System Thinking and Fracking: Sustainability Challenges in Australia

This essay delves into the complex issue of fracking in Australia, highlighting its detrimental impacts on the environment and public health. It emphasizes the importance of system thinking in addressing these challenges, particularly concerning coal seam gas (CSG) extraction. The essay explores various issues such as water pollution, air quality deterioration, and the manipulation of regulations by gas companies. It analyzes the ineffectiveness of current governmental approaches, including the shifting of responsibility to state governments and the weakening of environmental protections. The essay advocates for a more comprehensive system design that prioritizes environmental safeguards, including stricter regulations on CSG extraction, continuous monitoring of gas leakages, and proper handling of contaminated water. The conclusion stresses the critical role of federal government intervention and collaboration with business houses to ensure sustainable practices, while acknowledging the interconnectedness of these issues and the need for a holistic approach to mitigate the negative impacts of fracking in Australia.

[SYSTEM THINKING IS CRITICAL FOR DEVELOPING SOLUTIONS TO SUSTANABILITY
CHALLENGES]
FRACKING IN AUSTRALIA
[Year]
[Type the company
name]
[Type the author name]

INTRODUCTION
A system is a set of detached elements interconnected with each other to toil towards a
universal purpose. The fact that systems thinking are useful for dealing with various wicked
problems cannot be under-estimated in totality. By systems thinking, it means that
concentration is put upon those areas and the linkage between those parts which would enable
production of solution to the issues. Sustainability is the need of the hour alongside
development. Sustainability challenges basically focuses upon how the individuals will utilise
the resources which are being provided to them by nature. The threat to sustainability due to
the acitvites performed by the human beings is numerous in nature. Australia is one such
country along with United States and Canada who is lazybones when it comes to adhering to
sustainability practices. Australia has a huge reservoir of eccentric gas, specifically CSG and
shale. It is around four times more than the conventional gas resources the country possesses.
Maximum part of the exploration i.e. fracking occurs in Queensland’s Surat and Bowen
Basin and NSW where the reserves are comparatively small in quantity (Swayne, 2012).
The country failed to understand that the development of the industrial segment will have a
negative implication on the social environment. One of the most important issue for the
Federal Government of Australia is that of the coal seam gas (CSG) development in the east
coast of the country. The possibilities of leakages and spills has been one of the most striking
concerns with regards the extraction of the said gas. The said procedure of extraction of CSG
is known as fracking. Although system thinking is critical for developing a solution to this
issue of fracking and the after effects it has on the people and the environment around, yet the
same cannot be said to be an ultimate solution. The said essay will ensure to reveal and make
it clear that system thinking has a major contribution to make in developing solution to the
said issue.
WHAT KIND OF ISSUS HAS FRACKING LED TO?
Even though it is agreeable to concentrate upon resolving towards one issue at a time,
however while doing so, such as resolving the issue of domestic energy consumption may
lead to global warming. The environmental costs of fracking for oil and gas are a
deterioration of the quality of the air one breathes, the nearby habitats and pollution. Fracking
in Australia has led to the emergence of various issues and in the 21st century, the said
extraction policy has gained more importance. It has attracted not only those people’s
attention who are a direct sufferer of the same but also the eminent scholars and researchers

