Coal seam gas, a new theatre for nanny state oppositionists

I have a piece in today’s Sydney Morning Herald showing how an alliance of self interested parties and the usual green anti-growth crowd are throttling coal seam gas developments especially in NSW.  CSG involves relatively new technology and offers considerable potential income levels. 

We have put so many barriers in place of new venters  in the primary production area that paralysis seems to be the normal order.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

802 Responses to Coal seam gas, a new theatre for nanny state oppositionists

  1. Winston Smith

    Bullshit Rob.
    You’re a sociopath and every time you make a statement on this site and others, you add more proof.

  2. JC

    Rob

    You’re just a scum bag, that’s all and like most Greenslime leftwingers a complete lowlife, so it doesn’t surprise. Neither does your voodoo attempt to wish death upon me.

    It’s genetic with the left coming from long lines of scumbags and remorseless dickheads.

    Who cares here about my comments as everyone knows about me and who i am.

    One other thing, a large number of the regulars go drinking and lunching together having known each other for years and what we’ve said both here and other blogs. You’re not adding anything new. So fuck off you clown and go intimidate and scare some poor widow that’s dealing with the miners. That’s all you’re good for.

  3. twostix

    i believe the information to be accurate, i have no intent to cause seriouse harm.

    Sure thing.

    That comment doesn’t CYA – just so you know.

  4. Rob in MArgs

    good to hear that it has all been said before, then you should be under no illusions. enjoy your new years people. needless to say, you really do deserve each other.

  5. JC

    “i have no intent to cause seriouse harm.”

    Yes you do, you lying piece of shit. If you didn’t want to cause harm you would not have published an email address you thought was mine.

    You had every intention of causing harm, you lying sack of shit.

    Man up, Rob, you frightened little beta and be honest abut it at the very least.

  6. JC

    you’re right he is a sociopath. He publishes someone’s email address and tell people here we deserve each other as though he’s in the right.

    Do people now see what this leftwing Greenslime is capable of and why it needs to be crushed?

    These people are not normal. They all have serious mental problems. Every single one of them.

  7. Entropy

    I looked up the info on the incident that I recalled. It wasn’t the bore casing, that was misreporting by activists. Unfortunately it does tend to dominate the press, who for some reason lap it up as fact.

    What happened was at a place called myrtle 3. The gas yield from the test well was poor, so they tried Fraccing. Unfortunately there was connectivity between the seam and the springbok aquifer, and some of the Fraccing fluid was detected in the aquifer. This test well was shut down, and the amount of Fraccing fluid in the aquifer was not enough to cause serious contamination (detection occurs at very tiny levels).

    This was covered in some detail by the ABC, which provided a stack of quite clearly partisan questions to the company (QGC). They replied in writing and it is all on the ABC website.

  8. Winston Smith

    Of course he thinks he’s in the right, JC.
    They are convinced they are the smartest person in the room, so therefore if you disagree with them, you must be wrong. Or Eeeevil.
    They have to dehumanise you so they can ignore their own inhumanity.
    That’s how Julia can ignore 700+ drowned refugees, thousands of freezing pensioners, and people having to spend money on power, rather than food.
    It’s because we are Eeeevil, and deserve everything we get. And they will do anything to not see themselves in the mirror.

  9. Winston Smith

    The other point here is the Discovery process when you sue someone.
    Amazing just how much dirt floats to the top in that process.
    And the internet never forgets, mate – something the Left continue to rediscover to their cost.
    Eh, Rob?
    Do you want to go down that road?
    If you post here again, we will.
    Promise.

  10. Alan moran

    Rob, who I guess is the Rob mcd emailing me, seems to have an affinity for conspiracies and having trawled the web mistakenly says I am in favor of greater MDB environment flows. I am not! The MDB system is a working river and better for man and probably fish and trees than pre-white settlement. City types spooked by Green activists are trying to seize the irrigators’ water, an act that would be highly detrimental to Australian incomes.

    Entropy makes plausible points about the cost of gas being no cheaper in Australia once the international links are formed. My own view is that the export and local sale price will be cost reflective and the processing and ocean transport will always mean the delivered gas is cheaper especially inAustralian locations close to the gas .

