah Coal’s Galilee Coal Project; • QGC’s Queensland Curtis LNG project; • North Queensland Bulk Port’s Abbot Point Coal Terminal Capital Dredging Project; and • Jandakot Airport developments. I contend in my submission that offsets do not and cannot achieve their stated aim of compensating for residual (or non‐residual) adverse impacts on the environment from large‐ 1 scale projects and that their fundamental premises are flawed for a number of reasons detailed in the submission. Background The federal approval for the Alpha mine was given by then Environment Minister, the Hon Tony Burke, on 23/8/12 under sections 130(1) and 133 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) in relation to the following sections: World Heritage (s12 & s15A) National Heritage (s15B & 15C) Listed threatened species and communities (s18 & 18A) Listed migratory species (s20 &20A). The World Heritage and National Heritage sections are relevant to the Alpha project, as the Alpha project included a 495km rail line from the project through the Bowen Basin and through the Caley Valley Wetlands at Abbot Point on the Great Barrier Reef. The Caley Valley Wetlands are a nationally significant wetland. The project is majority‐owned by Indian company GVK with Hancock Coal Pty Ltd (HCPL) the 21% minority owner. Sections 24D and 24E of the Act (the ‘water trigger’) were adopted as an amendment to the Act in June 2013 and were therefore not in place at the time of the Alpha project. If it goes ahead, the Alpha project would be equal to the largest coal mine in Australia at the present time and produce 30m tonnes of coal per annum. There is some question at this time as to whether the project is economically viable. The EPBC Act approval for the Alpha project is deficient in that the Act does not take into account the impacts of global warming which is exacerbated by the coal produced and burned from these mines resulting in significant greenhouse emissions. The natural state of coal at the mine is as a carbon stock. Destroying the carbon stock at coal mines inevitably leads to serious, widespread and irreversible harm globally and on the Australian environment. There is a direct causal relationship between mining black coal, that is, destroying the stable carbon stock, and the unavoidable release of greenhouse gas emissions to the atmosphere. This is not a question of where the emissions take place or where they are reported. It is the action of destroying the carbon stock which will inevitably lead to serious, widespread and irreversible harm, both in Australia and globally. The environmental impacts of large­scale coal mines can in no way be considered residual ‐ this is a major consideration for the Inquiry. I do not argue that offsets should be imposed to take account of this serious omission in relation to environmental conditions on the projects. Rather, I think these impacts are so serious that they should preclude the approval of new coal mines. There are alternative technologies and power systems now available to provide electricity for Australia and other countries, such that coal for power must be phased out. Ecological Ponzi scheme Further, I argue that offsets are not appropriate in relation to the environmental impacts of large‐scale mining or CSG projects. I see offsets as an ecological Ponzi scheme, which borrows 2 from the future of our biodiversity, leading to a serious and irreversible situation of ‘extinction debt’1. International agreements and environmental policy relevant to this case study include: 1. The United National Framework Convention on Climate Change, which asks developed countries to shoulder the burden of reducing greenhouse emissions. 2. The United Nations Convention on Biodiversity, is a relevant international agreement which Australia has signed and ratified as is the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (World Heritage Convention). 3. In Queensland, the Great Barrier Reef and the Wet Tropics are on the World Heritage list. 4. The National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development The National The Core Objectives of the Australian government’s National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development are: • To enhance individual and community well‐being and welfare by following a path of economic development that safeguards the welfare of future generations • To provide for equity within and between generations • To protect biological diversity and maintain essential ecological processes and life‐support systems. Two of the Guiding Principles are: • Decision making processes should effectively integrate both long and short‐ term economic, environmental, social and equity considerations • 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 These Core Objectives and principles have particular relevance as biodiversity and the ecological processes and life support systems (such as habitat and water) which support biodiversity are a fundamental component of equity for future generations. If species become extinct, they are extinct forever. TOR: The appropriateness and effectiveness of environmental offsets in federal approvals: • the principles