Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence (Adams 1770). Some people unfamiliar with upstream petroleum operations, some enterprises keen to sustain uncontested land use, and some people against the use of fossil fuels have and will voice opposition to land access for oil and gas exploration and production. Social and economic concerns have also arisen with Australian domestic gas prices tending towards parity with netbacks from liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports. No doubt, natural gas, LNG and crude-oil prices will vary with local-to-international supply-side and demand-side competition. Hence, well run Australian oil and gas producers deploy stress-tested exploration, delineation and development budgets. With these challenges in mind, successive governments in South Australia have implemented leading-practice legislation, regulation, policies and programs to simultaneously gain and sustain trust with the public and investors with regard to land access for trustworthy oil and gas operations. South Australia’s most recent initiatives to foster reserve growth through welcomed investment in responsible oil and gas operations include the following: a Roundtable for Oil and Gas; evergreen answers to frequently asked questions, grouped retention licences that accelerate investment in the best of play trends; the Plan for ACcelerating Exploration (PACE) Gas Program; and the Oil and Gas Royalty Return Program. Intended and actual outcomes from these initiatives are addressed in this extended abstract.
Trade-offs and Implications of Two-stage Versus One-stage Unconventional Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Investment Strategies: A Case Study of the Barnett Play