    It is however an empirical question. We should not be perturbed whatever the outcome since we want the best price for our products. We should not use fears about export sales to panic us into reservation policies and therefore suboptimal development

  11. Cocky

    I note with much interest all the “Farmers are being conned by Lock The Gate and the greens” comments. So about you all here from a farmer…that’s me.

    I live in an area of Queensland that is in the sights of the energy companies and I support Lock The Gate and their efforts. Sure there might be some odd fringe groups associated with them, but let’s have a look at some of the groups associated with the Coalition (Christian Lobby, The Brotherhood) or Labor (Fabians, Unions) and there is nothing unusual.

    I have had mates tell me about their dealings in other areas and the results of wells on their land. We seem to have moved from “precautionary principal” to “adaptive remediation” and that isn’t good enough for me.

    My gate is locked until it can be clearly demonstrated that my agricultural lands won’t be compromised.

  12. Winston Smith

    Alan, is there a clue you can legally and morally give us to follow if Rob comes back?
    Sinclair has my email.

  13. Tom

    I’ve been reading through a number of the more colourful comments in relation to Alan’s article, and I tend to hear out arguments on whatever issue if they’re well-reasoned and based on more than emotional perception. I recently read this excerpt on an anti-CSG website:

    “CSG production involves multiple wells, spaced fairly close together, connected by big aboveground pipelines leading to large, noisy compressor stations which vent hydrocarbons into the air. Many hydrocarbons cause cancer. The entire scene is then brightly lit up 24 hours a day without relief.”

    My personal opinion is that this is alarmist. Using words such as “big”, “noisy” & “cancer” would likely scare anyone. I am no expert in conventional or unconventional gas extraction but I wanted to provide my own personal opinion in rebuttal on the statement above. I should point out that I have no association with the gas industry, CSG or otherwise (given the paid lobbyist comments accusations that are banded around that needed to be said in advance).

    “Noisy compressor stations which vent hydrocarbons into the air. Many hydrocarbons cause cancer”. What do they define as excessive noise? I can’t recall what the Australian Standards allow but acceptable noise levels would have a dependence on the number of personnel in the vicinity of the noise source and number of hours they are exposed to the noise source. Compressor noise level would be heavily impacted by the flow it “sees” at the gas well. I could on about this point but I won’t.

    I disagree that the compressor would be venting hydrocarbons (or gas) deliberately. If there was some venting of gas from the compressor then this would cause a reduction in the ability of the compressor to compress the gas, which kind of defeats the purpose of the compressor. I am somewhat doubtful that a company would allow gas to vent from a compressor station because it is an ignition source putting equipment and personnel in the vicinity in danger.

    Is the gas cancerous? I don’t believe methane (main component of the gas) is a carcinogen but others may say otherwise. Again, from a safety point of view, companies would not (and should not) be allowing the venting of any gas likely to harm personnel. Imagine the ramifications on the company if someone is killed (not to mention the person but that goes without saying).

    Anyway, that is my 2 cents for good or worse.

  14. Winston Smith

    Cocky and Tom, we’ve had a lot of ‘false flag’ operators dive in here on this and other topics, so you’ll understand if we are dubious about any new contributors…whatever the merits of your argument.
    But don’t let that stop you from posting, we love to hear from opposing views, or supporting.
    Once you get used to the site, it’s actually quite informative.

  15. Tom

    Like I said Winston, that is my 2 cents for good or worse.

  16. entropy

    Tom, while the bore is being constructed, I am told it is pretty noisy and a 24 hour process that is lit upso the drillers can see what they are doing. This doesn’t take a long time though. I have been right up to wells, and I wouldn’t call them noisy. Most had a little pump (often running off the gas). it would have been the noise of a car running at idle, as in fact the pump was an old 202 motor. But that was in the real early days when I went and checked out the situation for myself. I would expect things are a lot more sophisticated, with purpose built pumps that would be even quieter.

    Established wells look like a typical bore with a pump on top. No lights. The main difference in appearance to a stock and domestic pump would be the cleared land around it and obviously higher standards of maintenance.

    Yes, like a car, there will be hydrocarbons burnt by the motor. leaks are few and far between, but minor. and the leak would be methane. methane is lighter than air and rises. I wouldn’t be surprised if you could be right beside a leaking well and because you are outside, inhale less methane than would the average dairy farmer in his shed twice a day (from cows burping). In any case I have never heard that methane is carcinogenic, but no doubt if you tried to breathe a pure atmosphere of it you wouldn’t last long.