that underpin the use of offsets; The Introduction to the Commonwealth’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Protection Act 1999 Environmental Offsets Policy (October 2012) states “Offsets are defined as measures that compensate for the residual adverse impacts of an action on the environment”. However ‘residual adverse impacts’ are not defined. The climate change and biodiversity losses resulting from large‐scale coal mine projects can be in any way considered as ‘residual’. This is a fundamental flaw of the offsets policies, both at federal and state levels. Offsets will not 1 This is the concept that species become extinct because of human actions taken many years previously. http://theconversation.com/extinction‐just‐how‐bad‐is‐it‐and‐why‐should‐we‐care‐13751. 3 compensate for the (non‐)’residual’ adverse impacts (federal and state policy), nor ensure ‘no net loss’ of biodiversity (QLD policy). [The Qld Biodiversity Offset Policy (QBOP) purpose is: The purpose of this policy is to increase the long-term protection and viability of the state’s biodiversity where residual impacts from a development, on an area possessing State significant biodiversity values, cannot be avoided. The policy provides the framework to ensure that there is no net loss of biodiversity. Overall the Qld policy provides seven policy principles which are similar to the Commonwealth principles – see Appendix B.] The Commonwealth policy provides 10 policy principles as follows: Box 1: Offset Principles Suitable offsets must: 1. deliver an overall conservation outcome that improves or maintains the viability of the aspect of the environment that is protected by national environment law and affected by the proposed action 2. be built around direct offsets but may include other compensatory measures 3. be in proportion to the level of statutory protection that applies to the protected matter 4. be of a size and scale proportionate to the residual impacts on the protected matter 5. effectively account for and manage the risks of the offset not succeeding 6. be additional to what is already required, determined by law or planning regulations or agreed to under other schemes or programs (this does not preclude the recognition of state or territory offsets that may be suitable as offsets under the EPBC Act for the same action, see section 7.6) 7. be efficient, effective, timely, transparent, scientifically robust and reasonable 8. have transparent governance arrangements including being able to be readily measured, monitored, audited and enforced. In assessing the suitability of an offset, government decision-making will be: 9. informed by scientifically robust information and incorporate the precautionary principle in the absence of scientific certainty 10. conducted in a consistent and transparent manner. While these principles for environment protection are generally appropriate, they are not met by the adoption of offsets to compensate for environmental damage from a project. In particular, for example: No. 4. be of a size and scale proportionate to the residual impacts on the protected matter Here the issue of ‘residual’ impacts is critical.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Report to Office of Water Science, Department of Science, Information Technology and Innovation, Brisbane
    Lake Eyre Basin Springs Assessment Project Hydrogeology, cultural history and biological values of springs in the Barcaldine, Springvale and Flinders River supergroups, Galilee Basin and Tertiary springs of western Queensland 2016 Department of Science, Information Technology and Innovation Prepared by R.J. Fensham, J.L. Silcock, B. Laffineur, H.J. MacDermott Queensland Herbarium Science Delivery Division Department of Science, Information Technology and Innovation PO Box 5078 Brisbane QLD 4001 © The Commonwealth of Australia 2016 The Queensland Government supports and encourages the dissemination and exchange of its information. The copyright in this publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia (CC BY) licence Under this licence you are free, without having to seek permission from DSITI or the Commonwealth, to use this publication in accordance with the licence terms. You must keep intact the copyright notice and attribute the source of the publication. For more information on this licence visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/deed.en Disclaimer This document has been prepared with all due diligence and care, based on the best available information at the time of publication. The department holds no responsibility for any errors or omissions within this document. Any decisions made by other parties based on this document are solely the responsibility of those parties. Information contained in this document is from a number of sources and, as such, does not necessarily represent government or departmental policy. If you need to access this document in a language other than English, please call the Translating and Interpreting Service (TIS National) on 131 450 and ask them to telephone Library Services on +61 7 3170 5725 Citation Fensham, R.J., Silcock, J.L., Laffineur, B., MacDermott, H.J.