as well who are trying to evaluate the fact that the fracking procedure has led to development
and invention of various new kinds of disarticulation and disempowerment, altering
associations between people and technology and changing relationships between people and
the environment they stay in (Elias, 2013). Fracking is a consequence of recognized power
fabrication patterns, as well as new socio-technical experience. Even though it is a much
more mechanized procedure, yet it enlarges routes of physical and social implications which
had been started in the previous ages of resource extractions. Even though newer methods for
the extraction of fossil fuels have been found out, yet they fail to cater to the after effects and
how to control the same as there is no such legislation pronounced by the government of
Australia unlike the United States who have currently introduced legislation to control these
hazardous pollutants from fracking gas well (Theodori, 2009).
The fracking procedure has led to invention of newer issues such as on the water bodies.
These are very much different to the conventional ones. Post the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals
ruled in 1997 that fracking should be regulated as a form of underground injection by the
“plain language of the Safe Drinking Water Act,” it looked as if the developing technology
would be monitored federally by the EPA and by various states individually under the
Underground Injection Control (UIC) plans. UIC plans basically would have demanded
printing of the chemical hazards suffered due to fracking at the state-level and further
observing and safeguarding of underground sources of drinking water. Unfortunately, in lieu
of safeguarding their market forte along with progression of eccentric fossil fuel reserves, the
oil field service industry very conveniently lobbied an exemption in the Safe Drinking Water
Act 1974 (Willow & Wylie, 2014). Thus one of the most striking impact fracking has had is
on the water bodies adjacent to the place of the procedure.
SYSTEMS THINKING IN DEVELOPING SOLUTON TO THE ISSUE OF
FRACKING IN AUSTRALIA
Around 440 million hectares of Australia comprises of coal and gas licenses or applications.
The fact that natural gas in Australia is the best example available with regards sustainability
challenge. As per the thought process laid down by the government and the various business
houses, giving away of the ‘green tape’ is a method of increasing productivity. However, in
view of the same, they fail to understand that while doing so they fail to keep in mind the
negative impact it has on the environment as well as the health of the public at large. The gas
companies are huge proponents of cutting ‘green tape’ as they always try to find out ways

and means to sail their CSG projects in the eyes of the public who is unconvinced
(Richardson, 2016).
The Australia Institute conducted two surveys which looked upon at public opinion with
regards regulation and CSG and the result was that one in two respondents were in favour of
regulation and only seven percent were in favour of CSG. The systems thinking should be
such that the government should not take a back step and support CSG extraction as it is
harmful for the people around. Unfortunately, the Federal government has taken a step back
and left the reins into the hands of the states purposely, as it would mean that there would be
lesser regulations and approval procedure would be less cumbersome as well. However, the
public at large still have showed their inclination towards keeping the reins in the hands of
the Federal government only (Grudnoff, 2013).
By dealing with sustainability challenges, it not only means water pollution but also puts
immense pressure on the environment and natural resources. Unfortunately, the various
systems such as natural habitat, water bodies and public at large has been ignored and are
unsuccessfully linked to the issue of fracking. The Native Vegetation Acts in both NSW and
Queensland, prior to recent revisions, has very subtly taken care of the issues relating to
clearance of natural vegetation but at the same time has removed the CSG operations from
such an Act. The Acts have been formulated in such a manner that they fail to deal with a
broad-scale disintegration and snowballing failure of environment (Mercer et.al. 2014).
However, it makes it very evident from the above that systems thinking has failed to be a
major contributor to finding solution to the said issue. It is noted that in the beginning of
2013, the CSIRO commenced a plan examining renegade discharges from CSG in Australia.
The main aim was to formulate suitable Australian-specific methodologies for calculating
and computing fugitive emissions from the CSG industry, but to its loss, the said process is
also not full proof to be able to resolve the said challenge. The differences between geology
and hydrology is one of the main reasons behind the unsuccessful events in Australia against
the CSG emissions.
Although the fact that they have helped to find some solution if not in totality to give way to
the sustainability challenges being posed due to the fracking happening in Eastern Australia
mainly. The fact that CSG is one of the main items of export cannot be denied and also a
major source of income as well. Various reforms should be bought into action to deal with
the said wicked problem such as the present and the future CSG projects should be

mandatorily be asked to fulfil the baseline and continuous assessments of gas leakage within
the area which is having to face the brunt (Australian Network of Environmental Defender’s
Office, 2013). Leakage is one of the main issue that should be made a part of the systems
design.
Apart from the regulations which should be put in place with regards extraction of CSG and
adoption of fracking procedure, it is very important that the business houses who are
undertaking such an act, are making all efforts to design such a system which would help deal
with the wicked issue of contamination of water, land bodies as well as air. For example, the
contaminated and polluted water containing toxic elements should be stored carefully and
even if they are treated well, they should be disposed off very carefully as its disposal into the
natural streams can have a negative implication on the streams ecosystem as the said
discharge has to be matched to the temperature of the stream as well as natural flow regimes
(Williams, et.al. 2013).
Thereby it can be rightly said that the main issue here is not a change in the climatic
conditions, rather it is overshoot of which global warming is one of the symptoms and it is a
systemic problem. The designing has yet not been done in a manner which would be able to
address the issue of sustainability in the case of fracking in Australia. The big business men
with more resources in hand are posing greater danger than the small and medium explorers
who are trying to find out other ways and means of extraction so as to deal with the growing
environmental concern (Budd et.al. 2016). The system has been designed in such a manner
that these big houses can easily manipulate the same and find a way out. Their sole aim stays
profit maximisation and so the government too is found to be at their mercy due to which
they have handed over the power to deal with the said issue to the state governments. It can
be said that systems design is although critical in developing solutions to sustainability
challenges, yet it fails in the particular scenario due to the loose ends which are yet to be
tightened.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION
Thereby on a concluding note, it is very evident that systems design is a must for developing
solutions to various wicked issues which pose a threat to sustainability. Various measures are
being continuously taken by the issuance and pronouncement of various Acts, but the same
yet fails to adhere to the issues of safeguarding the environment and the health of the public
at large. The Federal Government is unfortunately seen to have been taken back step which is

