Woodside’s $30b gas project poses threat of ‘irreversible damage’, EPA warned

Western Australia’s environmental watchdog warned Woodside Energy’s proposal to drill for gas off the North West Shelf poses the threat of “serious or irreversible damage”, new documents reveal.

Online publication Boiling Cold obtained a draft letter from the state’s Environmental Protection Authority regarding the oil and gas giant’s plans for its Browse project, 300 kilometres off the Kimberley coast.

Woodside wants to drill up to 50 new gas wells near Scott Reef and construct a 900 kilometre-long underwater pipeline to send the gas to its North West Shelf facility near Karratha. That plan is now being assessed at a federal level.

In the letter, written in December 2023 and handed to Woodside in 2024, then-EPA chairman Matthew Tonts wrote that there were concerns over damage to “the environmental values of Scott Reef, Rowley Shoals and the surrounding marine environments, and the lack of full scientific certainty about the risk, nature and scope of that damage”.

He also wrote that measures Woodside had proposed to protect the marine environment, including green turtles and pygmy blue whales, were inadequate and that the company had “declined to propose contemporary world’s best practise measures”.

“The EPA does not consider the measures you have proposed are proportionate to the risk of serious or irreversible harm to Scott Reef, Rowley Shoals and the surrounding marine environments from unplanned hydrocarbon release and other cumulative and holistic impacts,” the letter states.

“The EPA considers that scale and magnitude of the potential impacts to the marine environment, particularly to Scott Reef, from any unplanned release of hydrocarbons is likely to be significant, serious and irreversible.

“The EPA notes that five scenarios were modelled, and that while likelihood for unplanned release is low, the consequences ranged up to ‘catastrophic’.”

In 2024, this masthead submitted an FOI request for the letter, which was denied, although the decision referenced the letter, which was titled, “EPA preliminary view to the proponent that the proposal was unacceptable”.

Australian Conservation Foundation climate and energy exports campaigner Piper Rollins said Federal Environment Minister Murray Watt’s imminent decision on Browse “must reflect what reef experts and the WA EPA acknowledge”.

“Woodside’s gas export project cannot proceed without risking grave and irreversible harm to the pristine Scott Reef and Kimberley marine environment,” she said.

“We commend WA’s EPA for listening to the science and making preliminary findings that clearly set out this proposal’s threat to the environment.”

Conservation Council WA executive director Matt Roberts urged the state and federal governments to “heed the dire warnings”.

“The letter outlined how the EPA was so concerned about the proposal, it bought in independent experts to peer-review Woodside’s claims dismissing potential impact on threatened species, including green sea turtles and pygmy blue whales,” Roberts said.

“The EPA also expressed deep concerns about the risk of oil spills from the Browse gas to North West Shelf proposal, saying these events could have irreversible, catastrophic consequences for Scott Reef, Rowley Shoals and the Kimberley Coast.

“It also reveals for the first time that the state government – the Department of Mines Industry Regulation and Safety and the Department of Biodiversity Conservation and Attractions – had serious concerns about the harm to WA’s oceans and marine life.”

WA Premier Roger Cook said the fact the letter was dated from 2023 showed “the level of focus that is being undertaken to ensure that, when we bring these projects on, that we can do so in a way where the impacts on the environment aren’t so negative.”

“My concern is that we get the balance right, that the economy remains strong, creating great WA jobs for WA workers, and that at the same time we don’t do so in a way which has too significant negative impact on the environment,” he said.

“This has always been the stuff of economic development, protecting the environment while continuing to make sure that you have prosperity, and that’s the balance we’re trying to strike.”

Cook confirmed there was no update on when a decision on the project would be made, but said both state and federal watchdogs were in the “latter stages of their assessments”.

“Then there will be a period of appeal as well, both from proponents and those who might oppose the decision,” he said.

Woodside has been contacted for comment, but told The Guardian the company understands whales did feed at Scott Reef, but that this was opportunistic and the area was not as important as the ocean off Perth and other areas further south.

Woodside agreed that Scott Reef and Sandy Islet had exceptional environmental value, and it was important to protect them for future generations.

Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.