APPEA’s emissions arrogance a mistake

Gas flare at a coal seam gas well near Casino

The Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association, APPEA, has described as “irrelevant” the growing body of evidence suggesting greenhouse gas emissions from coal seam gas (CSG) is significantly higher than the industry acknowledges.

APPEA was responding to media reports quoting several recent studies looking at ‘fugitive’ methane emissions from unconventional gas mining processes. These fugitive emissions have the potential to make extracting CSG for electricity production as bad for the climate as mining and burning coal.

This wouldn’t be such an issue for the CSG industry if it hadn’t staked the future of its product on being perceived as a “clean, green, transition fuel”. But in this context, APPEA’s dismissal of the science is a risky move.

APPEA has been seen by many as being particularly poor performers in the campaign for hearts and minds on the CSG issue, but this latest effort cuts much deeper. APPEA’s response risks losing the political support that has sustained it to date and has seen a number of major projects already approved in Queensland.

APPEA and their member companies have run a semi-effective campaign to position their product as a fuel to power the transition to a low carbon economy.  Despite the community and farmer friendly feel of their advertising campaign, this line has only partly been directed at the general public and consumer. The primary audience has been politicians who by and large have bought the message and continue to trumpet the ‘coal seam gas as a transition fuel’ message when quizzed about their position on CSG.

For labor, the rise of CSG during the carbon tax debate is an example of how pricing carbon works – lower emission energy becomes competitive. For the coalition who are trying to retain even a semblance of coherence in their climate policy, spruiking the carbon benefits of gas makes it seem like they actually don’t think climate change is crap and as a side benefit supports their friends in big energy.

For the public messaging of both major parties, the climate credentials of CSG is the ultimate pro that over-rides the cons of permanent damage to groundwater systems, hundreds of millions of litres of chemical laden waste water, carved up farming land and impacts on sensitive environmental and urban areas. Should something go wrong with the climate argument for CSG, APPEA may find political support falling sharply.

With the Queensland election shaping to be in part a referendum on this issue, now is not the time to be treating questions of climate credentials with arrogant disregard. APPEA needs to recognise that the emissions footprint of CSG is not just a neat public relations exercise, it is the lynchpin of their political support.

But there is another risk associated with APPEA’s dismissal of the emissions science and that relates to how the broad and growing activist community will react. Given the breadth of the campaign, there has been a remarkable consistency in the core message from farmers, community groups, and environmental campaigners – They are seeking a moratorium until an independent assessment is done into the social, health, economic and environmental risks of the industry.

That Governments have approved billions of dollars in projects in Queensland without this assessment already seems an act of negligence. But that Government and industry continue to ignore such a reasonable demand as that of a moratorium and inquiry suggests something more sinister. APPEA’s ‘irrelevant’ comment is particularly poor timing and is likely to have many in the ‘moratorium’ camp questioning their tactics.

It would be fair for many campaigners to ask why you would maintain a moratorium position if both the government and industry are prepared to write-off credible science? In the event there was to be an independent assessment (moratorium or not), why would anyone believe that the findings would be given any more credit then the science currently being disregarded? The case for campaigners to shift to a direct ‘just say no’ campaign is getting stronger.

Following the federal inquiry earlier this year and the first hearings of the NSW Coal Seam Gas Inquiry in Alstonville last week, it is clear that this campaign is not going away and community feeling against CSG is growing rapidly. APPEA and the industry now face a dilemma, they can either start to make concessions or face a tidal wave of community campaigns shifting to a direct ‘no gas’ position. It is difficult to see how that isn’t justified in the face of APPEA’s arrogance and lack of regard for the community.