World-first Australian Federal Court case over Santos’ ‘clean energy’ & net zero claims

On the same day that a judgement was handed down in Bushfire Survivors for Climate Action Incorporated v Environment Protection Authority [2021] NSWLEC 92 (26 August 2021) ordering The Environment Protection Authority, in accordance with s 9(1)(a) of the Protection of the Environment Administration Act 1991 (NSW), is to develop environmental quality objectives, guidelines and policies to ensure environment protection from climate change, news came of another legal challenge in which the Environmental Defenders Office is the the legal representative of the applicant.

Santos Ltd Cooper Basin facility
IMAGE: Environmental Defenders Office

Environmental Defenders Office, 26 August 2021:

The Environmental Defenders Office, acting on behalf of the Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility (ACCR), has filed a Federal Court case against gas giant Santos over its claims natural gas is “clean fuel” and that it has a credible pathway to net zero emissions by 2040.

ACCR will argue the claims – contained in the company’s 2020 Annual Report – constitute misleading or deceptive conduct under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and the Australian Consumer Law.

This is the first court case in the world to challenge the veracity of a company’s net zero emissions target, as well as the first in Australia raising the issue of climate greenwashing against the oil and gas industry.

It is also a landmark, world-first test case in relation to the viability of carbon capture and storage, and the environmental impacts of blue hydrogen, increasingly touted as a key element in gas companies’ pathways toward net zero emissions.

Santos’ claims – “Clean” gas & a “credible” net zero pathway

Santos Ltd is one of Australia’s largest gas companies, and the biggest domestic gas supplier in the country.

In Australia its major projects include oil and gas extraction off the coast of Western Australia, as well as in the vast Cooper and Eromanga Basins that span South Australia and Queensland.

Santos is also a major player in coal seam gas, developing vast areas of the Surat and Bowen Basins in Queensland and planning a major new CSG project around the northern NSW agricultural hub of Narrabri.

In 2019-20, Santos was responsible for approximately 7.74 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent emissions from its direct operations, with the end-use of the natural gas it supplied emitting an additional 28.6 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent.

Despite this, Santos describes itself as a “clean energy” provider in its 2020 Annual Report, stating that natural gas is a “clean fuel”.

It has also sought to assure investors and the public that it has a clear and credible pathway to achieve net zero emissions by 2040.

This pathway is heavily reliant on both carbon capture and storage (CCS)processes and the production of “blue hydrogen”.

However, ACCR alleges that Santos failed to disclose that it has firm plans to increase its greenhouse gas emissions by developing new or existing oil and gas project including the Barossa, Dorado and Narrabri LNG projects. ACCR also alleges that Santos failed to disclose that its net zero plans depend upon a range of undisclosed qualifications and assumptions about CCS.

In addition, although blue hydrogen is increasingly touted as a key element in gas companies’ pathways toward net zero emissions, scientists and even key gas industry figures have raised questions over its environmental impacts in comparison to other energy sources.

ACCR says that these issues call into question whether Santos had reasonable grounds to assert it has a “clear and credible” plan to reach net zero emissions by 2040.

On behalf of ACCR, we will argue that in making the above claims Santos potentially engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct under both the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and the Australian Consumer Law.

We are asking the court to grant an injunction requiring Santos to correct the record publicly on these statements, and prohibit Santos from engaging in similar misleading or deceptive conduct in the future.

The Impact of Greenwashing – Investors & Environment

This case is about holding gas companies like Santos to account for the claims they make about their product and future in a low-carbon world.

Our client, ACCR, is a shareholder advocacy organisation focused on how listed companies, industry associations, and investors are managing climate, labour, human rights and governance issues.

They are also investors in Santos, taking this action to ensure the company and others like it fulfil their legal responsibility to be transparent and open with shareholders like ACCR.

Companies have an obligation to be upfront and honest with investors – this is particularly important to investors who are trying to assess which companies will survive and thrive in a rapidly changing global energy economy.

Misleading information can have a dramatic effect on the market, on investors, and ultimately on the environment.

It can leave investors vulnerable to major losses. It can skew the market unfairly in favour of companies failing to adequately respond to the climate change, and unfairly away from companies that are acting responsibly.