    [Show full text]
  • Galilee Basin Thermal Coal Prohibition Bill Submission
    Galilee Basin Thermal Coal Prohibition Bill Submission This submission relates to the proposed Bill for an Act to prohibit the mining of thermal coal in the Galilee Basin. The Black-throated Finch Recovery Team is a community-based group whose mission is to secure the conservation of the Black-throated Finch (southern subspecies) Poephila cincta cincta which is listed as Endangered under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) as well as under Queensland and New South Wales state legislation. The proposed Bill is relevant to the conservation of the Black-throated Finch because of the vital importance of the Galilee Basin as a stronghold for the species. Portions of the Galilee Basin provide high quality habitat in narrow-leaf ironbark (Eucalyptus crebra) and other woodlands and these areas support the highest know densities and largest known surviving populations of the bird. The only other area known to support relatively large populations is the Townsville Coastal Plain where the species is threatened by urban expansion, intensive livestock grazing and vegetation change, including weed invasion. The species is rare, if not extinct, further south in Queensland and in New South Wales. Open-cut and underground coal mining present a major threat to the populations of Black- throated Finch in the Galilee Basin. These threats relate to mine footprints themselves, which can be substantial, especially in the case of open-cut mining, and to the direct and indirect effects of mining-related infrastructure. Offsets, as proposed for as part of the conditions for approval of developments, such as the Carmichael Mine, do not compensate for loss of habitat and populations of Black-throated Finch and there is the very real risk that there are inadequate areas suitable for offsets.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Do Coal Mines Need So Much Water? 13 April 2017, by Ellen Moon
    Why do coal mines need so much water? 13 April 2017, by Ellen Moon as a water-based slurry for further processing. Mines also need water for things like equipment maintenance, and for consumption by the mining communities themselves. In total, about 250 litres of freshwater are required per tonne of coal produced. This freshwater makes up around a quarter of the total water demand during coal production, the rest being "worked" (recycled) water. Coal mines, such as this one near Bowen, use water for What other industries use lots of water? everything from equipment cooling to dust management. Credit: CSIRO, CC BY The Great Artesian Basin is one of the largest underground water reservoirs in the world. It underlies 22% of Australia's land area, beneath the arid and semi-arid parts of Queensland, New South From accidental water spills into coastal wetlands, Wales, South Australia and the Northern Territory. to proposed taxpayer-funded loans, Adani's planned Carmichael coal mine and the associated Its aquifers supply water to around 200 towns or Abbot Point coal terminal can't keep out of the settlements, most of which are allowed to draw news at the moment. between 100 and 500 million litres (ML) per year. Last week, the granting of an unlimited 60-year water licence to the Carmichael mine, in Queensland's Galilee Basin, rattled environmentalists, farmers and community groups alike. In a region experiencing prolonged drought conditions, the provision of unlimited water for one of the largest mining operations in the Southern Hemisphere seems like a commitment at odds with current climate predictions.
    [Show full text]
  • 5.4 Galilee Basin Survey 2012 Report.Doc Occur in Proximity to Intact Woodlands.) Waterhole Watches Were Not Used (More Useful in the Dry Season)
    bulk email and a handout in Appendix 1 Notices. We were agreeably surprised at the positive response. Many landholders were concerned about the impact of mining on their properties, and made us very welcome. We were given the use of showers and toilets etc. in some delightful campsites. Paola Cassini at Bimblebox even provided us with great meals. One offer of hospitality came directly from the ABC Breakfast Session, and another as a response to the first bulk email in Appendix 1 Survey personnel Sixteen volunteers from BirdLife Southern Queensland (14) and BirdLife Townsville (2) took part. No members from the BTR Recovery Team, BirdLife Capricornia or BirdLife North Queensland were available. The volunteers worked as two independent groups. See Appendix 2 The Team Survey area Initially it had been planned to do three 500m surveys and twelve 2HA Atlas plus Habitat surveys each morning, and optional incidental searches in the afternoons. It soon became apparent that organisation time and distances between sites permitted less surveys – in many cases the 2HA and Habitat surveys were omitted. Survey Sites See list in Appendix 3 Survey Sites. In the Galilee Basin, BTFs had been found in grassy, open woodlands and forests of Regional Ecosystem 10.5.5 - Eucalyptus melanophloia (Silver-leafed Ironbark) open woodland on sand plains. When it became apparent that many of the property managers of the ten properties with this RE were happy to give permission for surveys, it was decided to concentrate on these. It was found that the Stock Routes in the area were all unfenced, and largely unused, so little attention was given to them, and there was no time for the rail corridors, National Parks or Nature Refuges.
