So, there are all sorts of sarcastic arguments possible related to the long gone PNG-Qld gas pipeline, but, to use them as arguments FOR CSG exports from Australia is hardly logical. I believe this is a variation on the "strawman" argument - fallacy of extension perhaps? As you use the strawman fallacy in your attack on Mark Ogge, I assume you are totally familiar with the paradigm!
I am reasonably aware of the recent history of the CSG mining industry having been a holder of QGC before the issues with CSG mining became evident. I believe it is still possible, although no Australian politicians would have the cojones, to honour our international treaty obligations and put an end to the ecocidal abomination that is the LNG export industry in Gladstone. IF that were done this whole argument would be moot, but, as I said, I doubt that will occur.
But, that is a digression. There are other means of power generation than CSG and it is in the development of those alternatives that our collective future lies. You would have us stay with the current paradigm for whatever personal reasons. I would suggest that it is time we embraced a new paradigm!
Meanwhile we are stuck with this fallacious argument that we NEED to despoil vast areas of the state in the interests of a handful of shareholders on the basis of a purported shortage of gas which could easily be supplied from existing reserves.