In doing so, misleading information about natural gas and the transition towards a lower carbon economy can obstruct an effective and timely response to the climate crisis.

A genuine transition to a low-carbon energy economy is crucial if Australia is serious about meeting its commitments under the Paris Agreement and ensuring the world avoids the worst impacts of climate change.

It’s essential that energy companies play their part and are upfront and honest about their role in this crisis and the challenges they face in adapting to a low-carbon economy.

This landmark case will help to ensure energy companies like Santos are held to account for the statements they make to investors and the public in the face of the global challenge of climate change. 

IMAGE: Santos 2021 Sustainability Report

Santos Ltd is one of Australia’s largest gas companies and is reportedly the biggest domestic gas supplier in the country. This court case is challenging the veracity of a company’s net zero emissions target, the viability of carbon capture and storage, and the environmental impacts of blue hydrogen.

Santos is also a major player in coal seam gas, developing vast areas of the Surat and Bowen Basins in Queensland and planning a major new CSG project around the northern NSW agricultural hub of Narrabri.

The Motley Fool blog stated on 26 August 2021 that; The Santos Ltd (ASX: STO) share price slumped today after news broke that the company is facing a lawsuit. At market close, Santos shares are down 2.27% to $6.02. It is worth noting that this means the company’s share price is now at a new low for the 2021 calendar year.

End of trading on Friday 27 August 2021 its share price fell again to $5.57.

Tony Windsor on fighting the Santos pipeline

“They were there in an attempt to survey a pipeline to convey coal seam gas from gas giant Santos’s proposed Narrabri gas field. As one landholder, David Chadwick, said: the pipeline was the “head of the snake” and if allowed to proceed would provide the infrastructure to convey the gas to Sydney or internationally and provide the political pressure to develop about 850 gas wells near Narrabri, with a view to hundreds more across the Liverpool Plains and associated areas.” [Tony Windsor, former  independent member for the federal seat of New England]

The Saturday Paper, 9-15 December 2017:

Last week I was working with my son Andrew on our farm 25 kilometres north of Coonamble when he received a message that there were trespassers on the neighbouring farm. A digital alert system had been put in place for such an event.

Within minutes, farm vehicles from all the neighbours converged on the scene. Others moved in on the trespassers from the eastern side and in a pincer movement the trespassers became trapped and unable to gain access to their vehicles.

By this time, about 100 agitated and concerned farmers, their employees and families were there to express their disgust at what had just occurred. The police had also arrived.

It was ascertained that these trespassers were not your everyday illegal pig hunters or bushwalkers. But they were no less illegal and in breach of the law.

These trespassers were eventually allowed to leave after the police took their details. They proceeded to another small town called Warren, more than 100 kilometres away, where they were observed acting strangely.

The next day, they were followed on the ground by vehicle and in the air by aircraft and again they invaded private lands without appropriate authority and were hunted off. They returned to Coonamble to complain to police about being harassed, and then they left the district.

The trespassers were dressed in new clothes, trying to look like ecological scientists but without any identification. They had a security officer with them.

The question is why? Why would these people climb over a gate to gain access to the property when on that gate was a sign warning about biosecurity, with the farmer’s mobile phone number on the sign? Why wasn’t contact made? Why were they behaving like this?

It has often been said there will be wars over water. In its own way, the scene I was watching was a skirmish in what has the potential to become a war and rewrite the politics of water, land use and energy in this country. It was also an insight into how threatened the farm community felt and demonstrated how it would be difficult to fight these farmers’ guerilla tactics. It was a warning they were serious players.

It also occurred to me that most people in our major cities would not necessarily understand why a small community would mobilise itself so quickly at an apparent breach of their rights.

This article is an attempt to explain some of the detail and policy clashes that will evolve over the coming year, on the Liverpool Plains, on the plain country west of the Pilliga, and around the Adani coalmine in Queensland.

Read the full article here.

Knitting Nannas Visit Narrabri and Proposed Santos Gasfield During Third Annual Conference

The Knitting Nannas Against Gas and Greed (KNAG) held their third annual conference at Narrabri on August 25-27. Attendees came from around NSW and further afield. The theme of this year’s conference was “Well behaved women seldom make history”.    

Narrabri was chosen as the venue because of its proximity to Santos’ proposed gasfield.  (The gasfield starts 6 km from the Narrabri Post Office.)

