Article

The Australian government’s decision to extend Woodside’s North West Shelf gas project by 40 years represents a pivotal moment for its climate credentials. Federal Environment Minister Murray Watt granted approval after a prolonged application process that began seven years ago, but the timing of this decision raises significant questions. It comes just a day after Vanuatu cautioned Australia that such an extension might violate a crucial ruling from the International Court of Justice regarding climate change responsibilities.

The backdrop of this approval coincides with the Australian government's preparations to announce its emissions reduction target for 2035 and its bid to host the 2026 COP climate summit. This convergence of events amplifies the government's ambition to position itself as a global leader in both climate action and natural gas exports, a balancing act that many observers find precarious.

Proponents, including industry representatives and government officials, assert that natural gas is indispensable for the global energy transition, asserting it aids in reducing reliance on more carbon-intensive coal. They maintain that Australia’s gas exports play a critical role in lowering global emissions.

However, climate scientist Bill Hare vehemently disputes this narrative, labeling the extension as a blatant disregard for climate science. He warns that the approval neglects the existential threats faced by Pacific island nations, which have implored Australia to reconsider its fossil fuel projects.

Notably, Watt's ministerial approval did not require deliberation on the possible climate impacts of extending the project, as current federal environmental laws do not mandate such considerations. Instead, the focus was on the project's potential effects on nationally significant environmental matters, particularly the Murujuga cultural landscape, which houses the world’s largest collection of ancient rock art. In response to concerns about air emissions, Watt imposed 48 conditions, including ambitious targets for reducing nitrogen oxide emissions and achieving net-zero emissions by 2050.

However, the approval of the North West Shelf project is merely the beginning of a larger struggle. The extension is viewed as a significant hurdle for Woodside as it seeks to exploit the Browse Basin, Australia’s largest untapped conventional gas resource.

This project is currently under scrutiny by Western Australia’s environmental regulators due to potential impacts on marine ecosystems, including vulnerable species such as green turtles and pygmy blue whales. Climate advocates have labeled the Browse project a “carbon bomb,” forecasting emissions of up to 1.6 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent over its lifetime.

Woodside contends that the Browse project is vital for Western Australia’s energy future and proposes a carbon capture and storage solution to mitigate its carbon footprint. Yet, the ongoing situation highlights the pressing need for a national discourse on the intersection of gas exports and climate responsibility. The pressing question remains: can Australia genuinely claim to be a responsible climate actor while continuing to develop significant new gas projects amidst rising global emissions and the diminishing prospects of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius?