IT is hardly surprising that new ways of extracting gas from the environment, on sites often close to residential centres, have provoked suspicion and resistance.

The way in which Dart Energy proposes to extract coal bed methane at Airth near Falkirk, it should be stressed, is not fracking, the controversial process that has provoked so many protests in England. Nevertheless, as Friends of the Earth point out, a high proportion of coal bed methane wells in Australia were subsequently fracked in order to extract the remainder of gas on the sites. Their fear is, in short, that if the Airth proposal is greenlighted now, it will be difficult to prevent fracking on the site in future.

What this highlights is the level of fear and lack of trust among members of the public with regards to new and unconventional methods of gas extraction, especially those that take place close to residential areas. That fear is understandable. Fossil fuel extraction is lucrative business. The discovery of shale gas in the United States has created a huge industry in a very short space of time, not to mention provoking fevered excitement among investors. This is in spite of the fact that fracking (hydraulic fracturing) - a method widely used in the United States by which a mixture of water, sand and chemicals is injected at high pressure into rocks containing gas to drive it out - has prompted widespread environmental concerns. Injecting fluid underground can increase pressure on seismic faults and cause small earthquakes. There are also anxieties about the potential contamination of groundwater by the chemicals used in fracking. Besides such immediate concerns, there are growing worries that the expansion of new ways of extracting gas could reduce momentum in the drive to create more energy from renewables.

Fracking is not immediately in prospect in Scotland. It is understandable, though, that unconventional gas extraction methods cause concerns in communities where operations are proposed. Put simply, people worry that amid all the excitement about finding new ways to extract this precious resource, the potential risks may not have been properly taken into account.

That is why a public inquiry is so important. It will help establish fact from rumour and fiction. It should investigate not only what is known about the risks associated with coal bed methane extraction and fracking, but also whether sufficient research has been done to be confident in assessing how safe it is. Local people will want to hear from independent analysts, not just industry experts.

It would be wrong to view those protesting against these operations as nimbyists or Luddites. These methods of gas extraction have the potential to be a boon to local communities, but the public rightly requires to be convinced that such benefits will not come at an unacceptable environmental cost.