Environment Report - Santos

More documents

Recommendations

Info

4. Project Rationale ability to store processed Casino gas in depleted gas reservoirs at the TXU WUGS facility at Iona for later withdrawal to meet peak demand. 4.3.3 Increased Gas Supply Competition Victorian gas fields in the Otway Basin are already linked to the South Australian and Victorian gas markets by the recently completed SEAgas Pipeline and GasNet’s existing Southwest Pipeline, respectively, and therefore present additional gas reserves to both these markets. This generates competition between gas producers ‘at the wellhead’. 4.3.4 Commercial Benefits Gas exploration and production in the Otway Basin has generated significant 10.2% 27.1% 13.1% 27.5% Source: AGA (2004). 6.3% 11.6% 1980-81 5.3% 2000-01 Oil 19.7% Black coal Renewables Natural gas Brown coal 44.8% 34.4% Figure 4.2 Australia’s primary energy consumption by fuel type, 1980-81 and 2000-01 economic activity at the local, regional, state and national levels. Whilst relatively modest in size, the Casino Gas Field Development will contribute significantly to economic activity with a total capital expenditure of approximately A$200 million for the project. The project’s total construction workforce is estimated to be 320 personnel comprising 250 for the offshore pipe lay (mostly Australian workers), 25 for offshore drilling and 45 for onshore pipeline construction and HDD operations as well as additional project management and other technical support services. Where practicable, <strong>Santos</strong> and its contractors will seek to provide opportunities for local contractors and individuals to be engaged on the project. A significant proportion of the total capital expenditure will be directed to pipe and wellhead infrastructure manufacture and construction. Australian manufacturers will be invited to bid on the supply of pipe and pipe coating. Similarly, Australian construction firms will be invited to bid on the onshore pipeline construction and HDD. Offshore drilling and pipeline construction is limited to a small number of international companies with the specified capabilities, however, Australian companies will be invited to bid for offshore construction logistical support activities, such as helicopter transport and supply and tender vessels. During construction, local economic opportunities will be provided through the provision of support services, which may include: • Labour supply (both skilled and semiskilled). • Construction services, such as earthmoving, concrete batching, road making, fencing and minor metal fabrication. • Support services for construction activities, such as equipment hire, motor vehicle hire, short-term accommodation, food and beverage supply, fuel supply and security patrols. During operations, the gas field and pipeline are likely to be operated under contract by personnel at the TXU WUGS facility, whilst technical support services will be provided by specialist contractors as required. <strong>Santos</strong> envisages that no dedicated field workforce will be required. 25% Source: AGA (2004). 14% 8% 2% 14% 37% Northern Territory South Australia Western Australia Queensland Victoria NSW/ACT Figure 4.3 Australia’s natural gas consumption by state, 2001 When gas is produced from the Casino Gas Field Development, the Commonwealth government will receive revenue through the payment of resource rent tax and corporate tax and revenue will be received by the Victorian government through the redistribution of the goods and services tax (GST) from the Commonwealth. 4.3.5 Potential Greenhouse Benefits Natural gas is recognised as having significantly less greenhouse gas emissions than alternate fossil fuels, particularly coal. A significant potential greenhouse benefit will arise where gas-fired electricity or gas water heating is selected over electricity derived from coal-fired power stations. 4.4 Project Alternatives The development of the Casino gas field has required consideration of a range of alternatives that influence the commercial viability and feasibility of the project. 1 Calculation based on Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association (APPEA) estimate of Victoria producing 15% of Australia’s total gas production for 2002–2003 (1156.7bcf) (APPEA, 2004). 16 Casino Gas Field Development
4. Project Rationale Greater Sunrise from Papua New Guinea Bayu Undan Browse Basin 21.4% Bonaparte Basin 17.2% Darwin Gove Katherine Mataranka Daly Waters McArthur River Weipa 0 N km 500 Perth Basin 0.6% Carnarvon Basin 51.9% Onslow Carnarvon Geraldton Bunbury Dampier Mt Magnet Perth Port Hedland Windimurra Worsley Wiluna Newman WESTERN AUSTRALIA Leonora Broome Kalgoorlie Telfer Jundee Existing natural gas pipelines Natural gas pipelines under construction Proposed natural gas pipelines Mt Margaret Murrin Murrin Kambalda Esperance Reserves are shown as a percentage of total reserves. Estimated Australian gas reserves as at 1 January 2001 157, 343 PJ (Geoscience Australia, 2002). Source: AGA (2004) and Encom Petroleum Information (2004). Figure 4.4 NORTHERN TERRITORY Mereenie Tennant Creek Alice Springs Amadeus Basin 0.2% Australia’s gas pipelines and gas fields Eromanga Basin Cooper/Eromanga Ballera Basins 2.8% Moomba Cooper Basin SOUTH AUSTRALIA Beverley Otway Basin 0.3% Mt Isa Cannington Noranside QUEENSLAND Gilmore (Field) Bunya Barcaldine NEW SOUTH WALES Tamworth Adavale Basin
