The paper authored by TAI senior economist Matt Grudnoff questions the viability of CSG as a low emission energy source.

“Gas is increasingly being seen by some as a ‘bridging fuel’ in the fight against climate change, yet because we don’t accurately measure the amount of leakage at wellheads we have no way of knowing if we’re actually reducing our emissions by switching from coal to coal seam gas,” said Mr Grudnoff in a statement.

The Australia Institute recommends allocating the $200 million from the Minerals Resource Rent Tax that the government has put aside for scientific research into the effects of CSG be used to look at accurately measuring fugitive emissions.

The SMH reports today:

The federal government has commissioned a review into the measurement of greenhouse emissions from coal seam gas drilling, amid questions over precisely how much gas leaks during the drilling process. [...]

The government is asking for public submissions on the best ways to measure ”fugitive emissions” from coal seam gas drilling, to be sent to the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency by September 14.

This explanation of fugitive emissions comes from paper’s summary:

Fugitive emissions occur when methane leaks during the extraction, processing and transportation of CSG. Leaking at the wellhead during extraction is the most significant source of fugitive emissions and is also the source for which the least amount of measurement has been done. The current default measurement technique for fugitive emissions at the wellhead is the same as that used for conventional natural gas, despite the fact that there is evidence to suggest that fugitive emissions from the extraction of CSG are significantly higher.

The definition of fugitive emissions used by TAI’s is made more specific in the paper itself:

Fugitive emissions for the purpose of this paper are all leakage emissions from the extraction, processing and transportation of gas. This includes both accidental leakage as well as deliberate releases from, for example, venting or flaring.

And aside from potential environmental harm through higher than expected contribution to warming, why does any of this matter? The Australia Institute paper says:

Under the carbon price, the underestimate also has a flow-on effect in terms of the size of the effective subsidy the government is giving to CSG companies. An extra 62 million tonnes of CO2e over three years is equivalent to giving CSG companies more than $1.5 billion. This figure is likely to be an underestimate; the actual size of the subsidy is likely to be far higher.

The paper outlines the current method of measuring emissions as well as the potential policy implications of incorrectly measuring the emissions coming from coal seam gas drilling. Read the Australia Institute’s paper: “Measuring Fugitive Emissions: Is coal seam gas a viable bridging fuel?” here.

Rising Tide Media Release – 5th August 2011
This morning climate activists have scaled a 15 metre high coal conveyor belt in Newcastle’s coal port and have suspended a banner saying, “We’re sorry Somalia. Coal = climate change and starvation.”

Their action comes as scientists this week have made the the link between human-made climate change and the deadly drought affecting over ten million people across the Horn of Africa.

Rising Tide spokesperson Naomi Hogan is at the scene.

“Coal is recognised globally as the biggest contributor to climate change. Yet, while climate disaster ravages East Africa, coal companies operating here in Australia are planning to massively expand their coal production, ignoring all the negative impacts.

“We are standing in the belly of the beast, here in the world’s largest coal port, calling on the coal industry to reverse their plans to more than double Australia’s coal exports.

“It’s about time the coal giants took responsibility for their contribution to the dangerous impacts of climate change.

“Tens of thousands of Somalis have already died and hundreds of thousands face starvation, partly due to a terrible climate change driven drought.

“We are calling on the coal companies operating in Australia to take a tiny fraction of their billion dollar profits and donate the 1.4 billion dollars urgently required to save lives across East Africa.

“These severe droughts, floods, famines and extreme weather events will continue to worsen with climate change. Coal companies must heed this wake up call, clean up their act and start taking responsibility for climate tragedies.”

Rising Tide is encouraging all Australians to act on climate change and to demand a stop to coal expansion.

For media contacts and updates visit the Rising Tide website.

The mess coal mining creates – this is a mine in the Hunter Valley:

Here is their discussion around the role of media in dictating national discussion and influencing politics (emphasis my own):

Then there is the media. Carr says: “If you’re writing about power, you have got to write something about the power of the tabloids.” Bearing the scars of brawls over a decade or more with Sydney’s tabloid radio and newspapers, Carr cites as evidence of their power their capacity to skew state budgets. “If they’re running a very angry law-and-order campaign and there’s money available in the budget for a new initiative, then that year you’ll have more police rather than more child protection workers.”

Has he heard it said that the purpose of the tabloid press is to persuade the working class to vote Tory? “I haven’t heard it but I think it’s incontrovertible.”

Manne sees far bigger issues at stake. “Dictating the terms of discussion for the great bulk of society is the greatest power of all, in a way. I more and more see the media as doing that. I give a kind of extreme example: if you take climate change seriously and realise that coal is by far the most important contributor to greenhouse gases in the world and if you see that Australia is an important exporter and relies on coal for 80 per cent of its own energy – then I think it would be completely reasonable at present for us to be debating what we do about the coal industry, whether we begin to phase it out.

