Publicly available groundwater data have been compiled to provide a common information base to inform environmental, resource development and regulatory decisions in the Galilee Basin region. This data guide gives examples of how these data can be used. The data package included with this data guide captures existing knowledge of Galilee Basin aquifers and their properties, including salinity, water levels, resource size, potential aquifer yield and surface water - groundwater interactions. The methods used to derive these data for all Galilee Basin aquifers in the Galilee Basin region are outlined in the associated metadata files. These are described in groundwater conceptual models (Hostetler et al., 2023). The Galilee Basin includes 3 broadly defined aquifer intervals: from deepest to shallowest, these are the Joe Joe Group, Betts Creek beds and Clematis aquifers. Compiled data have been assigned to these intervals and used to characterise groundwater systems at the basin scale. The data were compiled for a point-in-time to inform decisions on potential resource developments in the Basin. The available historical groundwater data can be used to assess the potential effects on groundwater. The data can also be used for other purposes, such as exploring unallocated groundwater resource potential. Data to January 2022 were used for this compilation.

Publicly available groundwater data have been compiled to provide a common information base to inform environmental, resource development and regulatory decisions in the Adavale Basin region. This data guide gives examples of how these data can be used. The data package included with this data guide captures existing knowledge of Eromanga Basin aquifers in the Adavale Basin region and their properties, including salinity, water levels, resource size, potential aquifer yield and surface water interactions. The methods used to derive these data for all Eromanga Basin aquifers in the Adavale Basin region are outlined in the associated metadata files. These are described in groundwater conceptual models (Gouramanis et al., 2023). The Eromanga Basin overlying the Adavale Basin includes 5 broadly defined aquifer intervals: from deepest to shallowest, these are the Poolowanna, Hutton, Adori, Cadna-owie–Hooray and Winton-Mackunda aquifers. Compiled data are assigned to these intervals and used to characterise groundwater systems at the basin scale. The data are compiled for a point-in-time to inform decisions on potential resource developments in the Basin. The available historical groundwater data can be used to assess the potential effects on groundwater. The data can also be used for other purposes, such as exploring unallocated groundwater resource potential. Data to January 2022 are used for this compilation.

Publicly available groundwater data have been compiled to provide a common information base to inform environmental, resource development and regulatory decisions in the Cooper Basin region. This data guide gives examples of how these data can be used. The data package included with this data guide captures existing knowledge of Eromanga Basin aquifers and their properties, including salinity, water levels, resource size, potential aquifer yield and surface water interactions. The methods used to derive these data for all Eromanga Basin aquifers in the Cooper Basin region are outlined in the associated metadata files. These are described in groundwater conceptualisation models (Gouramanis et al., 2023). The Eromanga Basin overlying the Cooper Basin includes 5 broadly defined aquifer intervals: from deepest to shallowest, these are the Poolowanna, Hutton, Adori, Cadna-owie-Hooray and Winton-Mackunda aquifers. Compiled data are assigned to these intervals and used to characterise groundwater systems at the basin scale. The data were compiled for a point-in-time to inform decisions on potential resource developments in the Basin. The available historical groundwater data can be used to assess the potential effects on groundwater. The data can also be used for other purposes, such as exploring unallocated groundwater resource potential. Data to January 2022 are used for this compilation.

