"Name supplied" - readers invited to guess who penned the letter

There are definitely times when newspapers publishing letters to editors shouldn't publish writers' names. However, today's edition of The Daily Examiner is not one of those times. One has to hope this was an oversight by the Examiner.

 

Coal Seam Gas: an object lesson for Northern Rivers communities is coming out of Colorado USA

These photographs and videos set out below are coming out of Colorado in the United States and, show just part of the gas and oil fields flooded in September 2013.

Is this the level of risk Prime Minister Tony Abbott, NSW Premier Barry O’Farrell, Metgasco Limited, and its main backer ERM Power, are willing to expose the flood-prone Northern Rivers region to?

http://youtu.be/y_wNkPYGiRo

Colorado frack-site flooding - September 2013 from Mateo Albaricoque on Vimeo.
http://vimeo.com/74683562

The Daily Examiner 19 September 2013:

EmmaB

So Metgasco is heartened by what the Liberal/Nationals governments are saying at state and federal level and plans to "ride a rising tide" to corporate prosperity on the backs of local communities.

Perhaps its board members should give some thought to both past and recent North Coast flood event history.

Then look at those news photographs of literally one thousand plus flooded gas wells, miles of broken pipelines, drifting condensate tanks and floating chemical barrels contaminating Colorado countryside right now.

Of which one Weld County, Colorado resident stated in the media:

“We probably shouldn’t have had the oil and gas development in a flood plain to begin with. That would have been the prudent thing. But, it’s done now. Now we have deal with the result of having made that decision.”

I can assure Metgasco that Northern Rivers residents are noting the lessons those photographs teach.

1984 Newspeak lives in 21st Century Australia! There is no such thing as "coal seam gas" in the lexicon of the NSW O'Farrell Government

This move by the NSW Coalition Government would be laughable if not for the deceit behind it.

The Sydney Morning Herald 16 September 2013:

The phrase "coal seam gas" is set to be wiped from official documents in NSW and possibly across Australia as governments come under increasing pressure over the contentious energy policy area.

A leaked briefing note prepared for NSW energy and resources minister Chris Hartcher recommends the phrase and its acronym CSG be replaced with the standard term "natural gas from coal seams".

The document says the move is designed to "improve clarity and consistency of the terms used to describe coal seam gas in departmental correspondence, communication and content".

It says the change is a recommendation of the federal Standing Council on Energy and Resources, whose members include ministers from each state and territory and the commonwealth.

In May the council published a National Harmonised Regulatory Framework for Natural Gas from Coal Seams which is designed to ensure "regulatory regimes are robust, consistent and transparent across all Australian jurisdictions".

"This is part of a national harmonisation initiative adopted by all governments," the NSW briefing note says.

The note recommends that references to "coal seam gas" and "CSG" be removed "where possible" in sentences on websites and in marketing material and standard responses to letters.

In internal briefing notes "natural gas from coal seams" should be used in the first reference, it advises.

However, CSG and coal seam gas are condoned on social media to track the national debate.

"Social media relies on CSG or coal seam gas references and hashtags (ie: #CSG)," the note says.

"In order to participate and track conversations it is therefore acceptable to use CSG or coal seam gas on Twitter and Facebook. CSG is also a recognised online search term and is a relevant key work for Search Engine Optimisation (SEO). This will assist the public in finding government information on the issue".

A handwritten addition to the note says the government "will need to ensure same approach" is followed within two independent agencies, the Land and Water Commissioner and the Office of the Chief Scientist.

So how will local government and greenhouse gas abatement businesses fare now that Abbott & Co have changed the goal posts?

Prime Minister-elect Tony Abbott says his government will waste little time before getting down to business after he and his frontbench are officially sworn in this morning.

Ten days after being elected to government, the Prime Minister-elect, his ministers and parliamentary secretaries will be officially commissioned by the Governor-General Quentin Bryce at Government House.