    [Show full text]
  • Galilee Basin (Coal Prohibition)
    Galilee Basin (Coal Prohibition) Bill 2018 IEEFA’s submission to the Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee inquiry into the Galilee Basin (Coal Prohibition) Bill 2018 January 2019 Tim Buckley, Director of Energy Finance Studies, Australasia ([email protected]) Galilee Basin (Coal Prohibition) Bill 2018 1 Table of Contents Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 3 1. The IEA Sustainable Development Scenario: Coal’s Collapse ............................... 5 2. Financial Institutions Pivot Away from Coal ............................................................... 9 2.1 Japan ..................................................................................................................................... 10 2.2 South Korea ........................................................................................................................... 11 3. India’s Pivot to Renewables........................................................................................12 4. Inferior Galilee Coal Quality ......................................................................................14 4.1 6,000kcal Thermal Coal at US$100/t .................................................................................. 14 4.2 5,500kcal Thermal Coal at a 2018 Low .............................................................................. 15 5. Other Risks .....................................................................................................................18
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 22 Conclusion and Recommendations
    Chapter 22 Conclusion and recommendations November 2013 Table of contents 22. Conclusion and recommendations ........................................................................................... 22-1 22.1 Purpose of this chapter .................................................................................................. 22-1 22.2 Rationale for NGBR Project ........................................................................................... 22-1 22.3 Economic justification .................................................................................................... 22-2 22.4 Project impacts .............................................................................................................. 22-2 22.4.1 Land use and tenure ........................................................................................... 22-2 22.4.2 Topography, geology, soils and land contamination .......................................... 22-3 22.4.3 Nature conservation ........................................................................................... 22-3 22.4.4 Matters of national environmental significance .................................................. 22-4 22.4.5 Greenhouse gas ................................................................................................. 22-5 22.4.6 Cultural heritage ................................................................................................. 22-5 22.4.7 Social and economic impacts ............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • VARIATION of CONDITIONS ATTACHED to APPROVAL Carmichael Coal Mine and Rail Infrastructure Project, Queensland (EPBC 2010/5736)
    ~£~" _A_u_st_r_a_Ji_a_D_G_o_V_C_I'"_D__ffi _e_"_t ~ Department of the Environment and Energy VARIATION OF CONDITIONS ATTACHED TO APPROVAL Carmichael Coal Mine and Rail Infrastructure Project, Queensland (EPBC 2010/5736) This decision to vary conditions of approval is made under section 143 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). Approved action Person to whom the Adani Mining Pty Ltd approval is granted ACN: 145455205 Approved action To develop an open cut and underground coal mine, 189 km rail link and associated infrastructure approximately 160 km north west of Clermont in central Queensland [see EPBC Act referral 2010/5736 and approved variations dated 19 April 2012, 9 October 2012 and 24 July 2013] Variation Variation of conditions The variation is: attached to approval Delete conditions 8 and 11 attached to the approval and substitute with the conditions specified below. Delete the definition of the Galilee Basin Strategic Offset Strategy. Insert a new definition of Galilee Basin Offset Strategy as specified below. Date of effect This variation has effect on the date the instrument is signed Person authorised to make decision Name and position Chris Videroni Acting Assistant Secretary Assessme and Post Approvals Branch Signature Date of decision Varied condition As varied on 8. The approval holder must legally secure the minimum offset areas detailed in Table 1 for the date of the rail (west) component within four years of commencement of the specified component of this notice the action. The approval holder must legally secure the minimum offset areas for the other specified components detailed in Table 1 within two years of commencement of those specified components of the action.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Galilee Basin Exploration and Mining Projects
