Woodside commits $18bn to US project that climate advocates warn ‘would export harmful gas until the 2070s'
Australian energy company Woodside will spend $18bn on a new liquified natural gas (LNG) project in the US that one advocacy group said would add 1.6bn tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions over its 40-year life.
Climate advocates said the announcement, made the week before Woodside's annual general meeting, would put further pressure on the company after a major rebuke from shareholders last year over its emissions plan.
Woodside's chief executive, Meg O'Neill, said the decision to invest in the Louisiana project was a historic moment and would turn the company into a 'global LNG powerhouse'.
Sign up for the Afternoon Update: Election 2025 email newsletter
The project was expected to cost US$17.5bn (A$27bn), with investment company Stonepeak also investing US$5.7bn (A$8.8bn).
Will van de Pol, chief executive of corporate climate advocacy group Market Forces, said Woodside had committed to a project 'that would export harmful gas until the 2070s'.
Market Forces estimated the project would add 1.6bn tonnes of CO2-equivalent over its life – the equivalent of running Australia's biggest coal-fired power station, Eraring, for 120 years. For context, Australia's total annual emissions currently are 435m tonnes.
Van de Pol said Woodside investors AustralianSuper and industry super fund Hesta, 'can't wash their hands of these massive new emissions committed on their watch, and they must escalate pressure by voting against directors at Woodside's AGM next week'.
Alex Hillman, lead analyst at the Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility (ACCR) and a former climate adviser to Woodside, said: 'Investors have voiced increasing displeasure with Woodside's climate strategy, most recently with the world's only majority vote against a company's climate plan at Woodside's 2024 AGM.'
ACCR sent a formal statement to Woodside to ask shareholders to vote against the re-election and election of directors at next week's AGM.
Hillman said Woodside was 'doubling down on its climate strategy by proceeding with its largest-ever LNG project' and the statement would put increasing pressure on the company to listen to concerns.
The bulk of climate-related emissions from Woodside's business come from 'scope 3' emissions, which mostly occur when the company's gas is sold and burned by its customers.
Sign up to Afternoon Update: Election 2025
Our Australian afternoon update breaks down the key election campaign stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters
after newsletter promotion
These indirect emissions totalled 74.65m tonnes of CO2-equivalent (co2-e) last year, according to company disclosures.
The company's only plan to address these was to invest US$5bn in 'new energy products and lower-carbon services' by 2030, that would indirectly cut 5m tonnes of CO2-e each year.
ACCR said Woodside's decision to go ahead with the Louisiana project would increase its annual scope 3 emissions by 27%.
A Woodside spokesperson declined to comment on the increase in scope 3 emissions identified by the advocacy groups, but said the company's climate targets – including a 30% cut to direct emissions by 2030 – remained unchanged.
Woodside said its US$2.35bn investment in an ammonia project was a 'material step' to its scope 3 investment goal which, when complete, would save 3.2 megatonnes of CO2-e each year.
