Woodside's North West Shelf extension the focus of another legal challenge
Yet another legal challenge has been lodged against a contentious gas plant extension in WA's north, arguing the state's previous environment minister failed to properly consider the emissions produced by customers burning gas produced at the facility.
The North West Shelf project has been processing LNG since the 1980s but needed fresh approvals from the state and federal governments to continue beyond 2030.
Then-WA environment minister Reece Whitby completed a six-year-long state approvals process in December last year when he approved the project with a range of conditions.
While federal environment minister Murray Watt is now considering the conditions the Commonwealth will impose, the Friends of Australian Rock Art group last week lodged an application in the WA Supreme Court, seeking judicial review of the state approval.
A statement by the group said it would argue Mr Whitby did not follow the state's Environmental Protection Act because the assessment his decision was based on "failed to consider the impact of climate change that would result from the project", including scope three emissions.
Scope three emissions occur as a consequence of a project, but from sources not owned or controlled by the owner of the project — for example, from a customer burning LNG processed at a particular plant.
Analysis by climate science policy institute Climate Analytics released this month estimated about 87 per cent of emissions linked to the North West Shelf between 2024 and 2050 were scope three.
The application could represent yet another legal hurdle for the project.
Mr Watt is yet to make a final decision, having given Woodside more time to respond to the conditions he is considering imposing.
Traditional owner Raelene Cooper said Mr Watt had promised to give her three business days' notice before making a decision, which could allow her to seek an injunction, further delaying his decision.
If ultimately granted, those approvals would allow Woodside to go through the separate process of getting approvals to extract gas from the Browse Basin, one of the country's largest untapped resources.
While Woodside and both levels of government see those plans as a boost to the WA economy and jobs, climate activists have long argued against the project and what its emissions will mean for a world trying to reach net zero by 2050.
Friends of Australian Rock Art co-convenor Judith Hugo said the application was brought because of concerns about the impact of emissions linked to the project on the world's climate, and on rock art at Murujuga.
Those petroglyphs are approximately 40,000 years old and are being closely studied to assess whether or not nearby industry, including the North West Shelf, is impacting on their condition.
"The North West Shelf Extension will cause pollution equal to 12 coal-fired power stations every year until 2070, however the vast majority of these emissions were ignored by the WA Minister in approving the proposal," Ms Hugo said in a statement, referring to scope three emissions.
"Our case aims to require the government to rectify this fundamental omission, so that the impacts of Woodside's carbon pollution can be understood.
"We have consistently raised concerns regarding sea level rise, increased wildfires, extreme heat and flooding and coastal erosion on the heritage landscape.
"We have also raised concerns about the ongoing use and enjoyment of this landscape by custodians practising cultural traditions, and by researchers and visitors in a heating climate.
A spokesperson for current WA Environment Minister Matthew Swinbourn said as the matter was before the courts, it was inappropriate for him to comment.
A Woodside spokesperson said the company was aware of the case.
"We have confidence in the robustness of the state government's comprehensive approval process," the spokesperson said in a statement.
Last week Woodside said it recognised the importance of the Commonwealth's proposed environmental approval conditions, "including cultural heritage management and air quality".
Tom Hatton, who chaired WA's Environmental Protection Authority between 2014 and 2020, said he never saw it as the agency's role to regulate scope three emissions.
"For exported gas, those scope three emissions happen in jurisdictions outside of Australia, so it was never considered something that the state government, on advice from the EPA, would ever feel that they should condition, or put any conditions, on," he said.
While Dr Hatton said it "remains to be seen" whether scope one or two emissions, produced directly by projects, were best regulated by state or federal governments, he remained firm on his view on scope three even after leaving the regulator.
"It would be a confusing international analysis, international arrangement, for Australia to do that."
Curtin University sustainability professor and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report author Peter Newman said addressing global warming needed to be seen as a partnership.
"This process of being serious about climate change is not just a matter of who's really responsible for this and who's not, it is a matter of fixing it," he said.
"And we have to get serious about fixing it otherwise we're not going to solve this problem and the temperatures are going to get so bad that all of our economies are going to struggle and so many millions of people will be dying from it.
