Latest news with #BurrupHub
The Guardian
10-06-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
Neither glib lines nor warm thoughts can hide the cynicism of Labor's North West Shelf decision
Fans of naked political cynicism have had plenty to cheer of late. Those hoping for something more from their elected leaders – a bit of principle and coherency, say – have had no shortage of reasons to lament what Michael Stipe once called the downhill slide into abysmal. In Australia, there is cynicism right through the Albanese government's proposed approval of a 45-year life extension for one of the world's biggest gas developments. The 28 May announcement that Labor planned to greenlight the North West Shelf liquified natural gas (LNG) project, on the Burrup Hub in northern Western Australia, to run until 2070 came just 15 days after Murray Watt was sworn in as environment minister. The rapid turnaround suggests either departmental advice backing the decision was waiting for him when he arrived, or he digested it particularly quickly. The advice hadn't been available a few weeks earlier, when Watt's predecessor, Tanya Plibersek, delayed the decision until just beyond the election, saying officials needed more time. It is tempting to speculate what might have happened had the extension been announced prior to 3 May. Given the scale of Labor's victory, the impact may have been around the margins. It might have made things even tighter in Fremantle, where a community independent who ran hard against the extension, Kate Hulett, gave Labor's Josh Wilson a scare. It may have helped the Greens hang on in Melbourne and Brisbane, and added fuel to other climate-focused independent campaigns. We'll never know. What we do know is the North West Shelf extension is backed not just by the minister, but the prime minister and cabinet – and there was nothing particularly surprising about where they landed. It was only a year ago that the resources minister, Madeleine King, released a 'future gas strategy' that – for reasons not fully explained – assumed greater ongoing demand for the fossil fuel than any scenario proposed by the International Energy Agency, and declared new sources of the fossil fuel would be needed 'to 2050 and beyond'. Even with this factored in, the language Anthony Albanese used when asked about the decision was striking in its dismissiveness. His line varied a little depending on when you caught him, but included gas being needed for the Tomago aluminium smelter in New South Wales and to 'firm up' renewable energy in electricity grids on the east and west coasts. This was mostly dissembling, and nonsense. For now, at least, no fuel from the North West Shelf is used in the east. Only a fraction is directed to power plants in Perth's electricity grid, which requires relatively little gas and has other sources to draw from. Nearly all the gas from the Burrup Hub is shipped overseas or used on site during production. Albanese also justified decades-long gas expansion by saying Australia's 2050 target set was 'net zero, not zero' and 'you don't change a transition through warm thoughts, you do it through a concrete proposal'. True enough, if your goal is just to get through a press conference unscathed. But the former is a line most usually rolled out by people arguing against the need to act rapidly on climate – not a club Albanese would usually want to align himself with. The latter might be better saved for when you actually have a plan to reach net zero emissions across the economy. His government hasn't released one yet. It reinforces a perception that the prime minister's commitment to the climate crisis is too often built on the idea that being better than the Coalition – which went to the election promising nothing to address the climate crisis for at least the next decade and a long-term nuclear pledge that didn't add up – is enough. But that's not how it works. Labor did take strides on climate in the last term. Chris Bowen's renewable energy underwriting program – the capacity investment scheme – will help drive the construction of large-scale solar, wind and batteries needed to help replace creaky old coal plants. The parliament passed a long-promised vehicle efficiency standard to help clean up emissions from most new cars. A Future Made in Australia bill introduced by the treasurer, Jim Chalmers, offers billions in tax credits for green industries. A subsidy for household batteries is on the way. Sign up to Clear Air Australia Adam Morton brings you incisive analysis about the politics and impact of the climate crisis after newsletter promotion But national greenhouse gas emissions are not coming down at anything like the pace required. Last year they didn't come down at all. And there is an equally compelling list of policy areas that have not been addressed. Two stand out. The first is the reliance on often questionable carbon offsets that the owners of major industrial facilities can buy in lieu of making direct emissions cuts. Experts advise offsets cannot be used to justify expanding fossil fuel use if the world is going to limit climate breakdown. Instead, nature and other projects that draw down CO2 from the atmosphere will need to complement deep on-site cuts in fossil pollution. That isn't happening yet. The second is the unwillingness to come to grips with the impact of Australia's near world-leading fossil fuel exports. On this, the country needs more than simple lines. It's true that it can't fix the problem alone, and the answer is not as simple as turning off the fossil fuel tap. It's equally true that if the world is going to come to grips with the crisis, exporters and importers have to work together as rapidly as possible to find new solutions. Would anyone suggest Australia is taking this responsibility as seriously as it could? Labor has approved about 30 fossil fuel developments and expansions since it was elected in 2022. Choosing another path would need a whole-of-government response that prioritises the climate crisis in decision-making. It means leadership from the top in tackling what getting to net zero actually means. Albanese's public comments since the election have been running in the opposite direction. Meanwhile, Australia has been hit by simultaneous devastating drought and floods in neighbouring states. An unprecedented marine heatwave around the country has engulfed an area five times the size of the continent. It has contributed to havoc across the region, including a massive toxic algal bloom in South Australia and unprecedented damage to WA coral reef ecosystems that scientists have described as astounding and heart-breaking. Researchers say the 'sleeping giant' of Antarctica has awoken and is showing signs of abrupt changes that could affect us all. The World Meteorological Organization says the world is racing towards breaking temperature goals set out in the 2015 Paris climate agreement much faster than expected. Neither glib lines nor warm thoughts will help much in responding to these. Serious concrete proposals – both on across-the-board emissions cuts and adapting to what we're living through – are what's needed.
