History, Geology, In Situ Stress Pattern, Gas Content and Permeability of Coal Seam Gas Basins in Australia: A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coal seam gas (CSG), also known as coalbed methane (CBM), is an important source of gas supply to the liquefied natural gas (LNG) exporting facilities in eastern Australia and to the Australian domestic market. In late 2018, Australia became the largest exporter of LNG in the world. 29% of the country’s LNG nameplate capacity is in three east coast facilities that are supplied primarily by coal seam gas. Six geological basins including Bowen, Sydney, Gunnedah, Surat, Cooper and Gloucester host the majority of CSG resources in Australia. The Bowen and Surat basins contain an estimated 40Tcf of CSG whereas other basins contain relatively minor accumulations. In the Cooper Basin of South Australia, thick and laterally extensive Permian deep coal seams (>2 km) are currently underdeveloped resources. Since 2013, gas production exclusively from deep coal seams has been tested as a single add-on fracture stimulation in vertical well completions across the Cooper Basin. The rates and reserves achieved since 2013 demonstrate a robust statistical distribution (>130 hydraulic fracture stages), the mean of which, is economically viable. The geological characteristics including coal rank, thickness and hydrogeology as well as the present-day stress pattern create favourable conditions for CSG production. Detailed analyses of high-resolution borehole image log data reveal that there are major perturbations in maximum horizontal stress (SHmax) orientation, both spatially and with depth in Australian CSG basins, which is critical in hydraulic fracture stimulation and geomechanical modelling. Within a basin, significant variability in gas content and permeability may be observed with depth. The major reasons for such variabilities are coal rank, sealing capacity of overlying formations, measurement methods, thermal effects of magmatic intrusions, geological structures and stress regime. Field studies in Australia show permeability may enhance throughout depletion in CSG fields and the functional form of permeability versus reservoir pressure is exponential, consistent with observations in North American CSG fields.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".