lnc,cnx,cxy valuations, page-35

Much as I hate to say it, the Qld govt UCG policy does make sense in the broader picture.

UCG is substantially untested both economically and environmentally, while CSG is massive in Qld - Palmer's coal project for instance ("the largest sale in Australian history") has $6B of infrastructure funding, while Santos and BG both are spending $8B on their CSG-LNG projects and Origin/Conoco are spending $35B on theirs.

So what the govt is saying is,

Those criticising Qld as somehow 'backward' in this regard are just showing their ignorance of the situation. It's not about 'backward', it's about priorities and insisting that UCG prove itself before it's allowed to take its place alongside CSG. And they're giving the UCG companies the chance - not one but three different pilot projects have the chance to prove they are both technically and economically feasible, and environmentally friendly.

Once UCG has done that, the government will open up the coalfields to other UCG companies. A handy benefit is that by that time, the first of the Queensland CSG fields will have declined to the point where they are starting to come offline, and then UCG can move in and gasify them with no complaints from the CSG companies.

They say a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, and CSG is the bird in the hand. And what a bird it is. The two UCG birds might prove just as good, but we have to prove we can catch them first!