The Guardian
28-05-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
Approval of Woodside LNG project gambles with ancient heritage for short-term gain
We don't know all the evidence that the new environment minister, Murray Watt, had before him when he decided to approve a 40-year life extension to one of Australia's biggest fossil fuel developments so that it could run until 2070. But we do know this. The decision largely turned on whether the North West Shelf liquefied natural gas (LNG) development on the Pilbara's Burrup Hub can coexist for decades into the future with an incredible collection of ancient Murujuga rock art, some of it nearly 50,000 years old and unlike anything else on the planet. And there is enough evidence in the public domain for people to have, at best, serious doubts. A summary of a rock art monitoring report compiled last year – but only released by the unwaveringly pro-gas Western Australian Labor government last Friday afternoon – acknowledged that emissions of nitrogen oxide and sulphur dioxide had damaged the rock types on which the art is etched. Get Guardian Australia environment editor Adam Morton's Clear Air column as an email But it said this was OK. It concluded that this problem peaked in the 1970s – a time when there was far less industrial activity in the region than today. There was no LNG export industry, and therefore not one of the world's largest LNG processing facilities. But there was a relatively small gas power plant. The WA government summary – backed by the Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation – suggested this was likely the major cause of the problem, and that pollutant levels have declined over the past decade. The scientific report behind the summary was 800 pages long and it took some time for people to digest it. Once they had, concerns were raised. Benjamin Smith, an archaeology professor at the University of Western Australia, said data in the report suggested local acidic pollution was actually four times higher now than when Gough Whitlam and Malcolm Fraser were running the country. He claimed scientists who worked on the report were being gagged so they couldn't raise their concerns about how their data was being interpreted. Not long after, the ABC released details of an email complaint from Adrian Baddeley, the chief statistician who worked on the rock art monitoring, accusing WA government officials of removing some information from a graph in the summary, and adding a claim that current pollution levels are 'lower than the interim guideline levels'. Baddeley said the five monitoring sites closest to industrial development were experiencing pollution levels above a guideline level, and claimed there was 'unacceptable interference in the scientific integrity of the project'. The WA premier, Roger Cook, told the ABC's Radio National that some scientists were engaging in a 'political frolic'. 'We have to strip away the background noise and rely upon the reports to make good decisions on behalf of the people of Western Australia,' he said. This came to light on Wednesday, shortly before Watt announced his decision. Sign up to Clear Air Australia Adam Morton brings you incisive analysis about the politics and impact of the climate crisis after newsletter promotion Watt could have taken time to absorb this. There was nothing forcing him to rush into an announcement. Even Cook – an assertive backer of Woodside's plans – had said just hours earlier that the minister should move quickly but not make a 'hurried decision'. Watt chose to move just as a significant cloud enshrouded a key piece of evidence. People will draw their own conclusions about whether it is a coincidence that the announcement came at a busy news time, when focus was on the reunited Coalition and shortly before the rugby league State of Origin series consumed the attention of millions of people in Queensland and New South Wales. But let's put it this way: if you wanted to avoid accusations of politically motivated cynicism, you wouldn't have dropped it on Wednesday afternoon. Two things seem clear. The first is that the precautionary principle – long meant to be a guiding light in environmental decisions – is hard to see here. Whatever the weight of evidence about what amount of pollution is sustainable, and for what period, we know emissions have degraded the rock. We are gambling with a place of extraordinary cultural heritage for the sake of short-term interests. A draft decision by Unesco, revealed on Wednesday, that industrial activity makes a world-heritage listing for the Murujuga cultural landscape unlikely only underlines that point. The second is that it will almost certainly face legal challenges. Raelene Cooper, a Mardathoonera woman and former chair of the Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation, flagged this in a blunt media statement that told the government she would see them in court. These issues would be enough to raise concerns about the decision – but there is also the not insignificant issue of the huge greenhouse gas emissions that will result. For several years, the North West Shelf was the biggest polluting site within Australia, and it still sits in the leading pack of emitters. Much, much more pollution is released once the LNG is shipped and burned overseas. It is often tagged as a 'carbon bomb'. Some see this as an easy pejorative term used by activists. Maybe. But it is hard to dispute based on the numbers. There are complicated and contested arguments about whether stopping production at the North West Shelf would reduce global emissions – and whether that should be the point. But no one committed to meeting the goals of the Paris climate agreement, and limiting surging global heating, can seriously argue it should be operating until 2070, as Watt has approved. It makes no sense that the environment minister does not have to consider this atmospheric carbon footprint before approving a major fossil fuel development such as the North West Shelf under national environment law. Emissions hurt the environment. People know this. The law should reflect that reality.