    North Goonyella* QUEENSLAND ENERGY RESOURCES Eaglefield* CHARTERS # China Stone* TOWERS CARMICHAEL " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " R FLINDERS REGIONAL AILWAY " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " QUEENSLAND " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " # LONGREACH SHIRE Twin Hills Gold ENERGY " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Grosvenor* NUMBER 2 " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " RESOURCES PANGAEA PTY LTD " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " GALILEE GALILEE LIMITED " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Y PTY LTD RESOURCES A PANGAEA " " " " " " " " "#" " " " " " " " " W L PTY LTD " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " I A Isaac Plains South GALILEE " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " R # PTY LTD Carm"ic"ha" e" l*" " " " " " " " " " " " " " DIAMOND GALILEE " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " CREEK COAL RESOURCES " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " PTY LTD WINTON " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " PTY LTD " " " C" O" M" E"T " " " " " " " " " " " RIVER QUEENSLAND SHIRE " " " R" ID" G" E" " " " " " " " " " " " Belyando Gold ENERGY " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " # RESOURCE" S" " " L"TD" " " " " " " " " " " " " WESTERN # LIMITED " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Anthony Molybdenum WINTON " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " ! " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Y QUEENSLAND A # " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Gunn CSG W " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " ENERGY IL " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " A RESOURCES R " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " L C LIMITED A E " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " O N C
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrogeological Overview of Springs in the Great Artesian Basin
    Hydrogeological Overview of Springs in the Great Artesian Basin M. A. (Rien) Habermehl1 Abstract The Great Artesian Basin (GAB) is a regional groundwater system consisting of aquifers and confining beds within the sedimentary Eromanga, Surat and Carpentaria Basins. They under- lie arid to semi-arid regions across 1.7 million km2, or one-fifth of the Australian continent. Artesian springs of the GAB are naturally occurring outlets of groundwater from the confined aquifers. Springs predominantly occur near the eastern recharge margins and the south-western and western discharge margins of the GAB. These zones of natural groundwater discharge represent areas of permanent water, with widely recognised cultural, spiritual and subsistence importance to Indigenous people for tens of thousands of years. The unique hydrogeological environments – discharge, hydrochemistry and substrate – support a range of endemic flora and fauna protected under the EPBC Act (1999). Springs have formed in many areas across the GAB; however, the largest concentrations occur near the south-western margins of the basin. Supporting these flowing artesian springs is a multi-layered aquifer system, comprising Jurassic- to Cretaceous-age sandstones and siltstone, and confining beds of mudstones. Hydrogeological, hydrochemical and isotope hydrology studies show that most artesian springs and flowing water bores in the GAB derive their water from the main Jurassic–Lower Cretaceous Cadna-owie Formation – Hooray Sandstone aquifer and its equivalents. Focusing on springs in South Australia, this paper provides a summary of the hydrogeology of the GAB, including zones of recharge and regional groundwater flow directions, with a major focus on summarising under- standing of the occurrence and formation of springs.
    [Show full text]
  • The Structure, Sedimentology, Sequence Stratigraphy and Tectonics of the Northern Drummond and Galilee Basins, Central Queensland, Australia
    THE STRUCTURE, SEDIMENTOLOGY, SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY AND TECTONICS OF THE NORTHERN DRUMMOND AND GALILEE BASINS, CENTRAL QUEENSLAND, AUSTRALIA Volume I Thesis submitted by Aldo Van Heeswijck MScStud (Newcastle) Dip Ed in February 2006 for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Earth Sciences, James Cook University of North Queensland STATEMENT OF ACCESS I, the undersigned, author of this work, understand that James Cook University will make this thesis available for use within the University Library and, via the Australian Digital Thesis network, for use elsewhere. All users consulting this thesis will have to sign the following statement: “In consulting this thesis I agree not to copy closely or to paraphrase it in whole or in part without the written consent of the author, and to make proper written acknowledgement for any assistance I obtained from it.” I understand that, as an unpublished work, a thesis has significant protection under the Copyright Act. Most of the work in this thesis is intended for publication in scientific journals and any such work should be acknowledged accordingly. Beyond this, I do not wish to place any restrictions on this thesis. Signature Date ii ELECTRONIC COPY I, the undersigned, the author of this work, declare that the electronic copy of this thesis provided to the James Cook University Library, is an accurate copy of the print thesis submitted, within the limits of the technology available. _______________________________ _______________ Signature Date Signed on behalf of Aldo van Heeswijck by Head of School of Earth & Environmental Sciences, JCU DECLARATION I declare that this thesis is my own work and has not been submitted in any form for another degree or diploma at any university or other institution of tertiary education.
