A little game of compare and contrast, for those of you who aren’t yet convinced that The Australian is a tool of the ruling class (no conspiracy theories here, just an acceptance of economic reality).
First, an article by Imre Salusinszky (right-wing ideologue and professor of literature) in The Australian, claiming that a new report by engineering consultancy WorleyParsons categorically shows that coal seam gas (CSG) has less emissions than coal, (and, of course, that in their stance against CSG The Greens are being ‘political’, which, to Imre, is about “making noise”).
Next, two articles that offer then entirely contrary interpretation of the very same report. One in the Sydney Morning Herald, and the other in Climate Spectator. Neither of these are exactly propaganda tools for the revolution (not that there’s anything wrong with that!). They both read the report as stating that, taken over its full life-cycle, CSG-LNG is no better (if not, worse) than black coal, and will not replace it in China (where we will be shipping most of our CSG-LNG), but instead just add its emissions to the grid.
In sum, it’s tremendously bad and needs to be stopped. Just like all coal mining and coal fired plants.
Who to believe here…? I don’t think we need to answer that question.
Imre, do you think we’re stupid?