ON ABC reports you get both sides of the case on CSG land use. They interview farmers who argue in favour of CSG on their land - because of the lucrative "compensation" for extraction infrastructure. Some have even said they get a royalty payment. ABC also interviews farmers who want to continue their farming practices as they have always done and explain the arguments against CSG.
Watching/reading ABC reports, and papers on the Conversation and other sources, usually give me a balanced view of the issues. Academic papers, industry reports, expert source and scientific information all inform without debarring alternative perspectives. This is what informs my opinion.
I take bg's and your arguments into consideration along with all other information available.
Your posts are defensive and so necessarily one-sided - pro-CSG and other gas exploitation. Thats a fair comment and I don't dispute your position. Whereas, other reports I've read do dispute your claims.
Seismic testing does have adverse effects on marine life. Its pretty hard for a biased eye who isn't underwater observing animal or other reactions to blasts to say that there is no impact. I guess that you base your understanding on counts of lobster catches. This says very little and is not empirical evidence.
Spot prices are volatile and do not reflect actual supply so much as speculative market dynamics and demand. Supply has been rising YOY and yet domestic demand has been compressed by short supply, forcing price rises to consumers.
I could go on but its Saturday and my wife is on my back to go groceries. Talk with you and bg later on this important issue.
