Coal Seam Gas and one greenhouse gas emissions myth doing the rounds

THE MYTH

A RESPONSE

Letter to the Editor in The Daily Examiner 23 April 2013:

I’ve noticed recently that there has been some discussion in both mainstream and social media concerning coal seam gas mining and levels of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States.

Various assertions has been made that the reduction in these emissions is both considerable and due solely to gas produced by fracking replacing coal as the main energy source for the U.S. population.

Some have attempted to use this argument to justify coal seam gas (CSG) mining in Australia.

What no-one mentions as they spread this myth is that natural gas has not yet replaced coal as the main source of energy, as where America primarily draws the raw materials supplying its energy generators varies across any one year but coal has generally remained dominant since at least 1973.

There is complete silence on the fact that shale/unconventional gas mining has been conducted on a widening scale since the late 1980s and early 1990s when U.S. national greenhouse gas emissions stood at an estimated 6,183 to 6,912 Tg CO2 equivalent and never a word is said about the fact that government agencies still expect emissions to be back around 6,320 million metric tons in 2035.

Neither do they point out that gas production from coalbed methane (coal seam gas) has been falling since the 1990s. So currently CSG is only an estimated 7.5%  of America’s natural gas production profile.

Nor does anyone mention that annual greenhouse gas emissions began to fall significantly only after U.S. superior courts held in 2007 that these emissions were in fact pollutants under that country’s Clean Air Act and that the Environmental Protection Agency had the right to control emissions emanating from both moving and stationary sources.

Other facts that don’t rate a mention are that America’s national greenhouse gas emissions levels (including methane) are higher now than they were in the 1980s and, that annual emissions from “natural gas” use have been steadily climbing again for the last four years so that it remains the fourth highest source of greenhouse gas emissions ahead of both cement/lime production and the incineration of waste.

So yes, America has made reductions in its emission levels since these peaked in 2007 and its federal and state governments should be congratulated. However, the reductions are in the context of slowing not stopping inevitable rises over time and no single energy source is the hero of the hour.

All this is easily checked at U.S. Energy Information Administration, Energy Protection Agency and Dept. of the Interior websites.

JUDITH M. MELVILLE

Yamba

Nationals MP for Clarence Chris Gulaptis has his work ethic - or lack of it - questioned

From Clarence Valley Rate Payers, Residents & Business Owners Facebook page:

                                                                                                                  

Ursh Tunks  

I finally got a copy of Page Federal MP Janelle Saffins letter of response from the NSW Health Department in relation to her representations on our behalf about the closure of the Haemotology Unit at Grafton Base hospital.

Ironically I suffered quite some flack in certain quarters for daring to question the work ethic of the State Member for Clarence's in particular the electorate office team that purports to work for all the electorate not just their preferred residents and business owners.

A copy of the State Members letter from the same NSW Health Department official details that they received representation from his office via a letter on the 7th of March and a telephone call from his office on the 12th of March. You'll note that Janelle's letter was received by the Health Department on the 24th of January, a good 6 weeks prior to Gulaptis'.

When I contacted the Gulaptis' electorate office in January to advise them of the situation with Haematology Unit the chap that answered the phone told me they had already been contacted by other constituents prior to Christmas about the problem.

Correct me if I am wrong but issues in relation to operational NSW Health matters are the purview of the state governments, and therefore the responsibility for these matters in our electorate are the responsibility of the State Member and his staff.

The situation wasn't some minor issue. The Haematology Unit is vital to the delivery of services to constituents and their families who suffer from bone/blood related cancers. Surely if the state members office was aware prior to Christmas they should made representations then, not three months later.

Our Federal MP realised the import of the situation to our community and made representations on our behalf even though this was an operational NSW Health matter and not in the purview of her responsibilities.

I've been criticised and even threatened because of willingness to openly discuss this issue and the fact that I consider I have the right to comment publicly on what appears to be the failure of our elected state representative and his staff to act in a timely manner for our best interests.

Apparently having the hide to openly discuss the service delivered by our representatives, who are paid to represent us - by us, isn't popular in some quarters. Those quarters are also using tax payer funded time to target people who have the hide to question them. Very curious ... and somewhat indicative of the issue at hand.

If you do your job properly you won't have to waste our money covering your ar*e.

What Murdoch University doesn't mention about one of its Senate members

This is what Murdoch University in West Australia states about Antonino Mario 'Tony' Iannello who has been an external member of its Senate since at least 2006:

Click on image to enlarge

What it does not say is that he has been a director of ERM Power Limited since July 2010 and is currently a shareholder in that company through what appears to be a family superannuation scheme.

ERM Power is the largest shareholder in Metgasco Limited, a coal seam gas exploration and mining company currently holding tenements on the NSW North Coast and operating without a social license from local communities.

ERM appears to have markedly increased its shares in Metgasco as part of a strategy to increase its slice of  the Australian east coast electricity supply market and with a view to taking advantage of conventional and coal seam gas production opportunities in New South Wales.

Given the widespread opposition to coal seam gas exploration and mining, it is no wonder Murdoch University does not have that association up on its web pages. Particularly as Tony Iannello is currently chair of the university's Resources Committee which has investment capability as part of its duties:

 a. Oversee the development of the University’s key strategy of building ‘wealth’ to support the University’s long term educational goals. 
b. Oversee the investment of all monies of the University (including monies held in trust). 
c. Exercise oversight of the finances of all University trusts and foundations. 