"Some part of government needs to take hold of that and run with it and the EPA is as good a place as any."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News.com.au
3 hours ago
- News.com.au
You should delete yourself from the internet: here's how
If you feel like most of the calls you're getting at the moment are from 'The Visa MasterCard fraud department' or you're getting bombarded by texts from Clive Palmer 's lackeys, then your data has probably been bought and sold. Your name, mobile number, email address and possibly even home address are likely showing up on the databases of data brokers, available to the highest bidder or, worse, anyone who knows where to look. In the best case scenario, this data is being used to try and sell you stuff, in the worst case scenario, it's being combined with other data for identity theft. The good news is that you can take some of the control back and remove yourself from many of these databases. Turns out it's not even that complicated if you're willing to dedicate a little time or money to the problem. The only issue is that it's going to be a Sisyphean task. Dr Arash Shanghagi, a Senior Lecturer in Cyber Security at the University of New South Wales says that while this process can seem like a hassle, it's necessary. 'People opt out of data broker databases to protect their privacy and reduce risks like identity theft, fraud, or aggressive marketing. Brokers collect and sell personal details. This can include names, addresses, phone numbers, and even financial data. Often without consent,' he said. 'This exposure can make you a target. Here's a familiar example: 'Hi Alice, this is Sarah from your energy provider. We've noticed unusual usage at your home on 10 Sydney Street. To secure your account, can you confirm your billing details?' It sounds legitimate because they know your name and address. But it's a scam. That kind of info is often bought from data brokers and used to trick people into giving up payment info or login credentials. By removing yourself from these databases, you're not just cleaning up your digital footprint. You're reducing attack surface. The goal is to reclaim control and make it harder for bad actors to exploit personal data.' If you want to get a sense of what data of yours is out there, there's a free tool from Google called 'Results About You' which will periodically scan the internet to see if your name, email address, phone number and/or home address has shown up in any of the data bases or 'people search' websites it checks. If data is found, you can start the process to request its removal. It's a very simple, low stakes tool. A Google spokesperson told that Results About You is just one of the tools Google makes available so people can take control of their privacy: 'We provide people with a range of tools to help safeguard their online information and mitigate the risk of identity theft. Beyond robust security features like Security Checkup, My Activity offers valuable insight into online activity, enabling people to investigate suspicious activity on their account. Google also actively sends notifications if it detects suspicious activity on your account to help you prevent unauthorised access and secure your information. Additionally, our 'Results about you' tool allows for the removal of personal contact information from Search, further enhancing privacy.' When I tried the Results About You tool, nothing came up for me, even though I know my data is out there, judging purely on the amount of spam and prank calls I get. While those free Google tools are a good place to start, they don't cover the full breadth of what's out there. Dr Shanghagi also says that it's worth being weary of data protection and privacy tools released by a company whose primary business is selling data. 'I think a healthy dose of scepticism is justified. Google's core business is built on data-driven advertising, so when they offer a tool like 'Results About You,' it's worth noting what it actually does – and doesn't do. It only removes your personal info from Google search results, not from the original data broker sites. It is a very narrow offering from a company that thrives on data. Use it, sure. But don't mistake it for real protection. Always pair it with more comprehensive tools and be mindful of how much data you're handing over to Google and other online services.' Step two: Use premium services to go even further Services like DeleteMe, PrivacyBee, Mozilla Monitor and Optery are set up to scan the internet and, depending on what account tier you pick, delete all your data on your behalf. Lawrence Gentilello, CEO and Founder of Optery told that when it comes to the databases of data brokers, his company understands the stakes. 'The personal information collected by data brokers is compiled into extremely detailed profiles. The information in these profiles can be used against people in harmful ways. It's both a privacy issue and a security issue. Most people don't want their private details made available publicly or for sale. The scale and granularity of data collection is beyond what most people would even imagine, sometimes including tens of thousands of sub-attributes and inferences about a person's behaviour, which may or may not be accurate. There is a widespread pattern of data brokers failing to adequately vet their customers, some of whom are malicious actors. Millions of dollars have been stolen from vulnerable consumers using brokered data.' 