Green group fired up on 'inconvenient' report

A MAJOR energy consultancy has been accused of suppressing a report that might have cast doubt on industry assurances that coal seam gas is a much cleaner fuel than coal.

By InvestSMART · 14 Nov 2011

By InvestSMART ·
14 Nov 2011

Comments

A MAJOR energy consultancy has been accused of suppressing a report that might have cast doubt on industry assurances that coal seam gas is a much cleaner fuel than coal.

Green group Beyond Zero Emissions, which advocates the development of renewable energy, commissioned a report from consultant WorleyParsons in June. The report, completed in September, is believed to raise questions about the leakage of greenhouse gases such as methane from coal seam gas projects.

Beyond Zero, which has not received the report, is accusing the company of holding it back to protect its lucrative business with the gas industry.

"We have a contract for the delivery of this report," Beyond Zero executive director Matthew Wright told The Age.

"The report has been completed and the fact that its findings are inconvenient for the gas industry and WorleyParsons is not a good enough reason for its suppression. It is of the utmost importance that the proper scientific research into the true emissions impact of coal seam gas sees the light of day."

Green groups including Beyond Zero argue the jury is still out on industry claims that gas, taken across its lifetime from extraction to burning, is significantly lower in greenhouse gas emissions than coal.

Mr Wright said "fugitive emissions" such as leakage from gas wells meant that the life cycle of gas may turn out to be little cleaner than coal. The report he commissioned was also tasked with investigating little-understood "migratory emissions" in which gas, released by the removal of ground water, moves through aquifers and leaks out of other bores, often kilometres away.

The disputed report is believed to highlight the fact that there is no Australian data on fugitive emissions and to recommend the use of technology such as lasers to measure the leaks.

Industry group the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association previously commissioned a report by WorleyParsons that the industry claimed backed the carbon credentials of gas.

APPEA chief operating officer for eastern Australia, Rick Wilkinson, told the ABC's Radio National: "The answer's consistent ... gas is better than coal when you use it for generation. It's just proving hard for the greens to accept the science."

WorleyParsons said it "rejects out of hand the baseless claims allegedly made by Matthew Wright of Beyond Zero Emissions". It acknowledged Beyond Zero had engaged the company to write a report. But it said Beyond Zero and WorleyParsons "subsequently agreed not to proceed with this report".

The company also said it had submitted a report on the life cycle GHG emissions for Australian gas via a peer-reviewed scientific journal.

WorleyParsons, a $6 billion ASX-listed company, has large deals with the resources sector, including a $580 million contract with gas giant QGC.

Go to Google News, then click "Follow" button to add us.

Share this article and show your support

Frequently Asked Questions about this Article…

What is the dispute between Beyond Zero Emissions and WorleyParsons about?

Beyond Zero Emissions (a green group) says it commissioned a WorleyParsons report in June that was completed in September and is now being withheld — accusing the firm of suppressing findings that could question coal seam gas emissions. WorleyParsons rejects those allegations, saying Beyond Zero and WorleyParsons later agreed not to proceed with the report and that it has submitted a life‑cycle GHG emissions paper via a peer‑reviewed journal.

What topics did the disputed WorleyParsons report reportedly investigate?

The report is believed to examine life‑cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for coal seam gas, including 'fugitive emissions' (methane leakage from wells) and less understood 'migratory emissions' (gas released when groundwater is removed that can move through aquifers and leak from other bores). It reportedly highlights a lack of Australian data on these leaks and recommends technologies such as lasers to measure them.

Could coal seam gas be as polluting as coal over its full life cycle?

According to the article, green groups argue the jury is still out. Beyond Zero Emissions warns that fugitive and migratory methane emissions could mean gas is only marginally cleaner — or potentially similar to coal — when measured from extraction through burning. The question remains contested and depends on accurate measurements of leaks.

What does the gas industry say about gas versus coal emissions?

Industry groups, including the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association (APPEA), cite previous reports (including one they commissioned from WorleyParsons) that conclude gas is better than coal for power generation. APPEA’s eastern Australia COO, Rick Wilkinson, is quoted saying 'gas is better than coal when you use it for generation.'

Has WorleyParsons admitted to suppressing environmental findings?

No. WorleyParsons has publicly rejected Beyond Zero Emissions' claims of suppression, saying the parties agreed not to proceed with the particular commissioned report and noting it has submitted life‑cycle GHG findings for Australian gas to a peer‑reviewed scientific journal.

What are 'fugitive emissions' and 'migratory emissions' in coal seam gas projects?

Fugitive emissions are unintended releases of gases like methane from wells and infrastructure. Migratory emissions — highlighted in the article — refer to gas released when groundwater is removed, allowing gas to move through aquifers and potentially leak from other bores, sometimes kilometres away. Both are important for accurately assessing total GHG impact.

Are there measurement or data gaps in Australia on coal seam gas methane leaks?

Yes. The disputed report is believed to note there is no Australian data on fugitive emissions from coal seam gas and recommends better measurement techniques (for example, laser technology) to quantify leaks and improve life‑cycle emissions estimates.

Why should everyday investors pay attention to this WorleyParsons and gas industry controversy?

The article highlights reputational and disclosure issues that can matter to investors: WorleyParsons is an ASX‑listed company (about $6 billion) with large resources‑sector contracts, including a reported $580 million deal with gas giant QGC. Environmental controversies, data gaps on emissions, and disputes over reports can influence regulatory scrutiny, public perception and long‑term demand for gas — factors investors may want to monitor.