Join the dots and start to see the big picture.
Majority of people don't want CSG. Majority of people see Health of primary concern to their daily lives, followed by Economic concerns.
Development of CSG will not benefit Health, even if the 2 major parties tell us they want to put CSG royalties toward the health system, because both the short and long term effects of CSG development will directly detrimentally affect general health and well-being:
* pollution of ground water with fracking chemicals;
* destruction of cultivatable farmland (thereby increasing the reliance on imported foods which will travel great distances - consider freshness and genetic modification to get it to our shops - and not be subject to strict quality controls as other countries will oversee food production);
* increased air pollution through the development, mining, processing, transportation and exporting of CSG - the full process has been shown to produce a fuel-to-energy process that is as polluting as coal, and is not the friendly 'transition fuel' the mining companies and QLD govt would have us believe;
* destruction of irreplaceable unique ecosystems which are fundamental to fishing as enormous areas of the Great Barrier Reef and associated waters are ruined to make way for port facilities up and down the QLD coast. It's a very simple equation, if you destroy the breeding and feeding ecosystems for fish (and other marine creatures) you destroy the continuation of those species, thereby disrupting the food chains and thus those who ultimately rely on them - people. Add to that equation the loss of tourism to our state because of the degradation of the reef and associated areas, and you have an extremely bleak outlook for health and economics;
* community disruption will impact greatly on social health, and thus on mental health and general well-being, which is of course an important factor in community and individual resilience.
So, there's a few ideas regarding Health. What about Economy?
You won't be surprised to find, when you think it through, that there is a lot of cross-over in those considerations too:
* start with agricultural land; loss of local production leads to reliance on imports, thus adding transport and storage costs not associated with local production;
* loss of primary industry jobs - and families - will raise unemployment levels specific to regional and rural areas, thus creating communities in need in areas already affected by insufficient resources. And as the mining industry likes to continually tell us 'think of the flow on effect', so think of the food and support workers - and whole communities - associated with our agricultural industries who will also be out of work against their will;
* how many untold billions of dollars is the government spending on the development of this industry, and in ingratiating itself with companies who already post astronomical profits? That taxpayer money is going toward these industries when it could be spent directly on better Health, small business and education measures is unbelievable. A 'simple' redistribution of taxpayer dollars would go a long way to assisting the state and local economies to be stronger and more resilient to future changes;
* and finally, for now, what costs will be associated with the collapse and clean-up of this short-term, destructive, dead-end industry? Who will clean up the mine areas and waste products? What will be done with the unusable infrastructure? Who is going to be paying for and organising to address the exponential pollution problems? How will collapsed communities continue and survive?
So, that's potentially the bad news.
The good news is that it needn't play out that way.
Genuine investment right now in sustainable energy production, and support for the development of that industry and associated industries and infrastructure are true long-term goals that will have immediate benefits in manufacturing, research and technology development, construction and support services. These projects will all be there for the long-term, sustaining individuals, families, communities and our state economy.
Impact on land is not destructive, and repercussions to ground water and air pollution become irrelevant issues.
Plans, strategies and the physical accomplishments of a sustainable energy industry exist today - as can be seen in Spain, Germany, areas of the US and other countries- and we just need the political will and commitment to make it all happen.
The fossil fuel energy production industry will not, and could not, be stopped overnight. A natural transition period needs to be managed to move to a sustainable energy production world. This includes things like training and retraining of workers, just as is happening right now for the CSG industry, to cover many types of jobs and services. But it would leave out the development of the misnamed 'transition fuel' industry of CSG, because that exists not to placate the public that something is being done to move away from dirty coal, but only to generate profits for multinational companies who would seem to have no imagination for considering a better future for the greater population.
You can help to make this sustainable future a reality. Make yourself heard and let the decision makers know what you want.
Don't wait until Queensland's 2012 election, or any other election, get up now and write, shout, talk about, tweet, share, march, sing and make known your support.
Before it's too late.
Stewart Luke
IN RESPONSE TO:
Support for CGS collapses: Newspoll
PUBLIC confidence in coal-seam gas development has collapsed in the sector's production heartland of Queensland.