ACF Sues Environment Minister Over North West Shelf Expansion

Highlights

• ACF initiates new legal action against Environment Minister Murray Watt over Woodside’s gas project extension to 2070.
• The case focuses on the four billion tonnes of emissions that were excluded from assessment under Australia’s environment law.
• ACF seeks a legal precedent requiring climate impacts of fossil fuel projects to be considered in future government decisions.

The Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) has announced new legal action against Federal Environment Minister Murray Watt and said that he neglected the climate impacts of Woodside’s North West Shelf gas project extension.

The project, which is expected to run until 2070, is one of Australia’s largest fossil fuel ventures.

This is the second case the ACF has filed against the minister this month, which ups its campaign to hold the government accountable for decisions that disregard climate consequences.

Read More: Greenpeace Activists Mount Peaceful Protest at Greek LNG Facility

At the centre of the dispute is Minister Watt’s May decision to uphold the earlier ruling of former Environment Minister Sussan Ley, who had concluded that the project’s four billion tonnes of carbon pollution did not require a climate assessment under Australia’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act.

Such emissions, says ACF, could damage the Great Barrier Reef, harm Ningaloo’s marine life, and push threatened wildlife closer to extinction.

ACF’s Legal Counsel Adam Beeson said that the Labor government had an opportunity to take a more responsible approach than its predecessor but chose to endorse a flawed assessment.

He pointed out that Woodside’s gas expansion would emit nearly ten times Australia’s annual domestic emissions, calling the minister’s stance dismissive of the project’s impact on the planet.

Also Read: Climate Lawsuits Rising in Nearly 60 Countries, Says Report

The organisation’s new court case asserts that the Environment Minister had a legal duty to consider the project’s climate pollution when assessing its environmental impact. If the case succeeds, it could create a legal precedent, as well as ensure that future coal and gas projects take into account their impact on World Heritage reefs, wetlands, and endangered species.

Legal proceedings, Beeson added, are difficult and expensive but necessary given the country’s weak environmental laws, which favour polluting industries over nature.

He also stressed that stronger nature laws are urgently required to prevent such harmful projects from being approved without adequate climate consideration.

See Also: Financing Fossil Fuels: HSBC Accused of Greenwashing After $1B Deal

The outcome of this legal dispute coincides with the Labor government’s move to table new environmental legislation in Parliament this week, which ACF hopes will create a framework that genuinely works for nature.

***

Looking to grow your sustainable operations with expert guidance?

Tap into our broad network of ESG and sustainability service providers offering a wide range of green solutions.

Stay informed with KnowESG’s Climate & Environment News for the latest updates and insights.

Don’t miss our updated ESG Online Courses—see what's new.

Source: ACF