11 Oct 2013

Gas Exports Hurt The Climate And Consumer

By Justin Field

The gas industry says greenies and farmers are to blame for price rises. Exports driven by coal seam gas expansion are the real cause, writes Justin Field

New South Wales Greens mining spokesperson Jeremy Buckingham has recently called for an East Coast domestic gas reservation policy. His plan would ensure the needs of domestic and industrial gas users are met before gas is allowed to be exported via plants currently being built in Queensland.

It is also the only policy response that will counter gas price rises that have been locked in by the reckless approval of damaging coal seam gas developments across Queensland.

Gas reservation is a sensible approach for the Greens and it should become part of the formal policy platform of the party. The proposal would reserve a proportion of conventional gas resources — not coal seam gas or shale gas — for domestic and industrial gas users.

This reserved gas would not be open to purchasing competition from export buyers and would guarantee Australian gas for Australian users at a price that would allow industrial gas users in manufacturing to remain viable. It would also protect domestic consumers from the price rises that will be caused by the opening up of the gas export market in Queensland.

Importantly, this policy would not reserve gas for electricity generation and therefore not reduce the incentives to move to renewable electricity.

The proposal for reservation provides a direct challenge to the current industry and federal government scare campaign of a gas “crisis” and escalating prices for NSW consumers.

The Sydney Morning Herald’s Economics Editor Ross Gittins affirmed this week what other economists have been saying all along about the industry’s scare campaign:

“The gas industry is working a scam on the people of NSW… It's trying to frighten us into agreeing to remove restrictions on the exploitation of coal seam gas deposits. Failing that, the various parties want to be able to lay the blame for an inevitable jump in the price of natural gas on the greenies and farmers.”

The fact, as highlighted by Gittins and The Australia Institute’s Matt Grudnoff, is that the reckless expansion of the coal seam gas industry has made gas exports viable on the East Coast. It is this connection with export markets that is pushing up the price of all gas in the Eastern states.

Origin Energy’s purchase this month of $3 billion of Bass Straight gas from ExxonMobil and BHP was reported to be at prices that reflect coming export parity rates. Had the export plants not have been coming online, this conventional gas would have been available for local purchase at much lower rates.

Supporting a gas reservation policy does not mean the Greens support the development of further gas, particularly unconventional gas resources like coal seam gas and shale gas. These developments cannot be supported given the unacceptable risks they present to farmland, water supplies and sensitive environmental areas.

It is also increasingly clear that the climate impacts from fugitive emissions from the unconventional gas production process are higher than estimated by industry and may produce lifecycle emissions as high or even higher than coal.

Eighty per cent of known fossil fuels must stay in the ground if we are to avoid dangerous climate change. This presents even more reason to continue to reject all unconventional gas development.

While the Buckingham proposal doesn’t include unconventional gas because it is inherently unsafe, if government continues to pursue it despite the clear environmental and climate risks, it too should be captured by a reservation policy. 

It would be unfair to reserve only conventional sources of gas, which can be produced more cheaply, while unconventional supplies are allowed unrestrained access to higher-paying export markets. A reservation policy affecting unconventional gas will likely constrain some higher cost projects, which explains the hysterical industry opposition to a reservation policy.

The Greens have the right long-term plan for Australia’s energy future. For the climate’s sake we need a rapid transition to 100 per cent renewable energy. A reservation policy will ensure Australian gas is available for Australian use in the meantime. 

While the major parties continue to fiddle with climate policy and do the bidding of big fossil fuel companies by supporting the unsustainable unconventional gas industry, the Greens have to be able to engage in the energy debate as it affects the day to day lives of domestic energy users and businesses. A domestic gas reservation policy is a common sense approach and will ensure no blame can be laid at the feet of “greenies” who have been putting forward constructive energy solutions from the start.

Log in or register to post comments

Discuss this article

To control your subscriptions to discussions you participate in go to your Account Settings preferences and click the Subscriptions tab.

Enter your comments here

This user is a New Matilda supporter. Rockjaw
Posted Sunday, October 13, 2013 - 01:07

Justin, great piece.

Speaking of renewable energy, the biggest barrier to progress is the strange bond between big government and big energy Corps.

As an ex military intelligence officer it should be fairly easy for you to take note and research the facts behind the "Joule", a motor vehicle developed by an industrial scientist responsible for major advances in many of today's cutting edge military technologies. This vehicle proved itself to be the world's first truly renewable energy driven motor vehicle.

According to technical staff and ex management of the development company for this product, "Oil and Energy concerns" with "joint international state interests", very quietly convinced the South African Government to shut down all funding for this viable product on the eve of the launch and to ensure the "safety" of the technology which led to the development of this vehicle.

Why?

Go figure.