AustralianSuper said it had no comment. The Guardian also approachedHesta for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
6 hours ago
- The Guardian
Ballet Preljocaj's Swan Lake review – dystopian twist sucks the breath out of you
Swan Lake isn't one of those stories that connects hard with current events or the world around it. You can say much the same for ballet itself. As a form, it usually doesn't have much to say. Ballet Preljocaj's production, which debuted in France in 2020, is something of an exception to the rule. Making its Australian premiere within days of Woodside receiving the federal government's (election-delayed) green light to extend the life and colossal climate impact of its North West Shelf gas project until 2070, and the Woodside boss Meg O'Neill's clumsy attempt to shift responsibility to supposedly Temu-addicted gen Z consumers, this staging from has a bit of a kick to it. A Swan Lake for the ecocide era, if you like. It's not the first reworking of Marius Petipa and Lev Ivanov's 1895 classic, of course. Choreographers including Alexei Ratmansky, Matthew Bourne (his famous all-male Swan Lake) and Mats Ek have all ruffled the feathers of this tutu favourite. Here though, Angelin Preljocaj manages to entirely rework the choreography while honouring the narrative spine of the original and some of its structure. He doesn't throw the cygnets out with the lake water. For music, he draws principally on the Tchaikovsky score (played here in this QPAC exclusive season by the Queensland Symphony Orchestra under the sensitive baton of Johannes Fritzsch) cut with extracts from Tchaikovsky's Second and Fourth Symphonies and dark-toned slabs of electronica and EDM by the French studio 79D. Fans of the original will not find the story hard to follow. Here, the royal court is dystopian-corporate but the broad sweep of the story still has a young Prince Siegfried (Antoine Dubois on this occasion, alternating the role with Leonardo Cremaschi) chafing against expectation and falling for Odette (Théa Martin/Mirea Delogu), a woman who has been transformed into a swan by the sorcerer Rothbart (Redi Shtylla/Elliot Bussinet). In this version, Rothbart is a rapacious property developer whose city-building scheme is eagerly supported by Siegfried's wealthy parents, who play a much larger part in the drama than more traditional versions. Siegfried has an exceptionally tender and close relationship with his mother, for example, and his father appears to be in bed (sometimes literally) with Rothbart. Early on, plans for the transformation of the kingdom are waved around in paper form. A trolley is wheeled on bearing an idealised model of the proposed venture. Neither makes a visceral impact, it must be said. Later, however, huge monochromatic digital projections by Boris Labbé start to loom large, filling the space with images of rising city skylines, stock market trends, excavators and, eventually, an industrial plant with a throbbing life of its own – one that spells a grim death for Odette and her swan kind. Preljocaj's athletic choreography is full of swagger, strength and sass, and does not incorporate any of Petipa's dreamy original sequences. But, for lovers of Swan Lake, there are plenty of beautiful lines and bird-like movements, particularly in the white swan sections. The women/swans sometimes embody the whole bird stretching their own necks into beautiful arched shapes, and at other times use their arms as swan necks with hands for heads. The high-impact ensemble routines echo some of the set pieces of the Petipa original, including its court scenes. The Dance of the Little Swans gets a winking update with pelvic wiggles and a sharp weaving of the dancers' arms. Siegfried and Odette deliver an audience-pleasing romantic pas de deux with inventive lifts. There's no interval between the 'white' and 'black' acts of the story. Swan Lake plays straight-through for two hours and its 26-strong cast don't get much downtime. Preljocaj's choreography looks demanding with its rapid switching between planes, knifing arms and legs and intricate unison work. The women perform barefoot in short, loose dresses; the men wear suits and pumps (with leather trousers for the bad guys). The highly gendered prettiness and prissiness we associate with Swan Lake is rinsed out. Everyone looks strong, athletic and grounded. From the fourth act, a febrile energy starts to take hold, especially when the swans react en masse to Siegfried's betrayal. The final image is a striking one, as Siegfried searches for the dying Odette among the twitching, writhing bodies of her kind, all poisoned by the obscenely pumping industrial plant that now surrounds them. Rather than leaving you breathless, this bleak ending sucks the air out of you. Swan Lake is performed in the Lyric Theatre, Queensland Performing Arts Centre until 7 June. Watch the production for free on Digital Stage from 6pm, Friday 13 June to 6pm, Sunday 15 June
The Guardian
13 hours ago
- The Guardian
What went wrong for the Greens in the Australian election?
