Select an energy project that has been controversial in the past five years. This may be a current (proposed) project with active controversy, or a historical project. While Australian projects are encouraged

Task

1. Select an energy project that has been controversial in the past five years. This may be a current (proposed) project with active controversy, or a historical project. While Australian projects are encouraged, you may select any worldwide project. You may not select the same project that you contributed to in the Group Presentation.
2. Select a single analytical domain that interests you from the list below:
   • Environmental impact (including climate, water, land, and ecosystems)
   • Technological viability (technology readiness, scalability, innovation risks)
   • Economic impact (distribution of costs and benefits)
   • Policy settings (alignment or conflict with regulatory frameworks)
   • Ethical considerations (should this be undertaken, and why)
3. Identify and analyse the number of angles (arguments) relevant to your selected domain. You will need to research and properly cite information relevant to each angle in your assessment. Critically, you may notice that some angles will use different/competing information (including data) that may not agree. Your analysis should critically analyse evidence behind, and stakeholders for, each angle associated with your domain, identifying where evidence has been stretched or incorrectly applied to generate support for the angle. This process should avoid "for and against" framing, which often conflates multiple angles.
4. Conclude with a clear recommendation on how the project should proceed to best manage the number of angles identified. This recommendation should be supported by suggestions as to how legitimate concerns (from angles critical of the project) can be ethically managed.

Your report is limited to a maximum of 5000 words, and must include proper academic references (Vancouver style) for each piece of evidence included.

Assessment Summary

The assessment required students to select a controversial energy project from the past five yearseither ongoing or historicaland analyse it from a specific analytical domain. The goal was to evaluate complex stakeholder perspectives and competing evidence within one domain while developing a balanced, evidence-based recommendation.

Key requirements included:

• Choosing one controversial energy project (preferably Australian, but global options acceptable).
• Selecting one analytical domain:
  • Environmental impact
  • Technological viability
  • Economic impact
  • Policy settings
  • Ethical considerations
• Identifying and analysing multiple angles (arguments) within the chosen domain.
• Critically evaluating the evidence and stakeholder interests supporting each angle.
• Avoiding simple “for or against” framing and instead focusing on competing perspectives and data validity.
• Providing a conclusion and recommendation on how the project should proceed, including ethical management of legitimate concerns.
• Citing all evidence using the Vancouver referencing style.

The expected outcome was a 5,000-word analytical report that demonstrated critical thinking, research depth, and ethical awareness in policy and energy decision-making contexts.