Does anyone use the term eco-terrorists any more? Since Greenpeace stopped tying themselves to power plant smokestacks on a regular basis and global economic leaders decided they’d rather deal with the financial crisis than with climate change, the mood among those who advocate for environmental rules has evolved to one of public education and consensus-seeking.

That doesn’t mean that natural gas magnates should rest easy though, or at least that’s what the people traditionally charged with evaluating the manifold security risks for energy companies operating in harsh environments are arguing.

Control Risks is a London-based organization famous in part for its analysis of security risks and solutions for firms like oil majors, but equally for its involvement in the kind of security options that drive the plotlines of Hollywood thrillers involving kidnapping and infrastructure blowing up. The firm released a report this week on the global anti-fracking movement (download a PDF copy of it from their web site using this link), and it makes for interesting reading.

“Although anti-fracking direct action – primarily project site denial of access (blockades), equipment occupations and demonstrations – currently poses limited operational and security risks to unconventional gas development, it is becoming a more prominent feature of the anti-fracking movement,” the Control Risks report says.

It wouldn’t take much for the mood of the US natural gas business on security to turn gloomy; the success of efforts to block development in some areas already has some of the sector feeling persecuted.

What has your company done to enhance security? Discuss more here.