Protest movement swells as Premier green-lights fracking

Dr Hatton presented his findings and the government announced its response on Tuesday afternoon.

The inquiry findings

Dr Hatton said when the WA government announced its scientific inquiry last year, there was a widely held view that similar national and international inquiries made one in WA unnecessary.

But there was a unique and disctinctive WA picture of risk and concern and how those risks might be further reduced. There was also new science that made other inquiries somewhat dated.

The panel was asked to recommend a scientific approach to regulating fracking and limit its scope to the technical risks of shattering rock to get gas.

Instead, the panel took a "wider view" of the risks and impacts an industry based on hydraulic fracturing would have on the environment and communities.

"It was our view given the nature of the concerns ... that this broader interpretation would be of greater value and more respectful to the community and the West Australian government," Dr Hatton said.

The inquiry reflected the existing regulatory environment and communities in WA. It involved 12 months of reviews and analaysis and resulted in a highly technical, detailed and lengthy report that needed to be read in its entirety in order to understand the risks and how these might be reduced.

The consultation had attracted massive interest, attendance at public meetings, 9500 pro-forma submissions and 400 written submissions. These complemented the panel's assessment of diverse scientific literature that was both complex and at times contested.

The report was "silent" on whether the moratorium should be lifted; that was the government’s decision, Dr Hatton said.

But it made 91 findings and 44 recommendations, which Dr Hatton emphasised were independent views based solely on an unbiased review of the available evidence.

The principal recommendation was for an enforceable code of practice aimed at further reducing the risks, most of which were associated with the integrity of the wells used and primarily emerged with the location and scale of development.

Strict adherence to global standards to design and construction would limit risk to a low level.

The panel had considered plausible scenarios of development, for how big projects might become and where they would be.

The state already had systems to assess risks to animals and vegetation, but the current process was limited to the consideration of individual wells and not of potential oil and gas field development.

It therefore recommended development proposals for any gas fields go to the federal government for assessment.

The panel concluded that the availability of water was not a significant issue and access to water was already well regulated. The risk to water quality emphasised the importance of long-term integrity of wells. The risk of below ground-pathways for contaminants was generally low, if well integrity was maintained.

Chemical spills and wastewater spills above ground were a greater risk, and a degree of precaution was justified to protect human health. A number of recommendations were made regarding this.

There was to be a minimum distance of two kilometres from human drinking water sources and habitations.

Link between air pollution of gas fracking and health of people living nearby had not been definitely proved but the link was plausible enough that caution was warranted and the panel recommended monitoring.

“The report presents estimated volumes of greenhouse gas for plausible development scenarios over their full life cycle and considers these estimates in the context of Australia’s emissions and commitments," Dr Hatton said.

“Again, the scale of those impacts depends on how big the industry is. The recommendations that we have included in the report extend to baseline measurement of greenhouse gas levels, monitoring for leaks and their remedy over the full development lifecycle of the gas field, a requirement ... to limit methane released ... and appropriate offsetting of emissions.”

The report also recommended that industry contributed to a fund for "remediation of any legacy issues" and that "penalties for any environmental issues should increase as an incentive to compliance."

The Premier's announcement

Premier Mark McGowan said that as a responsible government he needed to respect what the science told him and also take into account what people expected of their government.

He said to impose a blanket ban would undermine the state’s reputation as a safe place to invest and he could not turn his back on industry.

He believed the government had struck the right balance to support economic development, the environment and landowners.

The government accepted all 44 recommendations of the report.

All fracking projects would go through the Environmental Protection Authority.

Companies would be regulated under an enforceable code of practice.

Fracking would be banned within two kilometres of public water sources and towns.

The iconic Dampier Peninsula, national parks and other icons would be off-limits.

Beyond these areas, fracking would be restricted to existing petroleum titles representing just two per cent of the state. That meant 98 per cent of Western Australia would be "frack-free".

Farmers, landowners and traditional owners would, for the first time, have the right to say yes or no to gas production on their land.

"This is a fair and reasonable approach," he said.

The industry would not enjoy a royalties discount; the royalty rate for unconventional oil and gas would increase to 10 per cent, the same rate that applied to conventional petroleum production.

