Woodside to ‘vigorously defend’ second WA Supreme Court challenge to $16b Scarborough project

We’re sorry, this feature is currently unavailable. We’re working to restore it. Please try again later.

Advertisement

This was published 2 years ago

Woodside to ‘vigorously defend’ second WA Supreme Court challenge to $16b Scarborough project

By Peter Milne

Environmentalists have launched a second legal action against the Scarborough to Pluto LNG project adding to uncertainty about its construction a week after Woodside approved the $16 billion investment.

The Conservation Council of WA will argue that an approval to expand the Pluto LNG plant granted in May by WA’s Department of Water and Environmental Regulation was unlawful as it did not consider greenhouse gas emissions.

Woodside needs to expand its Pluto LNG plant near Karratha to process gas from the Scarborough field.

Woodside needs to expand its Pluto LNG plant near Karratha to process gas from the Scarborough field.Credit:

In a statement to the stock exchange, Woodside said it had complied with all requirements and processes in seeking and receiving its environmental approvals and would “vigorously defend its position.”

Woodside plans to build an additional LNG train that will emit about 1.6 million tonnes of direct greenhouse gases a year. Over the life of the Scarborough to Pluto project, direct greenhouse emissions from Woodside’s facilities and indirect emissions from its customers burning the gas will total about 878 million tonnes.

The serving of papers on DWER on Tuesday is another step in a long-running campaign against the Scarborough project by environmental groups that has attempted to warn off investors and both highlight and increase uncertainty about regulatory approvals.

Tim Macknay, managing lawyer for the Environmental Defender’s Office representing the CCWA, said it was well established that any additional CO2 emissions take the world beyond what is considered acceptable for a safe climate.

“That is why governments and regulators ... should be doing everything in their power to properly assess and control any additional greenhouse gas emissions,” Mr Macknay said.

The department’s report on the Pluto works approval said it did not consider greenhouse gas emissions as they had been dealt with in a separate ministerial statement reviewed by the Environmental Protection Authority.

In WA, the environmental impact of major projects is assessed by the independent EPA that makes non-binding recommendations to the Environment Minister, who then tasks the EPA with drafting a ministerial statement documenting the project’s high-level environmental conditions.

Advertisement

Once this so-called primary approval is in place more detailed secondary approvals, such as the Pluto works approvals from DWER and other licenses, are processed.

Loading

CCWA policy director Piers Verstegen said DWER had a separate and distinct responsibility from the EPA to both assess and control greenhouse emissions.

“Their response that it’s assessed by the EPA is not a satisfactory response, and doesn’t demonstrate that they have properly discharged their responsibilities under the Environmental Protection Act,” Mr Verstegen said.

“They’re saying that in relation to carbon pollution, but they’re not saying it in relation to any other elements of the license.”

The CCWA was not seeking an injunction to stop work at Pluto but “we may look at doing that in the future,” Mr Verstegen said.

“We’re simply saying the license should be declared invalid because it hasn’t properly considered and regulated the carbon pollution from the project.”

Mr Verstegen said if Woodside started construction, “they’re doing that at their own risk”.

“If the court finds the license is invalid in the future, then they’d be in a very difficult situation.”

Woodside’s plan to more than double the capacity of the Pluto LNG plant near Karratha already faces a challenge to be heard by the WA Supreme Court on December 20.

The CCWA disputes a WA EPA decision that adding decades to the operating life of the Pluto LNG plant by allowing it to process gas from new fields was a minor change that did not require detailed assessment or public comment.

After Woodside approved the Scarborough investment, WA Premier Mark McGowan said if the Supreme Court found in favour of the CCWA his government would seek legal advice about possible action to ensure “industry didn’t stop in the state”.

A DWER spokeswoman said as the matter was before the court it would be inappropriate for comment.

Most Viewed in Business

Loading