The attendees welcomed the opportunity to network with other Nannas and to hear inspiring speeches from Sue Higginson (Environmental Defender’s Office ) and Sydney Morning Herald journalist  Elizabeth Farrelly as well as women from the local Gomeroi community.  Unfortunately Janelle Saffin, who had been scheduled to speak, was an apology because of illness.

Perhaps the most important aspect of the conference was the opportunity to learn more about Santos’ gasfield which will cover a large area of farmland as well as the Pilliga Forest. In addition to hearing about local concerns, the Nannas had the opportunity to tour parts of the gasfield.

This immense development of 850 gas wells will have a devastating impact on the biodiverse-rich Pilliga Forest which provides habitat for a range of threatened species including Koala.  It’s not just the number of wells proposed but all the accompanying infrastructure such as roads, pipelines, vents and flares which mean that large amounts of the forest will be cleared.

So here we have land owned by the people of NSW – it’s OUR forest – which is going to be devastated so that Santos can make massive profits.  What was of great concern is that there has ALREADY been extensive infrastructure (wells, flares, wastewater storage and pipelines) developed in the Pilliga Forest – although to date it has only been a pilot project. Forest clearing is not the only issue about Santos’ gasfield.  There are major concerns. about contamination of the water table and impact on the recharge of the Great Artesian Basin. Santos also has a poor record in preventing and then cleaning up toxic spills during operation of its pilot project. And then there’s the question of the disposal of huge volumes of produced water and salt.  Santos has not provided satisfactory answers to these and many other questions.

While final approval has not yet been given for this proposal[1], the Nannas are concerned about the NSW Government’s record in pushing destructive mining projects which are not in the long-term community interest. We fear that this project will be approved despite all the opposition and the very many concerns about its long-term impacts.  It seems the big end of town is much more important to our politicians than the future health of our natural environment or productive farmland.   The Nannas want to see this change.

- Leonie the Novice Knitter

---

[1] The massive EIS was on exhibition earlier this year.  A final decision on whether the project will be allowed to go ahead is yet to be made.

Images supplied

Guest Speak is a North Coast Voices segment allowing serious or satirical comment from NSW Northern Rivers residents. Email northcoastvoices at gmail dot com dot au to submit comment for consideration

Australia 2017: No, means no in the bush when it comes to the gas industry

https://youtu.be/a_kxWi6_MWY

Go to http://majorprojects.planning.nsw.gov.au/index.pl?action=view_job&job_id=6456 to view Santos Ltd/Santos NSW (Eastern) Pty Ltd’s Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for it Narrabri Gas Project – a proposed 850 well gasfield across the Pilliga.

Go to North West Alliance at  http://www.csgfreenorthwest.org.au/ for assistance with a submission.

“Santos Narrabri Gas Project is merely a Trojan Horse to get hold of the whole of NSW”, Protect the West, 6 April 2017

Submission deadline is 22 May 2017.

Coal Seam Gas miner Santos still under the spotlight concerning sponsorship of Queensland Police

The debate on mining company sponsorship of Queensland Police continues......

Photograph showing Queensland Police vehicles attending NSW Pilliga protest

 against Santos CSG drilling: ABC News 7 April 2015

ABC News 7 April 2015:

The fact that the police refused to name the sponsors, indicates that the police hierarchy know they have a vulnerability.

President of the Australian Council for Civil Liberties Terry O'Gorman

Queensland Police Commissioner Ian Stewart says he is standing by his decision not to release the names of private companies who have sponsored the police service.

Mining companies, banks, media organisations and security firms are among a raft of sponsors behind almost $475,000 in donations to the Queensland Police Service last financial year.

The donations for this financial year are on track to reach the same level.

The ABC first asked for a list of sponsors and the sponsorship amounts four months ago, after environmentalists alleged it was a conflict of interest.

The QPS executive has now provided two lists of donations and a brief description of the programs, but the names have been withheld.

Speaking on 612 ABC Brisbane this afternoon, Commissioner Stewart said the sponsorship arrangements were within the official policy and were a benefit to both the community and the sponsors......

BACKGROUND

The Courier Mail 9 December 2014:

Santos said there was nothing untoward in the sponsorship deal, in which the vehicles attend public functions like caravan and camping shows.