One has to wonder if Murdoch University itself is quietly investing in the coal seam gas industry, given the background of the committee chair.

One also has to wonder why Mr. Iannello, living in his plush WA suburban MacMansion with its pool and tennis court, would consider associating himself with a mining sector which has the potential to threaten water security, local economies, lifestyle and amenity in the far away Northern Rivers region of New South Wales.

Perhaps he considers ERM Power's directors fees too good to refuse?

Yes siree! Tony Abbott just doesn't get women

“TONY Abbott's expensive paid parental leave scheme is "all about" encouraging women of "calibre" to have children, the Opposition Leader said today.” {News.com.au 7^th May 2013}

Maude up the Street is hoping mad over Teh Rabbit’s latest bon mot. She thinks that the idea that women who stay at home to raise their children or working women who earn $1,200 a week (before tax) or less have no calibre shows him up as a budding eugenicist. Maude wonders if his father’s family - hailing from England as it does – were fans of British Eugenics Society before they bailed out of that country in the early days of World War Two.

This is a Liberal Party official political advertisement in an election year

http://youtu.be/_3HtNCv3xvM

Not one policy statement or position in this advertisement. Not one promise or undertaking of any sort. Just 1.01 minutes of juvenile attack.

Australian voters deserve a lot better than this from the Federal Liberal Party in 2013.

I'm not the only person thinking this way if The Age report of 6 May is accurate:

A source familiar with the Liberal Party campaign described the advertisement as “stupid, unstatesmanlike and inappropriate”.

“All they have to do [to win the election] is turn up and for Abbott to look like a statesman,” the source said. “Now he's looking like a 14-year-old”.

The Northern Star contracts a case of the jimmy britts

The Northern Star is taken down in more ways than one...

The Northern Star  4 May 2013

Urban Dictionary:

1.	jimmy britts
	Australian version of British rhyming slang 'tom tits' for diarrhea/the shits.

* Hat tip to Clarrie Rivers for pointing out the rhyming slang

A brief look at The Coalition's Policy to Improve the Fair Work Laws

 

Australian Opposition Leader Tony Abbott on introducing the Coalition’s new industrial relations policy talked of no worker being worse off and the proposed legislation needing to pass the pub test.

 

As both these phrases were rather notorious on the NSW North Coast during the Howard Government era, I decided to take a look at this policy document which sets out (among other things) an intention to further limited a union’s right of entry into a workplace, reinstate the Australian Building and Construction Commission and alter the Better Off Overall Test.

 

This is what I found on a first reading of The Coalition's Policy to Improve the Fair Work Laws:

 

On Page 5 there is a justification to change right of entry for union representatives:

According to the footnotes this workplace receiving up to 200 visits is the Foster Wheeler Worley Parsons (Pluto) Joint Venture located 190km north-west of Karratha in Western Australia, where the occupying employer of record Woodside Burrup Pty Ltd (WBPL) would only allow one signed in and staff  accompanied CFMEU representative to see one individual contractor’s employees per visit.

Which means that he was required to make multiple visits due to the scale of this mining venture, where the onshore plant and associated infrastructure alone cover about 80ha and the combined construction and operation workforce was estimated to be between 4,000-6,000 workers over the life of the project up to that point in time.

 

Page 6 contains a justification for reforming the Australian Building and Construction Commission:

Again the footnotes do not fully support these assertions, as productivity was above predicted levels before the Australian Building and Construction Commission (ABCC) was formed and it is noted that the alleged over $6 billion per year is arrived at in part by KPMG Econtech assigning a monetary value to personal leisure time when not at work.

 

By Page 13 of the document the Coalition is stating that between 2014 and 2016 it will review the Fair Australia laws:

Of course there was a prior post-implementation review of these laws between 2011-2012 and the Coalition obviously finds no fault with that particular review as it allegedly intends to rely on some of that its recommendations. Which begs the question as to why there is need for another review if Abbott wins government.

Then on Page 36 the Coalition is supporting a new proposition regarding workplace laws allegedly drawn from that same post-implementation review:

The Fair Work Australia Better Off Overall Test apparently specifies that the employee must actually be “better off overall”. That wages and conditions being offered by the employer in any new individual flexibility arrangement or enterprise agreement are not merely equivalent with the relevant modern award.

 

In Australia, non-monetary benefits broadly cover conditions of work such as guaranteed minimum hours, reasonable working hours, location of employment, flexible working arrangements etc.  

 

During the period Work Choices legislation was in effect, the Fairness Test only partially protected and/or compensated for the loss of such benefits and that under Work Choices there was the removal of any requirement to offset employee losses with benefits. It also meant that being provided with such things as access to a works car park could be assigned a nominal monetary value and used as compensation for loss of award condition/s and overtime worked would not always result in an increase in wage received but could be a payment-in-kind such as leftover food.

 

There is no mention in the fact that the 2011-12 review of work place laws, on which the Coalition policy document relies, clearly indicated that any arrangement to confer a non-monetary benefit on an employee in exchange for a monetary benefit was conditional on the value of the monetary benefit foregone is specified in writing and is relatively insignificant, and the value of the non-monetary benefit is proportionate.

 

However, what is clear is that under proposed changes to Labor's system of individual flexibility arrangements, workers would have a greater ability to trade off entitlements, including penalty rates and leave which was a key characteristic of Work Choices eagerly abused by employers.