The Cooper Basin is an upper Carboniferous-Middle Triassic intracratonic basin in northeastern South Australia and southwestern Queensland (Gravestock et al., 1998; Draper, 2002; McKellar, 2013; Carr et al., 2016; Hall et al., 2015a). The basin is Australia's premier onshore hydrocarbon producing province and is nationally significant in providing gas to the eastern Australian gas market. The basin also hosts a range of unconventional gas play types within the Permian Gidgealpa Group, including basin-centred gas and tight gas accumulations, deep dry coal gas associated with the Patchawarra and Toolachee formations, the Murteree and Roseneath shale gas plays and deep coal seam gas in the Weena Trough (e.g. Goldstein et al., 2012; Menpes et al., 2013; Greenstreet, 2015). The principal source rocks for these plays are the Permian coals and coaly shales of the Gidgealpa Group (Boreham & Hill, 1998; Deighton et al., 2003; Hall et al., 2016a). Mapping the petroleum generation potential of these source rocks is critical for understanding the hydrocarbon prospectivity of the basin. Geoscience Australia, in conjunction with the Department of State Development, South Australia and the Geological Survey of Queensland, have recently released a series of studies reviewing the distribution, type, quality, maturity and generation potential of the Cooper Basin source rocks (Hall et al., 2015a; 2016a; 2016b, 2016c; 2016d). Petroleum systems models, incorporating new Cooper Basin kinetics (Mahlstedt et al., 2015), highlight the variability in burial, thermal and hydrocarbon generation histories for each source rock across the basin (Hall et al., 2016a). A Geoscience Australia record 'Cooper Basin Petroleum Systems Analysis: Regional Hydrocarbon Prospectivity of the Cooper Basin, Part 3' providing full documentation of the model input data, workflow and results is currently in press. This work provides important insights into the hydrocarbon prospectivity of the basin (Hall et al., 2015b; Kuske et al., 2015). This product contains the working Cooper Basin Trinity-Genesis-KinEx petroleum systems model used to generate the results presented in these studies. This includes maps describing thickness, TOC and original HI for the following Permian source intervals: Toolachee Fm coals and coaly shales Daralingie Fm coals and coaly shales Roseneath Shale Epsilon Fm coals and coaly shales Murteree Shale Patchawarra Fm coals and coaly shales This model is designed for use as a regional scale hydrocarbon prospectivity screening tool. Model resolution is not high enough for this product to be used for sub-basin to prospect scale analysis, without further modification. However, the model provides a regional framework, into which more detailed prospect scale data may be embedded. The systematic workflow applied demonstrates the importance of integrated geochemical and petroleum systems modelling studies as a predictive tool for understanding the petroleum resource potential of Australia's sedimentary basins.

<b>This data package is superseded by a second iteration presenting updates on 3D geological and hydrogeological surfaces across eastern Australia that can be accessed through </b><a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.26186/148552">https://dx.doi.org/10.26186/148552</a> The Australian Government, through the National Water Infrastructure Fund – Expansion, commissioned Geoscience Australia to undertake the project ‘Assessing the Status of Groundwater in the Great Artesian Basin’ (GAB). The project commenced in July 2019 and will finish in June 2022, with an aim to develop and evaluate new tools and techniques to assess the status of GAB groundwater systems in support of responsible management of basin water resources. While our hydrogeological conceptual understanding of the GAB continues to grow, in many places we are still reliant on legacy data and knowledge from the 1970s. Additional information provided by recent studies in various parts of the GAB highlights the level of complexity and spatial variability in hydrostratigraphic units across the basin. We now recognise the need to link these regional studies to map such geological complexity in a consistent, basin-wide hydrostratigraphic framework that can support effective long-term management of GAB water resources. Geological unit markers have been compiled and geological surfaces associated with lithostratigraphic units have been correlated across the GAB to update and refine the associated hydrogeological surfaces. Recent studies in the Surat Basin in Queensland and the Eromanga Basin in South Australia are integrated with investigations from other regions within the GAB. These bodies of work present an opportunity to link regional studies and develop a revised, internally consistent geological framework to map geological complexity across the GAB. Legacy borehole data from various sources, seismic and airborne electromagnetic (AEM) data were compiled, then combined and analysed in a common 3D domain. Correlation of interpreted geological units and stratigraphic markers from these various data sets are classified using a consistent nomenclature. This nomenclature uses geological unit subdivisions applied in the Surat Cumulative Management Area (OGIA (Office of Groundwater Impact Assessment), 2019) to correlate time equivalent regional hydrogeological units. Herein we provide an update of the surface extents and thicknesses for key hydrogeological units, reconciling geology across borders and providing the basis for a consistent hydrogeological framework at a basin-wide scale. The new surfaces can be used for facilitating an integrated basin systems assessment to improve our understanding of potential impacts from exploitation of sub-surface resources (e.g., extractive industries, agriculture and injection of large volumes of CO2 into the sub-surface) in the GAB and providing a basis for more robust water balance estimates. 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 2.1), • Twenty-one geological and hydrogeological unit thickness maps from the top crystalline basement to the surface (Figure 3.7 to Figure 3.27), • The formation picks and constraining data points (i.e., from boreholes, seismic, AEM and outcrops) compiled and used for gridding each surface (Table 3.8).

