Coal seam gas (CSG) company Santos has denied an aquifer in northwest of the state of New South Wales has been contaminated by water leaking from a storage pond.
Instead, the company says it’s bailing out contaminated water from what it calls a ‘shallow water table’.
The NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) has fined Santos $1500 for the pollution incident, which has been caused by leaks from Pond Three at the Bibblewindi Water Treatment Plant in the Pilliga.
It stems from routine groundwater sampling by Santos a year ago that revealed elevated levels of naturally occurring elements including arsenic, lead, and uranium.
The company said all concentration levels were below the Australian water quality guidelines for fresh water ecosystems (ANZECC), but admit some are above the recommendations for drinking water.
It said it has previously been ‘very clear that the facilities at Bibblewindi constructed by the previous owner, Eastern Star Gas, did not meet company standards’.
Santos hydro-geologist Glenn Toogood maintains that an aquifer is not affected, instead calling the groundwater 20 metres below the leaky pond a ‘shallow perched layer’.
“An aquifer in this particular area is something that could sustain a domestic or an irrigation use,” said Mr Toogood.
“If you tried to take water out of this shallow perch layer it would dry up very quickly.”
Mr Toogood acknowledged that the NSW environmental regulator did refer to the contaminated water source as an aquifer.
“We’ve had long consultations with the EPA over this. It’s a terminology that the EPA has decided to use.
“The NSW aquifer interference policy has clear guidance on what an aquifer is.”
In a written statement provided to ABC News, the EPA said Santos had been required by the EPA to develop and implement a groundwater remediation and monitoring plan.
“This will form part of a legally binding pollution reduction program that will be attached to their Environment Protection Licence and will provide a far more effective means of achieving a positive environmental outcome than a fine alone.”
Mr Toogood said until a new facility to hold the water is constructed, the polluted water was being transferred back into the leaking pond.
“The water is recirculated back into the pond itself, and that’s where we’re currently disposing that water to.
“It’s very small volumes of water, we’re likely to be getting five to10 litres every couple of days out of that well.
“Currently that’s our best strategy to maintain that water, is to relocate it back in the pond.”
ABC News reports Monash University senior lecturer in environmental engineering, Dr Gavin Mudd, said putting the polluted water back into the leaking pond was a bandaid solution.
“You’ve got to also look at that in context. What’s the option? Letting it go down a stream, letting it contaminate the aquifer worse?
“
At the moment, if they’re containing it til they can get better systems in place, better infrastructure, so they can properly clean it up, then sure, that might be ok in the very, very short term, but I do stress short term. It is not a long term solution.”
Dr Mudd said the $1500 fine imposed on Santos by the EPA did little to encourage companies to do the right thing.
“I think the fines need to be larger in order to make sure that industry has incentive to do the right thing, because historically we’re dealing with a situation where that wasn’t the case.
“I’ll give Santos credit here; they are actually spending a lot of money to re-engineer the whole site up there, but historically that wasn’t the case,” he added.
One Response