'Data brokers get hacked, and when they do, the personal profiles they've compiled are often sold by cybercriminals on the dark web. Data broker profiles enable phishing attacks, voice and messaging scams, identity theft, and fraud. They also pose a physical danger by enabling doxing, stalking, harassment, and violence. And so personal data removal is important for both digital and physical security. People in high-profile or high-risk roles — such as executives, journalists, law enforcement, and judges — use personal data removal to prevent malicious actors from showing up at their homes.' The data that services like Optery uncover and delete goes deeper than just your name and addresses, but things like your real time location, your favourite order at that place you have a loyalty card with, political preference, mental health status, device usage, and religion. Gentilello told us 'This data is packaged and sold to marketers, political groups, law enforcement, private investigators, and virtually anyone through subscription-based platforms. The datasets include inferred characteristics, life events, spending habits, and real-time or historical geolocation data.' 'Some brokers openly advertise data on US government employees, military personnel, students, elderly Americans, and even people with Alzheimer's or cancer. This kind of profiling is used for targeted advertising, lead generation, and identity verification, but it can just as easily be used for scams, discrimination, or surveillance. Malicious actors can buy pre-packaged datasets to identify and exploit vulnerable populations. Companies may also use this data to make decisions about you — whether you qualify for a loan, get hired, or receive certain services — without you ever knowing it.' With Optery, you can sign up for free, get a report on what private data more than 645 websites have on you. You can then manually remove yourself from these databases for free, or you can subscribe to various tiers to have Optery opt out of these databases for you. Because most of these services are US-based, most of their targets are also American, but the local options appear to be limited and this is better than nothing. Step three: The nuclear option Fully deleting yourself from the entire internet is likely an impossible task, but if you want to keep going after deleting yourself from these data broker sites, there are a few things you can do: Delete your account from any social media websites you're a part of. Some will allow you to just scrub your account from the settings, while others will require you use third party tools to delete your posts, and then you have to contact the service directly to request they delete your account, this doesn't guarantee that the company won't keep their data on you, but it will usually mean it stops being public (though it won't delete it from any internet archives that may have archived). Delete your accounts in any apps that you've made accounts. This might also involve contacting the company to request your data is deleted. Then, once you've deleted the account, delete the app and all its data from your phone. Once you've deleted any public profiles or accounts of yourself from the original sites, if you want to go really scorched Earth, you can then contact The Internet Archive to delete any archives of your data by emailing info@ To then stay off the radar without completely withdrawing from society, you can use a few different tools when looking at buying devices or using apps. First, consult Mozilla's Privacy Not Included database to gauge the creepiness level of the device or service you're looking for to see if there's one whose policies you're comfortable with. Another great tool is the Terms of Service: Didn't Read website, which sums up terms of service documents so you can understand what you're agreeing to without wading through all the legalese. Alternative step three: the more alert but not alarmed option Dr Shanghagi also recommends the following habits as a middle ground if you don't want to delete yourself completely: • Use privacy-first tools: Browsers like Brave or Firefox, along with ad blockers, can cut down on invisible tracking and surveillance. • Use alias emails and phone numbers: Services like Firefox Relay or SimpleLogin let you mask your real contact info when signing up for things online. • Create a 'privacy-first' identity: For newsletters, online stores, or giveaways, use a separate email and minimal real info. Keep your primary identity for essentials only. • Be mindful on social media: Oversharing is a goldmine for data brokers. Share less, and when in doubt, leave it out. • Avoid 'Sign in with Google' or Facebook logins: They may save time, but they link your activity across platforms. This is not great for privacy. • Tighten your settings: Check your privacy settings regularly across social, email, and mobile accounts. Do not trust the defaults. • Use a VPN: It hides your IP address and encrypts your internet traffic. Very useful when on public Wi-Fi or travelling. • Opt out where you can: Unsubscribe from marketing lists and use opt-out tools or services to remove your info from broker databases. Be selective with online forms: Skip the optional fields. your birthdate or phone number often isn't necessary. The goal isn't to disappear. It's to be intentional. A little effort goes a long way in protecting your digital footprint.' Generally, if it's not something a company has to know to provide whatever service it is for require, you don't actually have to give them any real information. Have fun coming up with your alias, and make sure it's something you can remember, so your real identity stays safe. Another thing that came up repeatedly from the experts we spoke to, and the guides we read is to use privacy focused web browsers, like Firefox and Brave, and to make use of privacy focused extensions. Good luck out there.