Publicly available data was compiled to provide a common information base for resource development, environmental and regulatory decisions in the Eromanga Basin region. This data guide gives an example of how these data can be used to create the components of a workflow to identify unconventional hydrocarbon resource opportunities. The data guide is designed to support the data package that provide insights on unconventional hydrocarbon resources in the Eromanga Basin. The unconventional hydrocarbon assessment for the Eromanga Basin includes shale resources (shale oil and gas) and coal seam gas for 6 of the 9 geological intervals, termed plays – these intervals have been defined by Wainman et al. (2023a, 2023b). Tight gas was not assessed due to play intervals lying above the zone of significant overpressure zone (2,800 m below ground level) in the Cooper-Eromanga region. The assessment captures data from well completion reports and government data sources to inform the components required for unconventional hydrocarbons to be present in the Eromanga Basin. The assessment captures data from the Great Artesian Basin geological and hydrogeological surfaces update (Vizy and Rollet, 2022), the Queensland Petroleum Exploration Database (QPED) from the Geological Survey of Queensland (GSQ) Open Data Portal (2020a), the Petroleum Exploration and Production System of South Australia (PEPS, 2021) and Draper 2002. These datasets were used to map out gross depositional environments and their geological properties relevant for unconventional hydrocarbon assessments. The data are compiled at a point in time to inform decisions on resource development activities. The data guide will outline the play-based workflow for assessing unconventional hydrocarbon prospectivity. Each of the elements required for a prospective unconventional hydrocarbon system is explained and mapped. These data are integrated and merged to show the relative assessment of unconventional prospectivity across the basin, at both play interval and basin scale. As an example of assessments contained within the dataset, this data guide showcases the prospectivity of shale resources in the Birkhead Play interval.

The Great Artesian Basin Research Priorities Workshop, organised by Geoscience Australia (GA), was held in Canberra on 27 and 28 April 2016. Workshop attendees represented a spectrum of stakeholders including government, policy, management, scientific and technical representatives interested in GAB-related water management. This workshop was aimed at identifying and documenting key science issues and strategies to fill hydrogeological knowledge gaps that will assist federal and state/territory governments in addressing groundwater management issues within the GAB, such as influencing the development of the next Strategic Management Plan for the GAB. This report summarises the findings out of the workshop.

<div>The Pedirka, Simpson and western Eromanga basins in central Australia have undergone a chequered exploration history which has seen a total of only 42 wells drilled across a study area of ~210,000km2. Exploration initially focused on conventional hydrocarbons from the 1950s-1980s, before shifting towards coal seam gas (CSG) opportunities in the mid-2000s. Active petroleum systems have been proven in the region by a non-commercial oil discovery at Poolowanna 1 in 1977, and by several wells that showed evidence of residual oil columns. CSG exploration wells have confirmed the presence of thick, marginally mature coal intervals on the flanks of the basins, but are yet to evaluate the deeper troughs.</div><div>Geoscience Australia, the Northern Territory Geological Survey and the South Australian Department for Energy and Mining have been collaborating on the Australia’s Future Energy Resources project under the Australian government funded Exploring for the Future Program to undertake an assessment of the resource potential for conventional and unconventional hydrocarbons, and the geological carbon and storage (GCS) potential of the greater Pedirka region. </div><div>The project applied a play-based exploration approach to qualitatively assess the resource potential of the region. The Carboniferous to Cretaceous stratigraphic interval was divided into 14 plays which were evaluated for the presence of sediment-hosted energy resources through post-drill analysis, gross depositional environment mapping and common risk segment mapping. The analysis identified energy resources and GCS potential across multiple plays and locations within the study area. These results demonstrate, that while the region is underexplored, it should not be overlooked by future exploration activities.</div> Published in The APPEA Journal 2023. <b>Citation:</b> Iwanec Jeremy, Strong Paul, Bernecker Tom (2023) Underexplored but not forgotten: assessing the energy resources potential of the greater Pedirka Basin region through play-based mapping. <i>The APPEA Journal</i><b> 63</b>, S251-S256. https://doi.org/10.1071/AJ22150

