Crikey

Adam Morton of The Age reports that the Victorian Labor Opposition has called for a moratorium on new licenses for CSG exploration in that state, while safety concerns about fracking are investigated by a parliamentary inquiry.

At this stage, Friends of the Earth’s Melbourne branch doesn’t list any active CSG exploration in Victoria. However, there are currently 24 exploration licenses, and another eight applications under consideration. Exploration for additional brown coal (for drying and subsequent export) is actively proceeding in areas like Bacchus Marsh a town not far from Melbourne’s western fringe, in the face of considerable resident protest, and with the active encouragement of the state government. In fact, they’re planning to run a “communication strategy” touting the benefits of coal mining.

The conservative government’s cheerleading for the coal (including CSG) industry is matched with active opposition to wind power – where every resident within 2km of a proposed wind farm has the right of veto over it.

Given the number of already issued exploration permits, and the fact that a state election is still some time away, the practical and political impact of this decision is likely to be small. But it’s interesting nonetheless that the state ALP clearly thinks that coal’s expansion into new, heavily populated areas is starting to antagonize the Victorian public.

Crossposted from A Bent Ghost

As noted in my earlier article, the federal government’s position on the way CSG fugitive emissions are currently assessed is supported by the “indpendent analysis” of the “Wilkenfeld report”. The Wilkenfeld report is an “…independent analysis” commissioned by the government and conducted by George Wilkenfeld and associates, an environmental consulting firm.

I’m very interested to find out what that report contains to justify the federal government’s position – which amounts to stating that CSG fugitive emissions are not a problem. So are the Australian Greens, particularly climate change spokesperson Chrstine Milne. Senator Penny Wong, in a response to an earlier question by Milne, has already acknowledged that the report doesn’t actually contain any independent data collection, but Milne and the Greens are continuing to seek its release, only to be knocked back in the Senate by the major parties. But what could it possibly say that would make the government so keen to keep it under wraps?

Of course, George Wilkenfeld himself is unlikely to comment directly on the contents of his report. But it turns out he’s already made his views on CSG fugitive emissions public, in an op-ed written for the Fairfax press arguing strongly against using CSG in New South Wales:

Conventional natural gas production can be managed to control leakage of unburnt methane, which is a far more potent greenhouse gas than CO2, and to remove any naturally occurring CO2 from the gas stream (hopefully, for reinjection into the gas reservoir). Coal seam production is more dispersed and less controlled. There is a risk of methane bypassing the well and bubbling up with the contaminated water and through surface fractures. The overall greenhouse impact could be worse than burning coal. The size of the production zone makes it difficult to monitor methane leakage and, if detected, not much can be done other than wait for the flow to stop.

Yes, that’s right. The government’s own handpicked expert thinks that the “overall greenhouse impact could be worse than burning coal”, and has been prepared to say so publicly. It’s hard to imagine that his advice to the government would have been significantly different.

And it’s also hard not to conclude that the government has seen this particular advice, and decided that the easiest response is to hide it and hope the issue goes away, rather than acting.