    It IS combustible at concentrations over 5%, but that would have to be one impressive leak. Like a truck driving over the top and ripping it out.

  17. Tom

    Entropy, I have no doubt it can get quite noisy when the gas well is being drilled due to all the heavy machinery. The excerpt from the anti-CSG website is based on a completed well with a compressor station transferring the gas through a pipeline. The noise levels allowed in a gas plant may not be necessarily comparable to that allowed in a rural “residential” area which is why I stated that acceptable noise levels would depend on personnel in the area, proximity to noise source and frequency of exposure. But all they state is that it is “noisy”, well, technically, their washing machine can be classed as noisy also. I take serious issue with the claim of emitting cancerous HC’s because apart from it being untrue, it claims that it is intentional, and that the companies have no moral obligation. People who would be designing this equipment do not want gas being released to atmosphere, they don’t want anyone harmed and they want to minimise the impact on the environment (believe it or not). Statements as shown in that website make it out that the people working in these industries don’t care and have no moral obligations. Maybe it’s so their opponents can try and claim the moral highground in their arguments, because that’s easier for people to oppose people like that.

  18. Tom

    I’ve referenced the website I took that statement from just in case people think I made it up.

    ttp://lelal.com/no2csg/

  19. Entropy

    Oh, OK, I thought you were talking about wells. Yes, the transfer/compressor stations would be a fair bit noisier, and would be lit up all the time for security. I think there are rules about distances from residences, and I have seen berms constructed to hide them, but all the same if you lived a km down the road I am sure you would be aware of it, much like a shopping centre in the city. However, the local farmer probably wasn’t expecting to end up with something like that down the road one day. So you can guess why they would be unhappy. It would even be worse if it was not on their property in a way, as they would not have access to compensation via a land access agreement.

    I visited a CSG powered power station a few years back. Five ginormous turbines pumping out 125mwt. Total cost and footprint a fraction of a wind turbine fleet, and actually delivers the rated power. Quite impressive. But the point is while it was certainly noisy, you could talk 100m away. I would not want it too close to my house though.

    I certainly take your point about the rhetoric though. There is a good example in yesterday’s The Australian about red spot infections in Port Curtis. The basic model is take whatever the activist/protestor says about a controversial subject as gospel, they seem to be able to say anything they like and are not questioned; not bother with evidence to the contrary (a fairfax habit); or downplay or play up any risk level; or outright skepticism of the alternate view. I guess to be kind the activist probably make themselves a lot more available to the journalists, who lets face it, a most interested in controversy to sell papers, and love sticking it to the man, having never gotten over the glory days running their student newspaper.

    In the recent OZ article the views of the local fish wholesaler who reckoned dredging was the cause of red spot disease was accepted as the key fact. The views of BioSecurityQ, DERM and Fisheries were not clearly stated, and in any case treated with suspicion of a coverup. As you read on in the article you discover that the fish wholesaler’s troubles started well before the red spot turned up, as local fisherman moved elsewhere because of the increased LNG related traffic on the Harbour. he was grumpy that the government had not offered ‘compensation’.

    The evidence currently points to red spot (a fungus) being the result of the floods earlier this year, and is certainly not unique to Port Curtis. As far away as NSW there were temporary closures of estuaries for fishing due to red spot and a host of other problems caused by flooding I suspect that the dredging certainly can’t help though, and it’s a good thing that dredging is only temporary.

  20. Entropy

    bTW most wells don’t have a transfer/ compressor station. Pipes from wells all concentrate at the station for the GSG to go into a bigger pipe.

  21. Apache

    “In the case of mining, vesting mineral ownership in the landowner leads to suboptimal effort – the landowner would be a passive beneficiary of any new found wealth that was uncovered. ”

    Wow. What a case of normalcy bias coming from Alan here! Its stunning to think that anyone could get matters so horribly wrong. Of course the best results lie in sound property titles. This is the essence of capitalism. And where is the issue of royalties in Alan’s analysis? We are not about to declare Australia an anarchy-capitalist territory anytime soon, so why the mean-spirited ignoring of royalties?

    Alan is wrong on this matter, obviously so, and its very surprising because he has a tendency to get things right.