<div>This Geoscience Australia Record summarises the collection, analysis and results of three Global Positioning System (GPS) campaign surveys conducted in 2015, 2016 and 2019 in the northern Surat Basin, Queensland, Australia. During each campaign, we collected at least seven continuous days of GPS observations at each of the 65 sites of a geodetic network established by Geoscience Australia in 2014. Our analysis of the collected GPS data reveals statistically significant downward vertical ground surface movement between 2015 and 2016, 2015 and 2019, or both, at 18 of the 65 geodetic sites. Two of the 18 sites have recorded downward vertical ground surface movement of more than 100 millimetres: SB36 near Miles (125 mm) and SB49 near Wandoan (218 mm). Further work is required to help better resolve the temporal and spatial pattern of ground surface movement in the northern Surat Basin. This could include further GPS campaign surveys, analysis of GPS data from continuously operating reference sites in south-east Queensland, and a detailed comparison of surface deformation observed with GPS and interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR) data; extending on the work described in McCubbine et al. (2022).</div><div><br></div>

<div>This Geoscience Australia Record reports on Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) processing over the Great Artesian Basin (GAB) to support an improved understanding of the groundwater system and water balance across the region. InSAR is a geodetic technique that can identify ground surface movement from satellite data at a regional scale and is therefore a valuable and widely used technique for measuring patterns in surface movement over time; including the movement of fluids (i.e. water or gas) beneath the surface.</div><div><br></div><div>This Record is the one of two Geoscience Australia Records that describe ground surface movement monitoring Geoscience Australia have undertaken in the GAB in recent years. Namely;</div><div>1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Ground surface movement in the northern Surat Basin derived from campaign GPS measurements. (Garthwaite et al., 2022).</div><div>2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;InSAR processing over the Great Artesian Basin and analysis over the western Eromanga Basin and northern Surat Basin (this Record).</div><div><br></div><div>We have produced ground surface motion data products, which cover about 90% of the GAB for the period of time between January 2016 and August 2020. The data products were created using Sentinel-1 Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data and an InSAR processing workflow designed for large spatial scale processing. The large spatial scale InSAR processing workflow includes using GAMMA software to (i) pre-process SAR images to align the pixels, (ii) generate interferograms and short temporal baseline surface displacement maps and PyRate software to (iii) combine these outputs in an inversion to form pixel-wise time series ground surface displacement data and fit ground surface velocities to the displacement data. The raw SAR data and these subsequent data products of the workflow are partitioned into overlapping frames; the final stage of the large scale processing workflow is to combine the partitioned data into a single map using a mosaicking algorithm. The results of this processing chain demonstrate the feasibility of developing a regional scale ground surface movement reconnaissance tool (i.e. subsidence and uplift). </div><div><br></div><div>We provide a summary of the processing chain and data products and a focused assessment for two case study areas in the western Eromanga Basin (South Australia) and northern Surat Basin (Queensland). Over these case study areas we examine the relationship between the InSAR derived ground surface movement and available groundwater level data. We also assess how land use types may influence the InSAR derived ground surface motion data by comparing the InSAR data to the “land types” over the region which we classify using a machine learning algorithm with Sentinel-2 optical imagery data. </div><div><br></div><div>From our analysis we observe little ground surface motion over the western Eromanga Basin. The surface movement rate over the entire area is estimated to be mostly within ±10 mm/yr. Groundwater level time series data from well monitoring sites in the area did not appear to have any significant trends either. However, large and broad scale ground surface motion (both uplift and subsidence) was observed in the InSAR processing results over the northern Surat Basin. A 75 km x 150 km scale uplift signal, with rates of up to 20 mm/yr, was located over an area we classified as cultivated land, where InSAR signals are likely to be influenced by near-surface cultivation activities (such as irrigation) rather than subsurface groundwater level changes. Furthermore, two approximately 75km x 75 km areas were identified which had subsidence signals of up to -20 mm/yr. Over the same area, groundwater level time series data show long-term negative trends in the water head level. For a more direct comparison between the InSAR results and the well data, we fitted a first order poroelastic model to transform the InSAR derived ground surface motion rates into modelled pore-pressure decline/groundwater drawdown rates. We compared the model to the groundwater time series data in the Walloon Coal Measures, Surat Basin, and found good agreement, which indicates that the observed subsidence signals could be attributable to pore-pressure decline due to the falling water head level.</div><div><br></div><div>We finally provide some preliminary analysis comparing our InSAR results to the results from an Office of Groundwater Impact Assessment (OGIA) InSAR study and a Geoscience Australia GPS land movement study to assist in validating the Geoscience Australia InSAR results. Overall, the comparisons are encouraging, showing a high correlation against the OGIA InSAR results and GPS results. Further work, is required to further validate our results and reduce uncertainty in our analysis process.</div>