A Santos GLNG spokesman said the claims were ridiculous.

“This is just one of our many investments that contribute to safety in regional Queensland, which also include the CareFlight aeromedical evacuation service used by the general community, the Rural Fire Service, the Royal Flying Doctor Service, and road upgrade programs,’’ he said.

“We have been supporting the Stay On Track Outback safe driving campaign since 2012.

ABC News 8 December 2014:

Queensland Police Commissioner Ian Stewart said Santos was one of a string of sponsors for the campaign, aimed at tourists with caravans on remote roads.

Mr Stewart said Santos had contributed about $40,000 to the program.

Truth in advertising and the coal seam gas industry

 

So confident is the coal seam gas industry of widespread political support across all three tiers of government and  so certain of the fickle attention span of the mainstream media, that its spokespeople knowingly utter falsehoods as easily as they breathe in and out.

 

They film an industry employee on land they don't have permission to enter in an effort to mislead the general public into believing that the employee is a farmer standing on his own land extolling the virtues of coal seam gas.

 

They make a blatantly false statement in print that has to be rebutted by CSIRO scientists:

 

CSIRO rejects claims made by APPEA regarding groundwater and coal seam gas

 

CSIRO rejects the claim made in a television commercial aired on Sunday 2 September that ‘CSIRO [and government studies] have shown that groundwater is safe with coal seam gas’.

• 4 September 2012

At no time has CSIRO made such a statement, and nor do the results of CSIRO research support such a statement.

CSIRO continues to undertake research to better understand the impacts of coal seam gas extraction on groundwater quality and quantity.

CSIRO has stated on the public record that coal seam gas extraction is likely to pose a ‘low risk’ to groundwater quality through contamination. CSIRO has also indicated that groundwater levels will fall as a consequence of coal seam gas extraction. In some places this could see aquifer levels subside by tens of metres for tens of years; in others it is likely to reduce aquifer levels by several metres for several hundred years.

CSIRO continues to undertake research to better understand the impacts of coal seam gas extraction on groundwater quality and quantity.

CSIRO became aware of the advertisement produced by Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association (APPEA) via a scan of social media on Friday 31 August and requested for the commercial to not be aired.

 

Because of this whatever-it-takes business culture which is loose with the truth, one has to question copies of print advertising the industry has displayed on one of its websites www.wewantcsg.com.au.

 

Who is this woman pictured below? Does she really come from Casino on the NSW North Coast? Is she a genuine school teacher or is she an industry employee or even a paid advertsing model? Is she related to someone who works for a mining company? Is she on the staff of a politician who is pro-coal seam gas?
Does she really want CSG?

Perhaps an NCV reader can answer these questions.

 

Richmond Valley Council declares moratorium on new coal seam gas projects. When will Clarence Valley Council do likewise?

Today's Northern Star reports:

Richmond Valley Council has joined the growing list of Northern Rivers councils to declare a moratorium on new coal seam gas projects.

Councillors voted to approve the moratorium (Stuart George, who works for Metgasco, and Charlie Cox excluded themselves from the vote) despite previously having opposed a moratorium.

NSW Greens MLC Jeremy Buckingham, who is the party's spokesman on mining, said it was clear the coal seam gas industry "has not got a social licence to operate in NSW".

"Local government is acting to fill the void left by the state government's failure to implement a moratorium on coal seam gas," he said.

"Santos Chief Executive David Knox's assertion that opposition to coal seam gas has 'peaked' is just wishful thinking. We saw a massive rally in Sydney recently, and 7,000 people marched through Lismore just last weekend. Community understanding and concern continues to grow.

"Last week Marrickville Council voted against allowing coal seam gas at St Peters, and Dart Energy canned their plans to drill. Narrabri Council is considering a motion to stop coal seam gas; Lismore Council has a moratorium; Moree Council, Leichhardt Council, Kyogle Council, Tweed, Byron, Wollongong Council, Camden, Campbelltown and Wollondilly have all expressed concern.

"There is nothing like a looming election to focus the mind of elected officials, and Councillors across NSW are recognising that the community wants to protect their land and water from the threat of coal seam gas.

"Congratulations to Richmond Valley Council for standing up for their community and a healthy environment."