“But it is completely unthinkable that that should be discussed. If anyone put up their head to say it they would be shouted down first by the media – first by the commentators – and then later on by the politicians. This is an extreme example of what I mean by controlling what counts as commonsense which I think is done by the aggregate of media power.”

Manne sees Murdoch as the paradigm. “There are two ways of misunderstanding him. One is to think he is only interested in money. The other is to think he is only interested in power. I think his genius is that he is both and he sees the ways massive amounts of money can influence the political agenda – by creating Fox News or various newspapers or Sky television – and they can in turn make money. So he advances a political agenda while simultaneously making fortunes.”

There is also a rather glorious moment in the piece where Bob Carr speaks about the joy of ignoring those exercising democracy outside the hallowed halls of Macquarie St.

“I’ve got to say, power is fun,” says Bob Carr. Not everyone’s idea of fun, perhaps, but certainly his. Over lunch in his Bligh Street office his mind goes back to the day demonstrators opposing workers’ compensation reform were blockading Parliament.

“Moments like that you know you’ve got power. I’m in Parliament House; there are no lights on; the staff has walked out; I get a tin of cold baked beans from the fridge to have for lunch. My caucus is at Governor Macquarie Tower and I’m on the phone to Whelan, the leader of the house, saying, ‘Paul, if they’re not up here, if they don’t walk through that union blockade, what happens in the Parliament this afternoon?’

“And my somewhat nervous caucus walked up Macquarie Street, some of them sort of staunching tears, went through the demonstrating building workers and they walked in. At the caucus meeting, I had to get up and say these are the reasons we’ve got to reform this system and defied them to vote against it. We got it through and then presented it to the house that afternoon. That is fun.“

Read full article here.

Across the globe cataclysmic weather events are occuring with such regularity that its bening called a new norm. But there is nothing normal about it. And there is something else that lies destroyed in the rubble: the truth about climate change.

Big oil and big coal are spending big money to spread doubt about climate change. They’ve been able to do so quietly, but not anymore. On September 14th, the world will join hands to create 24 hours of reality. An event that will focus the world’s attention on the full truth, scope, scale, and impact of the climate crisis.

More details here.

Two British guys took to the streets to ask passers-by how they’d feel about offsetting their cheating.

Cheat Neutral guy: Have you ever cheated on your girlfriend?
Passerby: No, certainly not.
Cheat Neutral guy: Really. Why is that?
Passerby: Because it’d be wrong. I mean…
Cheat Neutral guy: What about if I said you can pay £2.50 to our new company to cheat on your girlfriend and we’ll pay someone else to be faithful for you? How about that?
Passerby: No, no. I think I like my girlfriend too much.
Cheat Neutral guy: That’s very sweet, have a balloon.

This method would thereby ensure that the overall amount of cheating in the world wouldn’t rise. So it’d be fine, right?

Of course this is a spoof to highlight the type of logic behind an idea such as carbon offsetting. As Alan Simpson said in the House of Commons back in March 2007, “The website is not a serious website. It is intended to ridicule an approach that deserves to be ridiculed”.

You can check out the video about the campaign below.

Well, what we understand here at CheatNeutral.com is that cheating and jealousy are just a natural part of most modern relationships and what we needed was a market based solution to dealing with that.

[...]

What we’re making sure is that the total amount of cheating doesn’t go up. So if you want to cheat, it’s no longer something you have to feel bad about. It’s just something that you have to neutralise. Make sure the total amount of cheating doesn’t go up.

[...]

Well, I mean, let’s look at where we got the inspiration for this idea. You may have heard of carbon offsetting. The idea that you can take a plane flight, or whatever, and you’re going to emit so many tonnes of carbon, but you can pay into one of these so-called carbon offset companies, and they’ll pay someone else in a developing country to plant trees or you know, put in some low energy light bulbs. And that absolves you of that guilt as well. All we are doing is taking this well established concept of carbon offsetting and and moving it into the arena of cheating, and relationships.

The question du jour for the Greens is simple: will they be part of the solution on climate change or risk once again being the party that helps destroy Labor’s efforts to reduce carbon emissions? As the negotiations on a carbon tax reach their end point, the Greens have indicated they will accept a package that offers 94.5 per cent free pollution permits to emissions-intensive, trade-exposed industries. But they appear to want to cut the level of compensation to the coal and steel industries while increasing the level of funding for renewable energy.

[...]

The Greens should know that in politics, as indeed in life, it sometimes makes sense to settle for “good enough” rather than risk everything in the pursuit of purity.

The video embedded below combines footage of recent floods, droughts and other ‘natural’ disasters and is narrated by the words of McKibben’s article. It’s really highlights the insanity of refusing to consider the impact of our current greenhouse gas intensive way of life on our planet.

It’s very important to stay calm. If you got upset about any of this, you might forget how important it is not to disrupt the record profits of our fossil fuel companies.