The practice known as data washing is a particularly insidious form of disinformation, according to Claire Snyder, director of Climate Integrity, “because it’s so hard to spot.” Snyder claims to have identified this tactic within the Australian government’s Future Gas Strategy, released in May last year. This landmark policy, which promotes the expansion of gas production through to 2050, heavily relied on a submission from fossil fuel lobbyists, Australian Energy Producers (AEP), which in turn was based on research by consultancy firm EY.
The Future Gas Strategy has been criticized for its reliance on what experts from the University of Technology Sydney describe as deeply flawed research. Snyder argues that the EY report exemplifies how consultants can use complex modeling to sway policymakers, advancing the interests of their clients. Data washing involves hiring consultants to produce seemingly independent analyses that lend credibility to lobbying efforts, thus distorting policy debates.
Questionable Data and Industry Influence
The EY report, commissioned by AEP two years ago, aimed to provide an “independent assessment” of the future role of natural gas in Australia. AEP’s submission, accompanied by a media release, highlighted EY’s findings under the headline, “New gas supply needed in all net zero pathways: EY report.” The report claimed to have examined around 350 net zero pathways globally, suggesting that continued gas use was necessary through 2050 and beyond.
However, the report’s scenarios were criticized for being overly simplistic and misleading. Even in the most renewable-intensive scenario, gas demand would only decline by 40% by 2050. Other scenarios projected much higher gas demand, raising concerns among environmentalists and climate experts.
Expert Criticism and Flawed Assumptions
In response, Climate Integrity commissioned the Institute for Sustainable Futures at UTS to scrutinize the EY analysis. They identified numerous “misrepresentations and flaws,” particularly in how the scenarios were presented as compatible with net zero goals and the Paris Agreement. Snyder highlighted the overestimation of carbon capture and storage (CCS) capabilities, a technology portrayed as essential in the EY report.
“When we looked at the IPCC database … 134 of the scenarios they cited don’t exist,” Snyder revealed.
The EY report’s optimistic portrayal of CCS, citing projects like the Gorgon project in Western Australia, was met with skepticism. Gorgon, the world’s largest CCS project, has struggled with technical issues, capturing far less CO2 than promised.
Implications for Policy and Industry
The release of the Future Gas Strategy, echoing much of the EY/AEP submission, was met with mixed reactions. Resources Minister Madeleine King emphasized the necessity of natural gas in all credible net zero scenarios. This stance pleased the gas lobby but alarmed environmentalists, who noted Australia’s significant contribution to global greenhouse emissions.
The Climate Council condemned the strategy as a “regressive echo” of previous government policies. Critics argue that Labor, once opposed to such policies, has now adopted a similar approach, raising questions about the integrity of the policymaking process.
Calls for Accountability and Transparency
Climate Integrity has taken action by writing to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), urging an investigation into the claims made in the AEP submission and the EY report. The letter questions whether these claims are misleading or deceptive under Australian Consumer Law.
“The ACCC has recently stressed a focus on so-called ‘greenwashing’ claims by industry that could mislead consumers,” the letter states.
The ACCC has yet to announce whether it will investigate these claims. Meanwhile, a Senate inquiry into misinformation and disinformation about climate change has been initiated. The inquiry, chaired by Greens Senator Peter Whish-Wilson, will examine the allegations of data washing, although it remains unclear if AEP or EY will be called to testify.
Looking Ahead: The Future of Energy Policy
The controversy surrounding the Future Gas Strategy underscores the complexities of energy policy in the face of climate change. As Australia grapples with its role as a major gas exporter, the influence of industry lobbyists and the integrity of consultancy reports will remain critical issues. The outcome of ongoing investigations and inquiries could shape the nation’s energy strategy and its commitment to international climate agreements.
As the debate continues, stakeholders from all sides will be watching closely to see how these developments influence Australia’s path towards a sustainable energy future.
