Reports of bitumen stranding on the ocean beaches of southern Australia date back to the early days of European settlement. Previous investigations have shown that this ‘coastal bitumen’ comprises three categories of stranded petroleum: waxy bitumen, asphaltite and oil slicks. All three varieties are physically and chemically distinct from each other, and bear no geochemical resemblance to any indigenous Australian crude oil. This study focuses on the most common variety, waxy bitumen, which accounted for 90% of the strandings on six South Australian beaches repeatedly surveyed during 1991–1992. Geochemical analysis of 96 individual specimens collected from these survey sites and other beaches in South Australia and western Victoria has shown them to be variously weathered high-wax crude oils of paraffinic to aromatic-intermediate bulk composition. Elemental, isotopic and biomarker differences allow their assignment to at least five oil families with inferred source facies that range from deep freshwater lacustrine through paludal and deltaic to euxinic marine, possibly deposited within different sedimentary basins. Family 1, 2 and 3 waxy bitumens all contain biomarkers derived from the freshwater alga Botryococcus sp. and tropical angiosperms (notably dipterocarps). Similar biomarker assemblages are unknown in Australian sedimentary basins but are common in Cenozoic crude oils and source rocks throughout western Indonesia. Family 4 waxy bitumens lack these biomarkers, but do contain dinosterane and 24-n-propylcholestane, indicative of a marine source affinity, while the carbon isotopic signatures and high pristane/phytane (Pr/Ph) ratios of Family 5 waxy bitumens are consistent with their origin from coal-rich source rocks deposited in fluvial to deltaic sedimentary successions. The majority of these waxy bitumens represent an oceanic influx of non-indigenous, Southeast Asian crude oils carried into the waters of southern Australia by the Leeuwin Current. Although they are likely to originate from natural seepage within the Indonesian Archipelago, it is unknown whether the parent oils emanate from submarine seeps or from inland seepages which are then carried to the sea by rivers. The common practice of tanker cleaning operations in the Java and Banda seas may augment the supply of natural bitumen to the beaches of Australia.

This report, completed as part of Geoscience Australia’s Exploring for the Future Program National Groundwater Systems (NGS) Project, presents results of the second iteration of 3D geological and hydrogeological surfaces across eastern Australian basins. The NGS project is part of the Exploring for the Future (EFTF) program—an eight-year, $225 million Australian Government funded geoscience data and precompetitive information acquisition program. The program seeks to inform decision-making by government, community, and industry on the sustainable development of Australia's mineral, energy, and groundwater resources, including those to support the effective long-term management of GAB water resources. This work builds on the first iteration completed as part of the Great Artesian Basin Groundwater project. The datasets incorporate infills of data and knowledge gaps in the Great Artesian Basin (GAB), Lake Eyre Basin (LEB), Upper Darling Floodplain (UDF) and existing data in additional basins in eastern Australia. The study area extends from the offshore Gulf of Carpentaria in the north to the offshore Bight, Otway, and Gippsland basins in the South and from the western edge of the GAB in the west to the eastern Australian coastline to the east. The revisions are an update to the surface extents and thicknesses for 18 region-wide hydrogeological units produced by Vizy & Rollet, 2022. The second iteration of the 3D model surfaces further unifies geology across borders and provides the basis for a consistent hydrogeological framework at a basin-wide, and towards a national-wide, scale. The stratigraphic nomenclature used follows geological unit subdivisions applied: (1) in the Surat Cumulative Management Area (OGIA - Office of Groundwater Impact Assessment, 2019) to correlate time equivalent regional hydrogeological units in the GAB and other Jurassic and Cretaceous time equivalent basins in the study area and (2) in the LEB to correlate Cenozoic time equivalents in the study area. Triassic to Permian and older basins distribution and thicknesses are provided without any geological and hydrogeological unit sub-division. Such work helps to (1) reconcile legacy and contemporary regional studies under a common stratigraphic framework, (2) support the effective management of groundwater resources, and (3) provide a regional geological context for integrated resource assessments. The 18 hydrogeological units were constructed using legacy borehole data, 2D seismic and airborne electromagnetic (AEM) data that were compiled for the first iteration of the geological and hydrogeological surfaces under the GAB groundwater project (Vizy & Rollet, 2022a) with the addition of: • New data collected and QC’d from boreholes (including petroleum, CSG [Coal Seam Gas], stratigraphic, mineral and water boreholes) across Australia (Vizy & Rollet, 2023a) since the first iteration, including revised stratigraphic correlations filling data and knowledge gaps in the GAB, LEB, UDF region (Norton & Rollet, 2023) with revised palynological constraints (Hannaford & Rollet 2023), • Additional AEM interpretation since the first iteration in the GAB, particularly in the northern Surat (McPherson et al., 2022b), as well as in the LEB (Evans et al., in prep), in the southern Eromanga Basin (Wong et al., 2023) and in the UDF region (McPherson et al., 2022c), and • Additional 