Science minister warns CSIRO against ‘renting out’ its brand to giant gas companies
The science minister, Ed Husic, has questioned the priorities of Australia’s premier science body, warning it against “renting out” its brand to huge gas companies that could easily fund their own decarbonisation efforts.
Husic told the Spark festival on Monday that a “very major gas company” had approached CSIRO to support its claims of working towards net zero greenhouse gas emissions. While emphasising CSIRO’s independence, Husic said it should focus efforts elsewhere. “Gas firms at the moment are making enough money to ensure that the mint could blush,” Husic said.
“I do wonder why we need to have gas firms renting out the brand – [for] CSIRO to do decarbonisation work – that I’m sure they could get a lot of others to do.
“I would rather the CSIRO work with a lot more particularly smaller or extensively Australian firms on that [decarbonising] effort.”
It is understood the company seeking to partner with CSIRO is gas giant Santos, with the work involving carbon capture and storage. Guardian Australia approached Husic’s office and Santos for comment.
Husic made the comments after being questioned about Guardian Australia’s report on Sunday that CSIRO had ceased funding for its decadal forecasting program five years into its $37m funded plan. The project’s inability to attract additional external funding was one reason for CSIRO abandoning the work, insiders say.
One senior researcher on Monday said CSIRO had made it clear it did not want scientists to enter into ventures on projects valued at less than $500,000. The Climate Science Centre, for instance, could have helped close a funding hole of more than $4m if such projects had been permitted.
“They want us to work with fewer and bigger companies,” the researcher said, requesting anonymity. “They cut off a lot of smaller projects.”
Sign up for our free morning newsletter and afternoon email to get your daily news roundup
A CSIRO spokesperson said the organisation “works with government, industry large and small, and the community on a wide range of research and technological solutions aimed at reducing emissions and helping decarbonise Australia’s economy”.
They declined to confirm whether Santos was the proposed partner, saying any specific agreements being considered were commercial-in-confidence.
The spokesperson dismissed the claim of a $4m funding hole as “incorrect”, as was the comment that scientists were restricted to collaborations worth more than $500,000.
“We work with a range of organisations small, medium and large, on a number of projects with a focus always on ensuring the maximum impact can be achieved through the dedication of important science resources,” they said.
CSIRO had “facilitated” 339 research projects for 249 companies nationwide as part of its SME Connect program. These injected more than $35m into research and development of these projects, they said.
Husic said CSIRO had “gone to great lengths” to say they were doing “other things” with the research gleaned from decadal forecasting.
“CSIRO is an independent body and they make their own decisions,” he said.
“There might be some other ways in which they can bring their considerable research weight to bear on national problems and work locally. I do think with that national issue of decarbonisation, we do need to align a lot of our work.
“This is a government that’s committed [to] net zero, and everything that we can do – from government through all the agencies, harmonised on this effort – will go a very long way.”
CSIRO staff are due to discuss recent changes at the organisation at a session organised by the Community and Public Sector Union on Tuesday afternoon.
Among the issues likely to be raised include the abrupt cancellation of the decadal forecasting. That’s even though CSIRO’s website still listed the work as closing a “research gap” between seasonal forecasting and long-term climate projections that promised to provide “invaluable insights to industry and beyond”.
Also likely to be raised will be the union’s concern about the lack of consultation over the decision to combine the Oceans and Atmosphere and Land and Water business units.