  22. Apache

    “In the case of mining, vesting mineral ownership in the landowner leads to suboptimal effort – the landowner would be a passive beneficiary of any new found wealth that was uncovered. ”

    Wow? What a case of normalcy bias coming from Alan here! Its stunning to think that anyone could get matters so horribly wrong. Of course the best results lie in sound property titles. This is the essence of capitalism. And where is the issue of royalties in Alan’s analysis? We are not about to declare Australia an anarcho-capitalist territory anytime soon, so why the mean-spirited ignoring of royalties? Its royalties, and exemption from all other imposts, that can most effectively diminish excessive passive enrichment. Basic economics.

    Alan is wrong on this matter, obviously so, and its very surprising , given who it is, that has blundered so completely.

  23. Entropy

    I am have trouble understanding you point Apache. Unless you are Bird.

  24. Apache

    “Entropy, I have no doubt it can get quite noisy when the gas well is being drilled due to all the heavy machinery. The excerpt from the anti-CSG website is based on a completed well with a compressor station transferring the gas through a pipeline. The noise levels allowed in a gas plant …..”

    Obviously if the farmer has control, it will be in his interests to not have to contend with noise problems. So the tendency will be to make his partners invest in sound insulation.

    But if the farmer isn’t in control, other people can cause these problems and not really give a damn. This is a simple matter of failure to adhere to sound property rights principles. Where is the ad hoc argument against property rights? You won’t see it on this thread. We are tripping over communists, everywhere we go. When will these communists get off our backs? Think logically and not tribally.

  25. Apache

    I am trouble in understanding your argument Entropy, since you don’t have one. What is your argument against sound property titles? Where is it? Its not there. Because you don’t have one.

  26. JC

    Apache

    Vesting ownership below the top soil to the land holder assumes royalties goes to the landholder as well. I think you’re missing a step here, Comanche.

  27. Apache

    If someone has a killer argument against clarity in property titles, then surely you can apply this killer argument to other areas? Surely you would have a logical principle here that could be enunciated, explained, and applied elsewhere. But you don’t have that argument. You just accept the status quo, which is a complete mess.

    Communists everywhere. Communists defined as people who hate property rights. But how do we explain this hatred? The normal communists had certain ideals about equality. But the crony-communists appear to be shameless brown-noses of the more useless manifestations of the big end of town.

  28. Apache

    No. Don’t be an idiot JC. I’m not missing anything. Get your act together you imbecile.

    Its a simple matter of having total control in favour of the landowner, and diminishing the unjust gains through royalties. You have to be such an economic incompetent and general moron not to be able to understand that.

  29. JC

    Bird

    Get back in your cage. You should not be here and you know that.

    Go away.

  30. Apache

    If you have a government you have to pay for it. Does anyone not understand that? Who here is an anarcho-capitalist (1) and thinks that we are on the verge of achieving anarcho-capitalism (2).

    No-one. So why the gutless, and mean-spirited discrimination against royalties? Here someone doesn’t want to be enriching the farmers, and at the same time they are ruling out royalties, or act as though they are. So its just the same pro-crony anti-economics slime ball behaviour we see creeping into all things. There is no logic to it, so its simply tribal stupidity at play.

  31. Apache

    What an imbecile. What a moron. Can anyone tell me what is wrong with royalties? Someone other than this imbecile JC? The farmer did not homestead what was underneath the land, therefore obviously royalties are quite appropriate.

    Or am I going too fast for the mentally incompetent here?

  32. Apache

    You have economic rent, and you just simply, get rid of all other taxes in the industry, and match the royalties against the economic rent, as best you can. Its just economics people. That is all it is. But it appears that you cannot apply basic economics, being too morally bankrupt and then there is the problem if low IQ.

    Economics is an authentic science. Its just a matter of applying it.

  33. JC

    Bird

    So what if a farmer wasn’t the first owner, you dickhead.

    Go away and stop wrecking this thread.

  34. JC

    The concept of rent has been refuted for 100′s of years, you mental midget.

    As I said, go away and spend more time with your oiled up trannie.

  35. Apache

    No that is idiocy. Clearly there is economic rent in this situation, or imbeciles like yourself wouldn’t be so worried and concerned that farmers might make a lot of easy money. Don’t try it mate. You are just too mentally retarded. Accept your limitations you drooling retard.

