Agree Rehctub, but even those who suggest 20% be retained for our use
are unaware of what our need will be.
Their 20% suggestion is based on our current consumption.
They do not take into account what our consumption will be when we
start converting ALL our cars and trucks to CNG.

I cannot do the calculation as I do not have the truck & car metre sq
or oil equivalent consumption per km rate but I will guess that we
would need to reserve at least 80% for our use.
That would make the Gladstone project uneconomic.

The government was warned of this very problem before the project was
approved but of course they simply do not think there is a problem.
FYI, the US has already started converting their trucks to CNG and
installing CNG stations along all main highways.

....and installing CNG stations along all main highways

I believe we have our first one in Sydney.

The whole problem is, we are in such a mess finacial,y that governments, rather than use royalty money to improve infrastructure, now rely on it to pay the every day bills, because out tax system simply can't cope anymore.

The question then is, where do we turn once this finite resource is gone?

We will still have no money and no income revenues to speak of, that's for the ones who can ride out the extreme energy prices that is.

Governments have to understand that to stimulate the economy, in a sustainable long term way, they have to put more money in people's pockets, without killing business align the way. Tax reform is their only option in my view.

You are probably correct on tax reform.
I am no expert there, but I can see there is a problem.
Even Joe Hockey seems to see that.

I read an article some while back where it was suggested that we have
now left it too late to undertake expensive energy programs such as
nuclear or attempting to build a 100% alternative energy regime.
The reason; we no longer have the financial velocity to pay for it.
To undertake such projects we need substantial growth in the economy
and that is yesterdays economy.

You said;
The question then is, where do we turn once this finite resource is gone?

That is the fundamental question from now on. There seems no choice
to a much lower energy lifestyle using local everything

BUT WHO WILL PAY FOR THE 'INFRASTRUCTURE.
Under one god,
we the taxpayers as always after the writing off is done.

its not in the news as..yet..but
it seems anna blight..dONE a deal[sold the land..THE MARTA HOPITAL SITS ON FOR A BUCK...SO THAT EFFECTIVELY..THEY CAN CHARGE RENT..to the govt/or sell IT..off..[or who knows]..it was kept secret

yes its TIME GOVTS WERE REIGNED IN
[i understand blight..was/is a lawyert/like peter beatup before her
thing is..will IT track/back..tO SOME PUBLIC SERVANT/and a party HEAD
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=MARTA+HOSPITAL+DEAL+1+DOLLAR

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=sbs+news+marta+hospital+sold+for+1dollar&

PETER BEATUP/WASNt he the one that rewroTE THE QLD CONSTITUTION INTO ACT 70?..OF 2002/..then siGNED IT INTO LAW.[PUTTING the 'inconvenient biTS INTO THE ADENFDum

try reading the qld con..online..one line per page[no where does it EGSIST..on one page/pdf..format[online]

peter beater also is renowned for..GIFTING HALF A BILLION[PLUS HOWRDS HALF A BILLION]..TO PAY Shareholders dividends./FOR A MA\GNESIA PLANT THAT NEVER GOT built

who was it who sold billions of forestry lands [40,000 hectares]
UNDER ONE HOUR FROM BRISBANE GPO..FOR 800.MILLION..[CUT UP/AND rezoned COMMERCIAL/UNITS ETC..its a city worth billions..]

BUT sold for under the value of the trees on it

i have had it with pros..professing things..for their mates
bah

rehctub,
In simple terms no Australian resource should be allowed an export license until and unless all local needs are satisfied.
This includes natural resources, live stock, processed foods and manufactured goods.
In addition there should be a tariff barrier to protect Australian goods from unfair imports and help preserve Australian jobs.