Mr Abbott says he will immediately instruct the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet to prepare legislation to repeal the carbon tax. He also says incoming treasurer Joe Hockey will instruct the board of the Clean Energy Corporation to cease operations. [ABC News 18 September 2013]

Right now there are local councils across Australia considering the installation of landfill gas extraction systems. A laudable aim.

One particular council received advice that under the Labor federal government scheme its gas extraction project would generate revenues and savings worth between $1.8 million to $2.6 million over 7 years for estimated installation/operating costs of $1.18 million.

However, under the Abbott Government it is predicted that this council will have to outlay an est. $1.18 million in installation/operating costs over the next 7 years in order to generate revenue and savings in the vicinity of $512,000 during that same time period. Leaving the project with a net present value of an est. -$670,000.

An unenviable position for the council to be in and, one that residents and ratepayers will recognise as a harbinger of rises in domestic and commercial waste charges.

Companies which supply these landfill gas extraction systems to local government may be in an even worse position. Particularly those companies which have multiple councils on their customer lists.

If one looks at past minutes of various council meetings held up and down the east coast of the country, some of these waste management businesses committed themselves to long contracts in the belief that the carbon pricing mechanism/emissions trading scheme was here to stay.

A company which was relying on future trading of carbon credits on the domestic/international market or renewable energy certificates - to offset generous terms in tenders submitted to and accepted by a council – may be wondering what its financial bottom line will look like by 2015-16.

Especially if its tender also involved energy creation, given falling electricity demand in Australia

One particular December 2011 contract on the public record (which was predicated on potentially higher revenue for the company under Labor's Clean Energy Future legislation) can be found in Gladstone Regional Council records:

1. Accepts the offer from LGI Pty Ltd for contract number 35/12 for a period of 30

years for:-

A). No capital or ongoing maintenance costs for:-

i. the landfill gas extraction system,

ii. the flaring system,

iii. the electricity grid connection and generation system.

B). No costs for:-

i. creation, registration, sale & reporting of Carbon Farming Initiative

credits generated,

ii. sale & reporting of all electricity generated,

iii. creation, registration, sale & reporting on large renewable energy

certificates relating to all renewable electricity generated.

C). A share in the gross revenue generated form the carbon credits, raw

electricity generated and the Large Renewable Energy Certificates

associated with the renewable electricity generation as outline in the

attached confidential tender evaluation.Page 5

2. Notes the capital value of the landfill gas extraction & flaring system to be of the

order of $450,000 and the total value of the credits from the Carbon Farming

Initiative for legacy waste to be $4.6 million over 30 years.

The markedly lower revenue and savings expected under the Abbott Government’s ‘direct action’ scheme may see some of the smaller businesses involved in landfill gas extraction go to the wall if the they hold too many pre-Abbott Government council contacts. 

Abbott's Direct Action Plan held up to ridicule

Smithsonian Magazine 12 September 2013:

Australia’s newly elected liberal government, led by prime minister Tony Abbott, has very different ideas about what constitutes adequate climate policy than the country’s former political leaders. Among those changes, the New Scientist writes, are getting rid of both the country’s emissions trading scheme and its climate advisory board. To make amends, Abbott proposes a new carbon reduction policy, but experts have already written off that plan as a fatally flawed failure.

Rather than sneak these changes by the Australian public, they seem to have driven the Liberal-National coalition’s victory. Here’s the New Scientist:

It ran for election with a core idea of “scrapping the carbon tax”.

Abbott’s coalition also signalled that it would disband Australia’s Climate Commission – an independent scientific body that provides reliable information on climate change to the public. In response to a report the commission released, warning that extreme weather was made more likely by climate change, Abbott said: “When the carbon tax goes, all of those bureaucracies will go and I suspect we might find that the particular position you refer to goes with them.”

Abbott does not keep his climate skepticism a secret. In 2009, the New Scientist points out, he commented that the “science is highly contentious, to say the least” and “the climate change argument is absolute crap.” Staying true to form, upon victory his party declared that funding for such “ridiculous” climate-themed research will soon dry up.

