WA court challenge launched against huge Burrup Hub gas project
Environmentalists have launched a court challenge against approvals for a mega gas project in Western Australia that could lead to the release of billions of tonnes of greenhouse gases.
Lawyers for the Conservation Council of Western Australia (CCWA) want a judicial review of decisions made by the state’s environment agency which they say allowed for unlimited amounts of gas to be processed at two plants that are part of the Burrup Hub proposal.
Papers were lodged in WA’s supreme court on Monday against the chairman of the state’s Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) and gas company Woodside, which is leading the major LNG expansion.
Perth-based Woodside is partnering with other major energy companies, including Shell, BP, Chevron and BHP, to drill offshore gasfields, lay pipelines and expand LNG processing plants on the remote Burrup peninsular near Karratha in north-west WA.
Tim Macknay, a lawyer at the Environmental Defender’s Office in WA, said the legal action focussed on two decisions made by the EPA chairman in July 2019.
Macknay told Guardian Australia the then-chairman, Tom Hatton, had allowed a request from Woodside to change two previous approvals relating to LNG processing facilities at Pluto and Karratha.
Those approvals restricted the two plants to processing gas from particular sources but the July 2019 changes, Macknay said, allowed the two plants to process gas from any source.
The changes were made under a part of the state’s Environmental Protection Act that allows minor changes to previous approvals without the need for further assessments.
Macknay said the CCWA was arguing the changes and the environmental implications were major and should have been subject to full consideration by the EPA.
Piers Verstegen, the CCWA director, said: “This is the most polluting fossil fuel project ever to be proposed in Australia.”
“It’s astonishing to think that a project of that level of international significance has been given backdoor approvals by the state government without any consideration or assessment or consultation with stakeholders,” he said. “It’s really alarming.”
Verstegen said the project had escaped wider attention because it had been broken up into several smaller projects.
“These approvals allow unlimited processing of gas and then unlimited carbon pollution. We were astonished when we saw that provision was used to approve these proposals.”
Falls in the prices of oil and LNG earlier this year held back an LNG boom. Woodside has put back a final investment decision on two major elements of the Burrup Hub until the second half of 2021.
Analysis of the projected carbon emissions from the Burrup Hub, commissioned by CCWA, said in February the project was inconsistent with state, national and global efforts to meet the Paris climate target.
The report, from analysts Climate Analytics, said the expansion of the LNG industry was the biggest contributor to the state’s rising emissions.
The Burrup Hub’s operation would emit about 16mt CO2e a year by 2020, the analysis found, without counting the burning of the gas. By 2025, the burning of the LNG from the Burrup Hub would add about 120mt CO2e every year to the atmosphere.
Between 2020 and 2070, the burning of gas from the project would add more than six billion tonnes of CO2e to the atmosphere, according to Climate Analytics.
In publicity material, Woodside says the Burrup Hub project will play a key role in a low carbon future for the planet.
The company has a target to cut emissions from its own operations by 30% from current levels by 2030, but the burning of gas sold from its operations is not counted.
Woodside told investors in November that its 2030 target would be met by steps including the use of carbon capture and storage, efficiency improvements and the use of offsets.
In a statement, Woodside said it was aware of the court action “almost 18 months after the receipt of environmental approvals to process gas at our North West Shelf and Pluto LNG facilities.”
The gas to be processed would deliver cleaner energy for customers in Western Australia and overseas, the company said. It would provide thousands of jobs for Western Australians, tax revenue to state and federal governments and opportunities for local businesses.
“We intend to vigorously defend our position. The CCWA is resorting to a legal challenge a year and a half after the approvals were granted,” Woodside’s chief executive, Peter Coleman, said.
“Their action will cost taxpayers money and flies in the face of the EPA’s independent assessment. We strongly support the state government’s and the EPA’s processes.”
Coleman claimed emissions figures quoted by CCWA were “highly misleading” because using gas “instead of other fossil fuels reduces carbon emissions”.
Woodside pointed to a report it commissioned that modelled the use of gas in future energy networks globally, finding between 345mt and 620mt of CO2 could be “avoided” between 2026 and 2040 if its Burrup Hub LNG was used instead of other fossil fuels.
An EPA WA spokesperson said: “As the matter is before the courts it is not appropriate to provide comment.”