  36. Apache

    “Bird

    So what if a farmer wasn’t the first owner”

    Good Lord what an idiot!!!!! Holy crap. Don’t comment. You are just too dumb. What is going to happen if the farmer isn’t the first owner. Nothing you dead-head. Why are you so moronic. Go away.

  37. Apache

    Of course he shouldn’t respond. He’s a moron. So of course he shouldn’t respond. And neither should you. Until you find an argument against sound property titles, admit that I”m right or go away.

  38. Apache

    Imagine this idiot thinking that economic rent had been refuted as a concept? What a tool? Why would he say something as stupid as this? If you had total control of a property, where there was an old-fashioned gusher of an oil struck found, and the price of oil was 200 dollars per barrel, now supposing this property was real close to a shipping wharf……. Oh but you haven’t struck it lucky. Because the absolute total mentally retarded JC thinks that economic rent has been refuted.

    How doesn’t anyone get this stupid?

  39. Apache

    Hey I know what. I’ll get on the phone to Hernando De Soto, and point out to him that his decades-long work, showing the importance of clarity in property rights is all wrong. Thanks to a few mentally-retarded folks at Catallaxy, he need not continue to promote these concepts.

    We might also nominate the dope JC for the nobel prize thanks to his releasing us from the dogma of economic rent. Great to get that piano off our backs right?

    This is not a difficult matter. Its simply about applying stuff that is already known, in defiance of the bankers, and cronyists, who are profiting from the current setup, at great economic cost to us all.

  40. JC

    Bird,

    Please go away. Economic rent is a fallacious theory. It’s so absurd that suggests the most marginal mine would determine the profitability of the more profitable ones until a new less or more marginal mine is found.

    It’s stupid. It’s commie thinking so no wonder you’d fall for it.

    Now fuck off and stop abusing people, you clown.

  41. Winston Smith

    Yep. It’s Bird again, anyone going to take bets on when the first meltdown will be?

  42. Tom

    Entropy, I should have clarified that it would not be at each gas well otherwise it would be quite an expensive endeavour (but the statement from the website seems to make that point). I do not know what the size of each compressor station is and if they are gas turbine driven (logical) or diesel driven (illogical). This would also dictate the amount of noise generated but compared to gas-fired power plants, the compressors and drivers would pale in comparison. I agree they are impressive.

    I also do not know if the compressor stations have any sound insulation which could be a wall or barrier, enclosure (doubtful) or blanket (also doubtful). Contrary to comments by Apache disguised as Black Nobility, the stations may very well have some type of acoustic installation but I am not sure and from Apache’s comments, he/she certainly does not know.

    As per my previous comments, I take issue with the alarm being presented making out as if the people working for the gas companies simply don’t care about people or the environment, which I find very hard to believe.

    I also read about dredging of the Gladstone harbour and potential link with the “fish disease” but the link appears tenuous at best. The authorities (can’t recall the Department) have only tested 3 fish so far and claim it is not from dredging but testing is ongoing on a larger sample to find out the cause. From other numerous articles I have read surrounding the construction of the LNG plants in Gladstone, it appears that LNG is a very easy target for anything that goes wrong. It is an easy target.

  43. Entropy

    Well, yes, it is. Part of that is change, but also it is frigging huge,absolutely everywhere. And the risks are real, but I believe manageable.

    And think about it from joe blow farmer’s perspective. There he is, king of all he surveys, or so he thought. But this mob of careless contractors get to drive all over his place, leaving gates open and cutting fences. At least they can’t do that without an access agreement anymore. But even with the new laws it is a ‘violation’ just the same, as he can’t prevent them coming on altogether. If he just keeps saying no eventually the land court will force access. It just forces home that they do not have as much rights on the land as they thought. And after a decade of the introduction of a whole heap of land management laws that increasingly restrict their activities to the extent they never know when some greenie feral is going to get them summonsed for what they know not.

    So while I have a fair bit of sympathy, I can see the other side too. How dare they demand that their rights are more important than others? How dare they prevent access to the royalities that will build the schools, hospitals and roads of the future? Let alone the improvement in the standard of living for all.

    And don’t get me started on that most glorious of all forms of bullshit, the ‘precautionary principle’.

  44. Apache

    No JC. Stop being an idiot. You don’t know anything about economic rent, and besides that you are a mental midget.

    Now does anyone have an argument against clarity in property rights? Against royalties being the least cost tax in this scenario? Obviously not.

