Kim de Rijke

Hydraulically fractured: Unconventional gas and anthropology (Respond to this article at http://www.therai.org.uk/at/debate)

The predicted increase in unconventional gas production is set to change global energy and concomitant geopolitical relations. The scale and required infrastructure of unconventional gas extraction result in profound changes in the landscape where extraction and processing take place. Widespread public concerns about the impacts of this industry have emerged, particularly with regard to fracking, surface and subterranean water contamination, air pollution and a host of other environmental issues, as well as social impacts and health risks. This article sets out some of the emerging anthropological engagements with unconventional gas and fracking, including analyses of materiality, politics, discourses, rights, risk and knowledge.

The Great Artesian Basin: a contested resource environment of subterranean water and coal seam gas in Australia

ABSTRACT The Great Artesian Basin (GAB) in Australia is one of the largest subterranean aquifer systems in the world. In this article we venture into the subterranean “resource environment”’ of the Great Artesian Basin and ask whether new insights can be provided by social analyses of the “vertical third dimension” in contemporary contests over water and coal seam gas. Our analysis makes use of a large number of publicly available submissions made to recent state and federal government inquiries, augmented with data obtained through ethnographic fieldwork among landholders in the coal seam gas fields of southern Queensland. We examine the contemporary contest in terms of ontological politics, and regard the underground as a challenging “socionature hybrid” in which the material characteristics, uses, and affordances of water and coal seam gas resources in the Great Artesian Basin are entangled with broader social histories, technologies, knowledge debates, and discursive contests.

The CSG arena: a critical review of unconventional gas developments and best-practice health impact assessment in Queensland, Australia

Abstract This paper compares a government-commissioned health study of coal seam gas (CSG) developments in Queensland with international best-practice health impact assessment (HIA) methodologies. A literature review was conducted of (HIA) methods and health studies of CSG development areas in Queensland. Forty-eight interviews were conducted in the Darling Downs CSG region in Queensland. One Queensland Health report was identified but failed to meet HIA international best practice because 7 of 9 key steps were omitted. Interview participants reported poor consultation by government and industry within affected communities. Lack of and poor quality health data was found to exacerbate community tensions. We recommend application of HIAs, epidemiological studies, consultation with communities and consideration of social risks of poor quality health studies.