An environmental group had lodged a legal challenge against the state’s approval of Woodside’s North West Shelf extension, claiming the decision was made improperly.
An environmental group had lodged a legal challenge against the state’s approval of Woodside’s North West Shelf gas project extension, claiming the decision was made improperly.
Friends of Australian Rock Art launched a bid to overturn the December 2024 approval by former Environment Minister Reece Whitby in the Supreme Court this month.
The conditional approval of the North West Shelf extension will allow Woodside to run the Karratha gas plant through to 2070, in tandem with a federal approval currently being negotiated by federal Environment Minister Murray Watt and the LNG producer.
It was made following a rigorous assessment by the Environmental Protection Authority, which in 2022 recommended ministerial approval of the extension with a series of conditions. The proposal was first referred for assessment in 2018.
Explaining its recommendations in the 2022 report, the EPA wrote that it did “not consider it reasonable to impose conditions on Scope [Three] [greenhouse gas] emissions at this stage because those emissions are beyond the reasonable control of the proponent”.
The ministerial conditions imposed on Woodside in 2024’s approval included a requirement that a five-yearly report to be prepared by Woodside on project emissions “consider reasonably practicable options” for scope three reductions.
The environmental group claims the approval is unlawful, because it did not fully consider the impact of scope three emissions – those made by the customers using Woodside’s gas products – and their potential to change the climate.
A successful legal challenge would have implications for the federal approval, which relies on state assessment to guide its decisionmaking under the EPBC Act.
A spokesperson for the Friends of Australian Rock Art accused the state of prioritising economic benefit over the environment.
“Woodside’s proposed North West Shelf extension is one of the most polluting fossil fuel projects in the world, and will have severe consequences both for the Murujuga rock art landscape and for the environment of Western Australia as a whole,” the group’s co-convenor Judith Hugo said.
“FARA has made every effort to ensure these impacts are properly understood and assessed, however we believe the minister has approved the project without meaningful consideration of these impacts, as required under the law.
“It is clear that the state government is providing enthusiastic support for Woodside’s ongoing gas exports, but that does not detract from the obligation to follow the requirements of our legislation, and that means ensuring the impacts are properly assessed and managed to acceptable levels before any approvals are granted.
“We can no longer stand by as ministers make decisions to enable Woodside’s highly polluting gas developments while conveniently ignoring the legislation that is intended to protect our environment and heritage.”
A Woodside spokesperson said the company was aware of the Supreme Court challenge.
“We have confidence in the robustness of the state government's comprehensive approval process,” they said.
“As the matter is before the court, we have no further comment.”
The Friends of Australian Rock Art move is not the first legal challenge to an approval granted to Woodside in recent years.
A challenge by Mardudhunera Traditional Custodian Raelene Cooper and the Environmental Defenders Office against an approval of work at Woodside’s Scarborough gas project was successful in temporarily stalling activity in 2023.
In that case, the court found an approval from the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority was granted outside the regulator’s statutory power, because it was granted with a condition that further consultation be undertaken.
NOPSEMA granted fresh approvals to Woodside’s work plan months later, and the Scarborough project is on track for first production in 2026.
The EPA has been contacted for comment.