According to the IPCC, there is “ample evidence for significant potential impacts” to Australia’s climate and ecology as climate change continues to tamper with temperatures and precipitation in the future. By 2030, rain patterns will change by about 10 percent in magnitude, mostly decreasing but also producing more frequent severe storms in the summer. In Sydney, for example, “100-year floods” are predicted to increase by a factor of ten. Pest animals like rabbits will increase, while some of Australia’s beloved biodiversity–think koalas and coral reefs–may decrease. Overall, things don’t look pretty for Australia under a warmer future scenario.

Abbott may consider adding the disclaimer of potentially more events like the recent flooding, drought and fires his country has suffered to his promises of creating ”a stronger Australia” and a “better future.” However, his campaign slogan of “Chose real change” may turn out to be unsettlingly on the mark.....

Did Prime Minister-elect Tony Abbott make doubly sure he received four particular votes in the 2013 Australian Federal Election?

Anyone who has watched the past televised coverage of Australian Prime Minister-elect Tony Abbott with his family in an interview situation will know that he has a habit of breathing down the necks of his wife and daughters when they speak to the media.

Tony Abbott quickly moving into frame when one of his daughters was asked to comment during the

ABC TV Kitchen Cabinet program on 4 September 2013

The troublesome question is; has Abbott carried this one step too far? 

Apparently all the family submitted sealed votes at the Freshwater Surf Life Saving Club on 7 September 2013, which may possibly have been silent votes lodged with the precautionary aim of concealing their (already widely publicised) main residential address on the public electoral rolls.

Certainly the photographs below show these sealed envelopes were lodged with the Australian Electoral Commission at the polling booth they attended for that last media bite played out for the attending press.

Which leaves one wondering - did the over controlling Abbott line up his wife and daughters at home and either direct or check that they had voted according to his wishes before the envelopes were sealed?

A far cry from the Abbott family queueing to vote sans sealed envelopes, in the election the Coalition lost in 2010

These election day photographs are courtesy of relentless self-promotion by the Abbott family found on Zimbio

As the Abbott Government is sworn in today - a look at the National Party of Australia post-election September 2013

Starting at 10.20am on 18 September 2013 the Abbott Federal Government was sworn in.

As of 9.22am on the same day......

Across the entire continent of Australia the National Party only received 535,121 first preference votes out of the 12.96 million votes cast in the 2013 Federal Election or 4.39 per cent of the total vote pool.

In their own right the Nationals hold a mere 9 of the Coalition’s 90 House of Representatives seats in the 44th Australian Parliament.

While the Liberal National Party of Queensland (which absorbed the Queensland Nationals into its Liberal dominated ranks) only received 1,103,311 first preference votes or 9.04 per cent of the total vote pool and only holds 22 of the Coalition’s 90 seats.

Or to put it in perspective – the Nationals hold only two more federal seats now than they did after the 2010 election, the Liberal National Party holds only one more seat and, even the Nationals and Liberal National Party combined only hold 31 seats in the Lower House of this parliament.

Whichever way one looks at it, the Nationals are no longer the solid rump of the Coalition but rather a small, increasingly irrelevant appendage to the dominant Liberal Party Of Australia which in its own right holds 58 seats in the House of Representatives. Even Labor at 55 seats still holds more electorates than the Nationals.

In a 20 person Federal Cabinet announced on 16 September the Nationals hold just two ministries and have 2 assistant ministers in the Outer Ministry, one of which is in the Senate.

So how effective are these 9 lonely House of Representatives Nationals going to be in Canberra?

More importantly – just how effective will be those two Nationals MPs representing the NSW Northern Rivers region?

Will our region only get scraps from the Liberal Party table when it comes to vital federal funding?

Luke Hartsuyker failed to deliver much in the way of funding across the Northern Rivers the last time he was in government, while Kevin Hogan has never held any form of public office before and his funding promises during the recent election campaign amounted to peanuts with one exception.

How seriously the Northern Rivers currently takes Kevin Hogan might be indicated by the fact that the day after the first post-election joint Coalition party room meeting in Canberra at which he was introduced to his colleagues, the lead online story in The Northern Star was about a giant pumpkin for sale in Kyogle.