The government would use any royalties to support new renewable energy projects via a special Clean Energy Future Fund with a $9 million seed allocation.

Dissent in the ranks

Three unions attended a recent anti-fracking rally in Perth: United Voice, including chief executive Carolyn Smith who is also President of WA Labor; the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union; and the Maritime Union of Australia.

The McGowan government also faces a revolt from several of its own backbenchers who were reportedly briefed on the issue on Monday night by Dr Hatton.

ALP insiders told The Australian the issue had divided caucus and there was deep anger.

Kimberley and Swan Hills MPs Josie Farrer and Jessica Shaw have already publicly broken ranks to call for a ban.

The protest campaign

The protest campaign is backed by Australian scientists and experts including WA Scientist of the Year Peter Newman, 2003 Australian of the Year Fiona Stanley, former premier Carmen Lawrence, former CSIRO atmospheric research team head Graeme Pearman and Climate Council chief Tim Flannery.

It is also backed by public figures including Paul Kelly, Jimmy Barnes, John Butler, Peter Garret, Missy Higgins, Tim Winton and Janet Holmes a Court.

Weekend reports the Premier was about to open up the Kimberley to fracking prompted a strong reaction on Monday.

In Broome, more than 250 people turned out with just 24 hours’ notice to protest at Entrance Point beach. There were further demonstrations on Monday night at Parliament House and in Geraldton and Exmouth.

Four Kimberley Aboriginal groups are now officially opposed to fracking on traditional lands including Nyul Nyul, Nyikina Mangala and Ngurrara, though the Yungngora group is reportedly pro-fracking because it wants jobs for its at-risk young people.

The Pastoral and Grazers Association supports gas companies' access to natural resources in negotiation with farmers, but the Kimberley Pilbara Cattlemen’s Association called for veto rights.

The Conservation Council of WA on Monday released the contents of a letter received from Premier Mark McGowan during the 2017 election campaign outlining election commitments, quoting the 2016 WA Labor platform.

“WA Labor […] will conduct a public inquiry to examine environment, health, agriculture, heritage and community impacts (including full analysis of lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions) prior to any fracking activity," it said.

"WA Labor will place a moratorium on the use of fracking until such an inquiry can demonstrate that fracking will not compromise the environment, groundwater, public health or contribute adversely to climate change.”

CCWA president Piers Verstegen said Environment Minister Stephen Dawson had told parliament in 2017 the inquiry considered only direct greenhouse gas emissions from fracking.

He said this meant the inquiry was likely to have underestimated the climate impacts of fracking by up to 90 per cent.

“The majority of pollution from fracking occurs indirectly when the gas is burned to generate heat or energy (indirect emissions)," he said.

“Pollution from conventional LNG production in WA is already preventing Australia from meeting Paris Agreement pollution targets.

“Conservation groups are urging Premier Mark McGowan to uphold his election commitments to undertake a ‘full analysis of lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions’ from fracking."

Environs Kimberley director Martin Pritchard said Kimberley residents felt a ban in the South West but not the Kimberley meant they were being treated as second-class citizens.

"The people don't want it, the unions don't want it, the ALP State Executive don't want it," he said.

"Why make such an unpopular decision when there's unlikely to be any gain for years, especially at a time when we're supposed to be reducing carbon emissions not increasing them?

"Passions are running high in the Kimberley and the McGowan government will be dogged by any decision to allow fracking in the region for the rest of their term."

"This is going to be very unpleasant for the Premier if he pushes fracking here, just like James Price Point was for Colin Barnett."

Greens MP Robin Chapple foreshadowed a motion to introduce a Bill for a statewide ban by the end of the parliamentary sitting year.

"To lift the moratorium on fracking would be an act of environmental vandalism," he said.

"The IPCC report says that we have 12 years to halt the worst aspects of climate change, and meanwhile we have seen this government double down on oil and gas, and they are now on the verge of allowing our state to be fracked.

"Any attempt at a strong climate policy would be blown out of the water if fracking were allowed in WA. Renewable energy is cheaper and cleaner, and it is available right now."

The Institute for Financial and Energy Analysis' Bruce Robertson has been quoted saying fracking in WA will drive up domestic gas prices to above global parity.