Page 1 and 2: Environment Report Casino Gas Field
Page 3: Preface The Casino Gas Field Develo
Page 6 and 7: Executive Summary TXU WUGS facility
Page 8 and 9: Executive Summary ment from the Cas
Page 10 and 11: Executive Summary 9 8 N Casino offs
Page 12 and 13: Executive Summary 668 000 670 000 6
Page 14 and 15: Executive Summary Alignment of the
Page 16 and 17: Executive Summary Table 1 Environme
Page 18 and 19: Executive Summary Table 1 Environme
Page 20 and 21: Executive Summary xx Casino Gas Fie
Page 22 and 23: Contents 4.3.4 Commercial Benefits
Page 24 and 25: Contents 6.15.1 Existing Environmen
Page 26 and 27: Contents 6.3 Locations of commercia
Page 28 and 29: Contents xxviii Casino Gas Field De
Page 30 and 31: 1. Introduction 640 000 650 000 660
Page 32 and 33: 1. Introduction • Provision of an
Page 34 and 35: 2. Regulatory Framework • Commonw
Page 36 and 37: 2. Regulatory Framework Santos has
Page 38 and 39: 2. Regulatory Framework 10 Casino G
Page 40 and 41: 3. Stakeholder Consultation Table 3
Page 42 and 43: 3. Stakeholder Consultation This re
Page 46 and 47: 4. Project Rationale mary energy so
Page 48 and 49: 5. Project Description network. A n
Page 50 and 51: 5. Project Description 640 000 650
Page 52 and 53: 5. Project Description Proposed Otw
Page 54 and 55: 5. Project Description Table 5.3 As
Page 56 and 57: 5. Project Description 668 000 670
Page 58 and 59: 5. Project Description and hydrauli
Page 60 and 61: 5. Project Description with a ‘pu
Page 62 and 63: 5. Project Description HDD Profile
Page 64 and 65: 5. Project Description Restoration
Page 66 and 67: 5. Project Description Enesar Court
Page 68 and 69: 5. Project Description move weld de
Page 70 and 71: 5. Project Description tion contrac
Page 72 and 73: 5. Project Description corrosion in
Page 74 and 75: 6. Impact Assessment 10.3 m (WNI, 2
Page 76 and 77: 6. Impact Assessment 9 8 Flaxman's
Page 78 and 79: 6. Impact Assessment 640 000 650 00
Page 80 and 81: 6. Impact Assessment Drill Fluid an
Page 82 and 83: 6. Impact Assessment coated or thic
Page 84 and 85: 6. Impact Assessment mammals such a
Page 86 and 87: 6. Impact Assessment noise were red
Page 88 and 89: 6. Impact Assessment Physiological
Page 90 and 91: 6. Impact Assessment SIV, 2003). Ke
Page 92 and 93: 6. Impact Assessment the proposed s
Page 94 and 95:
6. Impact Assessment Table 6.4 Geol
Page 96 and 97:
6. Impact Assessment • Route plan
Page 98 and 99:
6. Impact Assessment Project, Santo
Page 100 and 101:
6. Impact Assessment 668000 670000
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
6. Impact Assessment Park and Loch
Page 108 and 109:
6. Impact Assessment side native ve
Page 110 and 111:
6. Impact Assessment Curdie Vale -
Page 112 and 113:
6. Impact Assessment Habitat Loss.
Page 114 and 115:
6. Impact Assessment Table 6.9 Pote
Page 116 and 117:
6. Impact Assessment 6.9.5 Residual
Page 118 and 119:
o 6. Impact Assessment 630000 65000
Page 120 and 121:
6. Impact Assessment Electricity. P
Page 122 and 123:
6. Impact Assessment will be requir
Page 124 and 125:
6. Impact Assessment requirements.
Page 126 and 127:
6. Impact Assessment of the project
Page 128 and 129:
6. Impact Assessment 6.13.2 Potenti
Page 130 and 131:
6. Impact Assessment will be contra
Page 132 and 133:
6. Impact Assessment dicted noise l
Page 134 and 135:
6. Impact Assessment occupants of R
Page 136 and 137:
6. Impact Assessment • Minimising
Page 138 and 139:
6. Impact Assessment - Pipeline mon
Page 140 and 141:
7. Environmental Management Framewo
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
8. References CSC. 2004c. Industry.
Page 148 and 149:
8. References Force on Marine Prote
Page 150 and 151:
9. Glossary laydown area: sites at
Page 153 and 154:
Appendix 1 Appendix 1 - Terrestrial
Page 155 and 156:
Appendix 1 List of flora species th
Page 157 and 158:
Appendix 1 Status List of flora spe
Page 159 and 160:
Appendix 1 List of fauna species th
Page 161 and 162:
Appendix 1 List of fauna species th
Page 163:
Appendix 2 Santos Environment, Heal
Page 166 and 167:
INTRODUCTION Introduction Message f
Page 168 and 169:
2 > FRAMEWORK EHSMS Framework The S
Page 170 and 171:
4 > MANAGEMENT STANDARDS EHSMS 01 |
Page 172 and 173:
6 > MANAGEMENT STANDARDS EHSMS 05 M
Page 174 and 175:
8 > MANAGEMENT STANDARDS EHSMS 07 M
Page 176 and 177:
unless otherwise stated, be based o
Page 178 and 179:
12 > MANAGEMENT STANDARDS EHSMS 10
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
22 > HAZARD STANDARDS Hazard Standa
Page 190 and 191:
24 > GLOSSARY Glossary EHSMS Perfor
Page 192:
Santos Head Office Santos House 91
show all

Environment Report - Santos

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?