all the more alarming. The said issue is so crucial that without the intervention of the
government it is impossible to resolve and stop the shrewd business houses from minting
money at the cost of the innocent. Although systems thinking is critical for developing
solutions to such wicked problems, but the fact that one solution can lead to emergence of so
many other related issues, cannot be ignored. The government is unable to do much as
fracking is one of the cheaper methods of extracting CSG and because of the, oil available is
cheaper in the global market. However, the scenario may take a hit if the same is restricted
stringently. Thereby the Federal Government in specific should try to communicate and
interact with the business houses and check upon the ways and means which would help to
secure the best possible way out of extracting oil from the fossil fuels as well as ensuring that
the ‘green tape’ formula is not ignored in totality.

REFERENCES:
Australian Network of Environmental Defender’s Offices., (2013), Coal and gas mining in
Australia, Available at http://www.tai.org.au/sites/defualt/files/TB%2024%20Coal%20and
%20gas%20mining%20in%20Australia.pdf (Accessed on 22nd August 2017)
Budd,A.R., Gerner,E.J., & Haynes,M.W., (2015), Developing Australian Enhanced
Geothermal Systems and Hot Sedimentary Aquifer Models for Reducing Risk, Available at
https://pangea.stanford.edu/ERE/db/WGC/papers/WGC/2015/11076.pdf (Accessed 22nd
August 2017)
Elias,S.A., (2013), Fracking – the pros and cons, Available at
https://www.elsevier.com/connect/fracking-the-pros-and-cons (Accessed on 22nd August
2017)
Grudnoff,M., (2014), Want a case for regulation? Look at CSG, Available at
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-18/grudnoff-the-case-for-fracking-regulation/5328678
(Accessed 22nd August 2017)
Mercer, A., de Rijke,K & Dressler,W., (2014), Silence in the midst of the boom: coal seam
gas, neoliberalizing discourse, and the future of regional Australia. Journal of Political
Ecology, vol. 14, pp. 279- 302.Available at
http://jpe.library.arizona.edu/volume_21/Mercer.pdf (Accessed 22nd August 2017)
Richardson,T., (2016), Come to SA, Koutsantonis tells gas companies after Vic fracking ban,
Available at https://indaily.com.au/news/2016/08/30/come-to-sa-koutsantonis-tells-gas-
companies-after-vic-fracking-ban/ (Accessed 22nd August 2017)
Swayne, N., (2012), Regulating coal seam gas in Queensland: lessons in an adaptive
environmental management approach? Environmental and Planning Law Journal vol. 29
no.2, pp. 163–183.
Theodori, G.L. (2009), Paradoxical perceptions of problems associated with unconventional
natural gas development, Southern Rural Sociology, vol. 24, no.3,pp, 97-117
Williams,J., Milligan,A., & Stubbs,T., (2013), Coal Seam Gas Production : Challenges and
Opportunities, Available at

http://wentworthgroup.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/BREE_Coal-seam-gas-
production_WILLIAMS-etal-.pdf (Accessed 22nd August 2017)
Willow,A.J., & Wylie,S., (2014), Politics, ecology, and the new anthropology of energy:
exploring the emerging frontiers of hydraulic fracking, Journal of Political Ecology, vol.21,
pp. 222-236, available at http://jpe.library.arizona.edu/volume_21/WillowandWylie.pdf
(Accessed 22nd August 2017)