  45. Apache

    Tom? What is this? Stupid club? I didn’t make any claims about sound proofing.

    “So while I have a fair bit of sympathy, I can see the other side too. How”

    No there is no other side Entropy. Yet again its just you being a moron. No-one says that the farmers will prevent royalties being gained, if they are charged royalties. This is just you being an idiot.

    If the farmers are charged royalties, obviously they will pay the royalties. How can you people be so stupid?

  46. Apache

    So here you have your oil-well, on your farm, somewhat close to a shipping container, and Entropy is arguing, that if there is clarity in property rights, every farmer in that position will forego exploiting all the resources…..?

    If you don’t have the mental ability to understand economics, listen, or ask intelligent questions. The mining companies also have the RIGHT not to mine. But this doesn’t mean they will always exercise their RIGHT not to mine, anymore than a farmer would.

  47. Tom

    Entropy, LNG plants are large but it’s not a new technology or unknown technology so it can be managed safely with minimal impact to the environment. Compare the situation to Chevron and the construction of a 2-4 train LNG plant on a Class A nature reserve (Barrow Island).

    From the farmer’s perspective the company would have to handle things very delicately. I have no idea if it was done properly at the beginning but I can only imagine they have had to learn very quickly to do it right. I have no idea how it’s done but I hope the farmer is fully informed of what is about to happen, potential impact on them & their property and fairly compensated especially if things don’t go right. After all, you are operating in a community but I’m sure the companies are aware of their social responsibilities. It’s taking but also giving back (well I hope anyway).

  48. Apache

    So the Entropy argument is what? That farmers, having the right to forego earning millions of dollars via mineral and energy resources, will forego that opportunity, on the basis of …… oh on the basis of Entropy’s stupidity. Yes thats right. We cannot have economic reform, simply because everyone is so dumb.

    The failure to charge high enough royalties brings in massive banker dead-weight loss. Since it makes the capital value of projects very high. And of course the company taxes, and lease fees, auctions etc, there is incredible dead-weight loss and big shot favouritism will all of this. The only tax for this situation that doesn’t have massive dead-weight loss are royalties, so they ought to be the only tax. Not complicated.

    The answer is simply to apply normal concepts of property rights and economics. But we have armies of idiots on the net running endless campaigns against reason in policy.

    But no-one is quite as moronic as JC. Who this time has decided that there is no such thing as economic rent. He’s just a moron. But not being very bright, the rest of you, you don’t seem to pick this up.

  49. Apache

    I’d want one of you other geniuses to back JC up on this brain fart to do with economic rent. Like this total moron is capable of having an informed opinion on questions of economic doctrine. Yeah you wish dummy.

  50. Tom

    Oops, I put in my details incorrectly (excuse the repeat that will appear soon).

    Entropy, LNG plants are large but it’s not a new technology or unknown technology so it can be managed safely with minimal impact to the environment. Compare the situation to Chevron and the construction of a 2-4 train LNG plant on a Class A nature reserve (Barrow Island).

    From the farmer’s perspective the company would have to handle things very delicately. I have no idea if it was done properly at the beginning but I can only imagine they have had to learn very quickly to do it right. I have no idea how it’s done but I hope the farmer is fully informed of what is about to happen, potential impact on them & their property and fairly compensated especially if things don’t go right. After all, you are operating in a community but I’m sure the companies are aware of their social responsibilities. It’s taking but also giving back (well I hope anyway).

  51. Kelly Fraser-Parle

    You are a clown Mr Moran. I know that many of the groups opposing this industry are only interested in saving thier own backyard (NIMBY) and that that is their achilles heal. However the way you characterize the benefits and potential costs of this industry leads me to believe that you are by no means an independent commentator and in light of this I must assume that you are nothing but a partisan hack (I would say spin doctor except a degree of talent is required). This industry has only been allowed to reach the stage of developement that it has due to lies by the companies to their shareholders, lies by the government to their constituents and the general ‘not give a shit about the environment’ attitude that occupies mainstream australian thought. Also throw in a touch of fear and greed. People living in rural Australia (that includes me, Chinchilla area) in the year 2075 will not be at all consoled by the fact that everyone got paid back when this industry was happening. THey will only be concerned that there are no more choices. And the cost of purifiying water is prohibitive. Life Jim, but not as we know it.

Comments are closed.