Woodside Energy has dodged a potential challenge to its environmental approvals at the Scarborough gas project, as it scales up towards a 2026 production date.
Woodside Energy has dodged a potential challenge to its environmental approvals at the Scarborough gas project, as it scales up towards a 2026 production date.
The challenge, which was brought by the Australian Conservation Foundation – represented by the Environmental Defenders Office – in June 2022, will not go ahead.
In a statement, Woodside said the ACF had agreed to dismiss its challenge against the project.
“The parties have agreed to seek orders from the court to dismiss the proceedings,” Woodside said.
The seemingly amicable decision was welcomed by Woodside chief executive Meg O’Neill, who lauded the future contribution of Scarborough to the state’s energy mix while hitting out at environmental lawfare.
“Litigation against energy projects like Scarborough is an ineffective way to pursue solutions to global climate and energy challenges,” she said.
“Such approaches create needless uncertainty for businesses, communities and the people who depend on the energy these projects produce.”
Woodside noted that Scarborough had been subject to rigorous approvals from a range of local, state and federal environmental bodies.
Scarborough was 67 per cent complete at the end of June and remains on track for its targeted production milestone.
Taking a different tone in its own release, the ACF lamented what it claimed were laws that “work in favour of fossil fuel interests” while conceding it had decided not to proceed with the action.
“Late last week it became apparent that the case was unlikely to succeed,” the ACF said.
The activist organisation hit out at what it deemed to be weak environmental laws in protection of the environment.
“We need laws that take into consideration the climate damage of fossil fuel projects and reject climate wrecking mines,” it said.
ACF has previously stated its view that the Nature Positive legislation pushed through the parliament by the federal government does not go far enough.
Woodside has also long been in its crosshairs.
In February, the organisation released a report alleging Woodside’s actions had not matched its publicly stated net-zero ambitions.
The pair were scheduled to meet in the Federal Court on September 2.
“We understand how disappointing this news will be to many and implore our federal government to act on their promise to fix our broken nature laws, so that the burden of tackling this issue does not have to be squarely placed on us,” it said.
“It is disappointing that this case will not be heard in the Federal Court. And we offer our apologies to those who have supported us.”
Legal challenges against environmental approvals for oil and gas projects have emerged as a theme in recent years.
Santos was blocked from progressing its Barossa project off the Northern Territory for more than a year as a result of a challenge by Tiwi Island traditional owners backed by the EDO.
On lifting the injunction which stalled that project late in January, Federal Court judge Natalie Charlesworth called into question the conduct of an EDO-engaged expert in guiding the evidence of traditional owners.
A probe into the funding of the organisation was launched shortly after that finding was made public.
The EDO is mandated to ensure all voices are heard on complex legal matters, and currently receives funding from federal and state governments, including the WA government.
Woodside’s work at Scarborough was temporarily halted as a result of a successful challenge to the Australian Energy Market Operator’s approvals of seismic surveying at Scarborough late last year.
Woodside shares were 1.1 per cent higher at 1pm.