    [Show full text]
  • Galilee Basin Jobs Impact
    The impact of Galilee Basin development on employment in existing coal regions Development of the Galilee Basin would displace production in other coal regions. Galilee mines would be more automated and less job-intensive than existing mines. Based on coal industry analysis, central estimates of employment reduction are 9,100 in the Hunter Valley, 2,000 in the Bowen Basin & 1,400 in the Surat Basin compared to a no-Galilee scenario. Galilee mines are likely to employ between 7,840 and 9,800 people, resulting in overall negative impact on coal jobs. Discussion paper Cameron Murray Bill Browne Rod Campbell July 2018 ABOUT THE AUSTRALIA INSTITUTE The Australia Institute is an independent public policy think tank based in Canberra. It is funded by donations from philanthropic trusts and individuals and commissioned research. We barrack for ideas, not political parties or candidates. Since its launch in 1994, the Institute has carried out highly influential research on a broad range of economic, social and environmental issues. OUR PHILOSOPHY As we begin the 21st century, new dilemmas confront our society and our planet. Unprecedented levels of consumption co-exist with extreme poverty. Through new technology we are more connected than we have ever been, yet civic engagement is declining. Environmental neglect continues despite heightened ecological awareness. A better balance is urgently needed. The Australia Institute’s directors, staff and supporters represent a broad range of views and priorities. What unites us is a belief that through a combination of research and creativity we can promote new solutions and ways of thinking. OUR PURPOSE – ‘RESEARCH THAT MATTERS’ The Institute publishes research that contributes to a more just, sustainable and peaceful society.
    [Show full text]
  • Detecting Inter-Aquifer Leakage in Areas with Limited Data Using Hydraulics and Multiple Environmental Tracers, Including 4He, 36Cl/Cl, 14Cand87sr/86Sr
    Hydrogeol J DOI 10.1007/s10040-017-1609-x REPORT Detecting inter-aquifer leakage in areas with limited data using hydraulics and multiple environmental tracers, including 4He, 36Cl/Cl, 14Cand87Sr/86Sr Stacey C. Priestley 1 & Daniel L. Wohling2 & Mark N. Keppel2 & Vincent E. A. Post 1 & Andrew J. Love1 & Paul Shand 1,3 & Lina Tyroller4 & Rolf Kipfer4,5 Received: 6 December 2016 /Accepted: 19 May 2017 # The Author(s) 2017. This article is an open access publication Abstract The investigation of regionally extensive ground- controlled by diffuse inter-aquifer leakage, but the coarse spa- water systems in remote areas is hindered by a shortage of data tial resolution means that the presence of additional enhanced due to a sparse observation network, which limits our under- inter-aquifer leakage sites cannot be excluded. This study standing of the hydrogeological processes in arid regions. The makes the case that a multi-tracer approach along with study used a multidisciplinary approach to determine hydrau- groundwater hydraulics and geology provides a tool-set to lic connectivity between the Great Artesian Basin (GAB) and investigate enhanced inter-aquifer leakage even in a ground- the underlying Arckaringa Basin in the desert region of water basin with a paucity of data. A particular problem en- Central Australia. In order to manage the impacts of ground- countered in this study was the ambiguous interpretation of water abstraction from the Arckaringa Basin, it is vital to different age tracers, which is attributed to diffusive transport understand its connectivity with the GAB (upper aquifer), as across flow paths caused by low recharge rates.
    [Show full text]