Woodside’s bid to expand a huge gas project is testing both major parties’ environmental credentials
- Written by Melissa Haswell, Professor of Practice (Environmental Wellbeing), Indigenous Strategy and Services, Honorary Professor (Geosciences) at University of Sydney & Professor of Health, Safety and Environment, Queensland University of Technology, University
Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has indicated a Coalition government would quickly approve a giant gas project off Western Australia which will release billions of tonnes of greenhouse gases until around 2070.
Woodside Energy is leading the joint venture, which would dramatically expand offshore drilling and extend gas production at the North West Shelf project – already Australia’s largest gas-producing venture.
In a statement on Wednesday, Dutton said a Coalition government would “prioritise Western Australian jobs and the delivery of energy security” by directing environment officials to fast-track assessment of the extension, later saying “we will make sure that this approval is arrived at in 30 days”.
Federal Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek is currently considering the proposal. Mining and business interests have been pushing her to make a decision this month.
Dutton’s support for the project is deeply concerning. Evidence suggests extending the project would undermine global efforts to curb carbon emissions and stabilise Earth’s climate. The extension also threatens significant Indigenous sites and pristine coral reef ecosystems. Federal approval of the project puts both natural and heritage assets at risk.
What’s this debate all about?
The North West Shelf project supplies domestic and overseas markets with gas extracted off WA’s north coast.
The project currently comprises offshore extraction facilities and an onshore gas-processing plant at Karratha. Its approval is due to expire in 2030.
Woodside’s proposed extension would allow the project to operate until 2070. It would also permit expanded drilling in new offshore gas fields and construction of a new 900km underwater gas pipeline to Karratha.
In 2022, the WA Environment Protection Authority recommended a 50-year extension for the plant, if Woodside reduced its projected emissions by changing its operations or buying carbon offsets. This paved the way for the state government approval in December last year.
Gas: a major climate culprit
Under the 2015 Paris Agreement, the world is aiming to keep planetary heating to no more than 1.5°C above the pre-industrial average. Greenhouse gas emissions must fall to net zero to achieve the goal. But instead, global emissions are rising.
Greenhouse gases – such as methane, nitrogen oxide and carbon dioxide – are emitted throughout the gas/LNG production process. This includes when gas is extracted, piped, processed, liquefied and shipped. Emissions are also created when the gas is burned for energy or used elsewhere in manufacturing.
Australian emissions increased 0.8% in 2022–23 – and coal and gas burning were the top contributors. However, Australia’s greatest contribution to global emissions occurs when our coal and gas is burned overseas.
The North West Shelf project is already a major emitter of greenhouse gases. The proposed extension would significantly increase the project’s climate damage.
Woodside estimates the expansion will create 4.3 billion tonnes of greenhouse gases over its lifetime. Greenpeace analysis puts the figure much higher, at 6.1 billion tonnes.
Increasing greenhouse gas emissions at this magnitude, when the window to climate stability is fast closing, threatens major damage to Earth’s natural systems, and human health and wellbeing.
Woodside says it will use carbon-capture and storage to reduce emissions from the project. This technology is widely regarded as unproven at scale. Indeed, it has a history of delays and underperformance in similar gas operations in WA.
Woodside proposes to reduce the project’s climate impacts by buying carbon offsets. This involves compensating for a company’s own emissions by paying for cuts to greenhouse gas emissions elsewhere, through activities such as planting trees or generating renewable energy.
However, there are serious doubts over whether carbon offset projects deliver their promised benefits.
Threats to marine life and Indigenous heritage
Damage from the proposal could extend beyond climate harms.
The approval would enable increased drilling in the Browse Basin, including around the pristine Scott Reef. The reef is home to thousands of plant and animal species. Scientists say the project threatens migrating whales and endangered turtles, among other marine life.
Also, the onshore infrastructure is located near the 50,000-year-old Murujuga rock art precinct on the traditional lands of five Aboriginal custodial groups. The site contains more than one million petroglyphs said to depict more than 50,000 years of Australian Indigenous knowledge and spiritual beliefs.
Traditional Owners suffered severe cultural loss in the 1980s when about 5,000 rock art pieces were damaged or removed during construction of Woodside’s gas plant. The Traditional Owners and scientists fear increased acid gas pollution from the proposed expansion will further damage the rock art.
Acting in Australia’s interests
The Albanese government has failed to deliver its promised reform of Australia’s national environment laws. This means nature lacks the strong laws needed to protect it from harmful development.
At federal, state and territory levels, both major parties support expansion of the gas industry. This takes the form of policy inertia, tax breaks and subsidies for the fossil fuel industry.
In the current term of government, Plibersek has green-lit numerous polluting projects. This includes approving several coal mine expansions last year.
What’s more, Australian governments support offshore gas developments in the Tiwi Islands, new onshore shale gas extraction in the Northern Territory and the Kimberley and a new coal seam gas pipeline and wells in Queensland.
Approval of the North West Shelf expansion is not in the best interests of Australia and future generations. No federal government should prioritise short-term economic gain over Earth’s climate and human health.
Authors: Melissa Haswell, Professor of Practice (Environmental Wellbeing), Indigenous Strategy and Services, Honorary Professor (Geosciences) at University of Sydney & Professor of Health, Safety and Environment, Queensland University of Technology, University of Sydney