Jacqui Kay
Posted Sunday, October 13, 2013 - 23:19

Over 2,000 high profile people  who subscribe to Market Force.org. who are greatly concerned about global warming, I fear it  too, with rivers polluted with methane as they are now, dried up ie 3 areas of Condamine which ultimately flows into the 3 state Murray Darling poisoned creek sign/s Qld. as told to me from Strathpine, the removal of Fossil fuel enmasse, Sept public announcement that Texas Qld is without water due to mining, People alarmed in Southern Highlands, Hunter Valley, Gloucester,Pilliga, Bimblebox  Northern Rivers, Tara and beyond, Alan Jones of 2GB coal seam gas page, the Dr 's concerns to Alan of recognised illnesses from CSG has been hailed publicly as the Asbestos of tomorrow. I cried for Brian Monk when I watched on Google Coal Seam Gas in Northern Rivers/NSW, Quentin Dempster visits Cordeaux and visits the damage there, Masses of water is needed for CSG is this the reason why the Sydney water catchment ? There is 15 months to the next State Election I am very concerned if the Libs ' return it will be Gungho for the rest of NSW. Before the Fed election Abbott and MacFarlane gave different views on mining, now in, it appears GungHo.

John Richardson
Posted Monday, October 14, 2013 - 14:57

An excelleny piece by Justin Field, although I think some points could have been made more strongly.

The proposal by the Greens Jeremy Buckingham for the creation of an "east coast gas reservation policy" fails to recognise the more important national interest issue, which is that Australia is the only natural gas exporting country in the world that does not operate within a regulatory framework requiring producers to not only ensure an adequate supply of gas is availabale locally, but that it is available on an 'affordable' basis. 

Justin is right to suggest that Australians are being conned  into believeing that our natural gas supplies are running out when, in fact, what is driving shortages & significant local price increases is the determination of the international energy companies who control the Industry in Australia to prioritise lucrative export markets ahead of domestic markets & customers.

This disadvantage to Australians, connived by our useless politocal class, then conveniently plays handmaiden to arguments in support of allowing unfettered development of the coal seam gas industry.: our tickets get punched yet again by the very same multinationals, as they go about despoiling our environment & our future clean water security, not to forget that our future energy security needs continue to be ignored. 

I also think that Justin could have better highlighted some of the disastrous outcomes that we can expect to experience if we allow the coals seam gas industry to run amok as it has in the US.

A quick read  of the latest report by Environment America called Fracking by the Numbers provides a stunning expose on the devastating impact this criminal - yes, criminal - enterprise has visited on the US & the planet in recent times. Headline numbers include - 280 billion gallaons of tox wastewater generated in 2012; 450,000 tons of air pollution produced in one year; 250 billion gallaons of fresh water used since 2005 & 360,000 acres of land degraded since 2005.

The interests of the Australian people are not being well served by the poor quality of the public debate around the merits of the coal seam gas fracking industry or our long-term energy needs & security.

This user is a New Matilda supporter. DrGideonPolya
Posted Friday, October 18, 2013 - 09:46

Excellent article that makes the crucial points that  (1) the impact from gas fugitive emissions may make gas burning worse than coal burning and (2) from a global perspective most of the coal and gas should be kept in the ground. These points are amplified below:

1. Gas is not clean, it is dirty, 1 tonne of methane (CH4) generating 2.8 tonnes CO2 on combustion. Gas burning is cleaner than coal burning in terms of twice the MWh/tonne CO2  emitted and less health damaging pollutants but gas is not necessarily cleaner than coal burning GHG-wise.  Thus methane (CH4) leaks (3.3% in the US; 7.9% from fracking shale deposits) and is 105 times worse than CO2 as a GHG on a 20 year time frame taking aerosol impacts into account, this meaning that a coal to gas transition could double electric power industry-derived GHG pollution (if shale gas is used). A coal-to-gas transition is contraindicated. Indeed Australian corporations with Lib-Lab complicity have evaded billions of dollars of Carbon Tax on fugitive emissions ( (see Gideon Polya, "Australia's Carbon Tax scandal", MWC News, 23  November 2012: http://mwcnews.net/focus/analysis/23026-gideonpolya-carbon-tax.html  ).

2. Australia and the world will  exceed the world's terminal CO2 polutiion budget by factors of 3 and 5, respectively.  The world's terminal  GHG pollution budget, that must not be exceeded if  we are to have a 75% chance of avoiding a catastrophic 2C temperature rise, is 600 Gt CO2.  The fossil fuel industry intends to exploit its stock exchange-listed reserves of 762 GtCO 2 that is approximately a quarter of the world's total reserves of  2,795 Gt CO2 on combustion. However historical GHG pollution since the start of the Industrial  Revolution has now brought  us to the point  at which an estimated 50 Gt of methane (CH4) is predicted to be released from the East Siberian Arctic Shelf in coming decades, GHG pollution equivalent 5,250 Gt CO2-equivalent, 9 times greater than the world's terminal GHG pollution budget.. The Biosphere and thence Humanity are doomed unless this gigantic methane release can be prevented. Accordingly , we must urgently cease fossil fuel exploitation (see Gideon Polya, "Why We Must Divest From Fossil Fuel Corporations To Help Save The Biosphere And Humanity", Countercurrents, 9 October 2013: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya091013.htm ). Australia has ALREADY exceeded its fair share if this terminal budget (see “Carbon debt, carbon credit”: https://sites.google.com/site/carbondebtcarboncredit/ ).