2D seismic interpretation in the Gulf of Carpentaria (Vizy & Rollet, 2023b) and in the western and central Eromanga Basin (Szczepaniak et al., 2023). These datasets were then analysed and interpreted in a common 3D domain using a consistent chronostratigraphic framework tied to the geological timescale of 2020, as defined by Hannaford et al. (2022). Confidence maps were also produced to highlight areas that need further investigation due to data gaps, in areas where better seismic depth conversion or improved well formation picks are required. New interpretations from the second iteration of the 18 surfaces include (1) new consistent and regionally continuous surfaces of Cenozoic down to Permian and older sediments beyond the extent of the GAB across eastern Australia, (2) revised extents and thicknesses of Jurassic and Cretaceous units in the GAB, including those based on distributed thickness, (3) revised extents and thicknesses of Cenozoic LEB units constrained by the underlying GAB 3D model surfaces geometry. These data constraints were not used in the model surfaces generated for the LEB detailed inventory (Evans et al., 2023), and (4) refinements of surfaces due to additional seismic and AEM interpretation used to infill data and knowledge gaps. Significant revisions include: • The use of additional seismic data to better constrain the base of the Poolowanna-Evergreen formations and equivalents and the top of Cadna-owie Formation and equivalents in the western and central Eromanga Basin, and the extent and thicknesses of the GAB units and Cenozoic Karumba Basin in the Gulf of Carpentaria, • The use of AEM interpretations to refine the geometry of outcropping units in the northern Surat Basin and the basement surface underneath the UDF region, and • A continuous 3D geological surface of base Cenozoic sediments across eastern Australia including additional constraints for the Lake Eyre Basin (borehole stratigraphy review), Murray Basin (AEM interpretation) and Karumba Basin (seismic interpretation). These revisions to the 18 geological and hydrogeological surfaces will help improve our understanding on the 3D spatial distribution of aquifers and aquitards across eastern Australia, from the groundwater recharge areas to the deep confined aquifers. These data compilations and information brought to a common national standard help improve hydrogeological conceptualisation of groundwater systems across multiple jurisdictions to assist water managers to support responsible groundwater management and secure groundwater into the future. These 3D geological and hydrogeological modelled surfaces also provide a tool for consistent data integration from multiple datasets. These modelled surfaces bring together variable data quality and coverage from different databases across state and territory jurisdictions. Data integration at various scale is important to assess potential impact of different water users and climate change. The 3D modelled surfaces can be used as a consistent framework to map current groundwater knowledge at a national scale and help highlight critical groundwater areas for long-term monitoring of potential impacts on local communities and Groundwater Dependant Ecosystems. The distribution and confidence on data points used in the current iteration of the modelled surfaces highlight where data poor areas may need further data acquisition or additional interpretation to increase confidence in the aquifers and aquitards geometry. The second iteration of surfaces highlights where further improvements can be made, notably for areas in the offshore Gulf of Carpentaria with further seismic interpretation to better constrain the base of the Aptian marine incursion (to better constrain the shape and offshore extent of the main aquifers). Inclusion of more recent studies in the offshore southern and eastern margins of Australia will improve the resolution and confidence of the surfaces, up to the edge of the Australian continental shelf. Revision of the borehole stratigraphy will need to continue where more recent data and understanding exist to improve confidence in the aquifer and aquitard geometry and provide better constraints for AEM and seismic interpretation, such as in the onshore Carpentaria, Clarence-Moreton, Sydney, Murray-Darling basins. Similarly adding new seismic and AEM interpretation recently acquired and reprocessed, such as in the eastern Eromanga Basin over the Galilee Basin, would improve confidence in the surfaces in this area. Also, additional age constraints in formations that span large periods of time would help provide greater confidence to formation sub-divisions that are time equivalent to known geological units that correlate to major aquifers and aquitards in adjacent basins, such as within the Late Jurassic‒Early Cretaceous in the Eromanga and Carpentaria basins. Finally, incorporating major faults and structures would provide greater definition of the geological and hydrogeological surfaces to inform with greater confidence fluid flow pathways in the study area. This report is associated with a data package including (Appendix A – Supplementary material): • Nineteen geological and hydrogeological surfaces from the Base Permo-Carboniferous, Top Permian, Base Jurassic, Base Cenozoic to the surface (Table 1.1), • Twenty-one geological and hydrogeological unit thickness maps from the top crystalline basement to the surface (Figure 3.1 to Figure 3.21), • The formation picks and constraining data points (i.e., from boreholes, seismic, AEM and outcrops) compiled and used for gridding each surface (Table 2.7). Detailed explanation of methodology and processing is described in the associated report (Vizy & Rollet, 2023).