News.com.au
8 hours ago
- News.com.au
Collingwood: ‘The Lamington' pad's red hot auction result
An ultra-cool Collingwood apartment known as the Lamington has smashed expectations after selling for more than $1m on Saturday. The two-bedroom home at 3F/68 Oxford St with red tiles, metals and glass throughout was advertised with a $900,000-$950,000 asking range. Short-listed for an Australian Institute of Architects' interiors award, the warehouse conversion is located within a factory complex that formerly belonged to one of Australia's first department store chains, Foy & Gibson. The apartment's owner commissioned architectural practice Rexroth Mannasmann Collective to transform its shell into an eclectic abode with a wall of tall windows, 3.6m-high steel-trussed ceilings and polished hardwood floorboards. A horizontal red line features on many of the walls including in the open-plan living and dining area is much like a strip of jam inside a lamington – contributing to the apartment's unofficial name. There's also a central pod within the home containing a laundry and bathroom. One of the pod's walls has a flip-top desk and foldaway bed. The residence has been featured in both Vogue Living and the Architectural Review magazines. Jellis Craig inner north partner Simon Shrimpton said a $900,000 bid started the auction as three bidders competed for the 'very cool' apartment. It was placed on the market at $950,000 and ended up fetching $1.025m. 'The apartment sold a young couple from Fitzroy and the underbidders were a couple downsizing from the eastern suburbs,' Mr Shrimpton said. 'The couple who bought were very excited, they were the first to inquire and the first ones through the door at the first open for inspection,' Mr Shrimpton said. 'They were absolutely in love with the place and all the design aspects and nuances it has.' Mr Shrimpton said that for inner Melbourne apartments, well-designed homes with stylish flair tended to attract a lot of interest. 'Bespoke, architecturally-designed apartments are few and far between and when they are offered to the market, buyers will always line up to compete for them,' he added. Also on Saturday, a double-fronted, Victorian-era house at 1 Peel St, Newport, sold for $1.21m. The three-bedroom house, in need of some work including replastering, had a $1.05m reserve. The Agency property partners Leigh Melbourne and Noah Lautman-Wurt had the listing. Mr Melbourne said that a young couple from the western suburbs purchased the property, out of three bidders. 'The bidding was fast and furious,' Mr Melbourne said. He noted that homes at Peel St's bottom end, near The Strand in Williamstown, did not often come up for sale. 'In my 25 years covering the area, it's the second property I have sold down here,' he said. Mr Lautman-Wurt said the auction started with a $1m bid, with a buyer's advocate and family among the underbidders.
News.com.au
8 hours ago
- News.com.au
Western United given 14 days to pay overdue wages or run risk of losing players
Western United has again been served with breach notices by a host of the A-League club's players over unpaid wages. It's the second time in two months that United has been issued breach notices by disgruntled players, who were also forced to endure late pay in May. United had 14 days from Friday to make the payments. If the club fails to meet the deadline, players will be entitled to leave to the club, regardless of their contract status. A club spokesman said United was in 'constant communication with all players' and was working 'closely with the PFA (Professional Footballers Australia) and the APL (Australian Professional Leagues) to ensure this is addressed in the coming days'. Earlier in the week, United officials had been confident the club's proposed new majority backers – KAM Melbourne – would have paid the players and staff their overdue wages by Friday. A pitch fit for the European champions 😉🤩 The @FIFACWC is underway with the Rose Bowl in perfect condition for @PSG_inside and @atletienglish yesterday thanks to our groundsman, Justin Lang ðŸ'�ðŸ'š — Western United FC (@wufcofficial) June 17, 2025 However, the money wasn't forthcoming, leading some players issuing breach notices via PFA. KAM Melbourne, a subsidiary of KAM Sports, was last month announced as financially embattled United's new controlling stakeholders. However, the deal is yet to be approved by the APL, which runs the A-League. PFA chief executive officer Beau Busch earlier this week said United's players and staff were 'victims of a governance model that is not fit for purpose, and where FA (Football Australia) and the APL appear unwilling to enforce their own regulations'. 'The professionalism of the Western United players and staff in the most trying conditions is a testament to their character and commitment to Australian football,' Busch said. 'The players (have been) left to fight for their most basic entitlement as employees. We will continue to ensure the players have access to the full resources of the PFA.'