The Greens lost three seats at the 2025 election, including Melbourne, the electorate of their former leader Adam Bandt. Their national Senate primary vote was down by almost one percentage point compared with 2022, though they have maintained the same number of Senate seats. Their national lower house vote was steady, with 12.22% of the primary vote in 2025 compared with 12.25% in 2022. This means the Greens are ranked third-highest among the parties, behind only Labor and the Liberals. So what went wrong for the Greens? And how can a party that has such a high share of the national vote have so few seats? To show why the Greens' seat share is so low relative to their national vote, it's worth comparing them with the other large party that isn't the Liberals or Labor – the Nationals. In Queensland and the Northern Territory, the Nationals and Liberals have merged into a single party. However, MPs can choose to identify with one party or the other federally by choosing to sit with either the Liberal or National party room. For the following figures we have separated out Nationals politicians and votes on this basis. The Greens have a much higher vote share nationally, but end up with many fewer seats: The reason for this becomes clear when the votes for each party are mapped. This explains the disparity between their national vote and the number of lower house seats – but to explain why the Greens lost three seats compared with the last election, we need to zoom in. Going into the 2025 election, Adam Bandt was disadvantaged by a change in electorate boundaries, but this isn't the only issue he faced. Again, this is much clearer with a map. In addition to the redistribution, Bandt faced at least some voters switching from the Greens to Labor, which Bandt acknowledged after conceding: 'In Melbourne, the boundaries changed and made the seat much more marginal, and I feel that a number of people shifted their votes to Labor to keep [Peter] Dutton out,' he said. The situation in Queensland is a bit different, and to explain the loss of two of the Brisbane seats, we need to get into some maths. Yes, that's right – maths, not maps. This is how the Greens lost Griffith in 2025 – the swing to Labor made it a contest between Labor and the Greens, and Labor won on Liberal preferences. In the seat of Brisbane, the Greens didn't make the final two and Labor won with Greens voter preferences. These seats are called three-cornered contests, and it can be hard to wrap your head around how small changes in the primary vote can result in big changes to the two-party-preferred outcome. Here you can play around with the primary vote and see how things change in our hypothetical electorate: We're using the following preference assumptions in our calculator and charts for hypothetical voting scenarios, loosely based on actual preference data from 2022: 80% of Labor voters preference the Greens before Liberals 80% of Greens voters preference Labor before Liberals 70% of Liberal voters preference Labor before Greens Thanks to Jill Sheppard at ANU for providing feedback on a draft of this feature. Any errors remain the fault of the authors.
The Guardian
2 days ago
- The Guardian
North West Shelf gas extension will deliver ‘almost nothing' to Australia's public purse
Extending the licence for the North West Shelf gas project won't assist Australia's energy transition, experts say, even as it allows Woodside and its foreign partners to profit from the nation's mineral wealth while delivering 'almost nothing' to the national purse. Environmental and Indigenous groups were dismayed this week after the environment minister, Murray Watt, granted conditional approval to extend the Woodside Energy-operated NW Shelf gas project out to 2070. The decision comes amid reports the Albanese government may consider creating an east coast gas reserve to prevent predicted shortfalls in domestic gas supplies over coming years. Australia is the world's third-largest liquefied natural gas (LNG) exporter after the US and Qatar, exporting nearly $70bn worth of the fuel in 2023-24. Austraila's proven gas reserves are more than 40 times the country's annual consumption, alongside a bounty of unconventional gas resources. Despite the huge revenues generated by exporters such as Woodside, Chevron and Santos, oil and gas companies contributed only $1.1bn in petroleum resource rent tax (PRRT) in 2023-24, according to budget papers. Woodside paid $175m in PRRT from the NW shelf project in 2022-23, according to the Australian Taxation Office. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email The 40% PRRT is levied on offshore oil and gas projects once they become cash-flow positive, which usually takes years or decades because of generous rules that allow capital expenditure to be fully deductible upfront when assessing the PRRT liability. This last allowance has meant the hugely profitable east coast LNG producers have yet to pay any PRRT, although a tweak to the deductibility rules in August last year will force them to begin paying some tax. While the owners of the long-running North West Shelf project pay the resources rent tax, which is in addition to the 30% corporate income tax, experts believe the settings do not place a high enough underlying value on the extracted gas, and too much on the value added through the manufacturing process, which is not liable for PRRT. The independent economist Chris Richardson argues that the resources rent tax has proved entirely unfit for purpose. 'It is fair to say that how we tax gas in Australia is a massive fail,' he said. 'This is a national asset and Australians deserve a return, as indeed do the miners. This is something that should be shared. The problem is that Australia struck deals that ended up resulting in little tax from extracting the resources that we all own, and so the big gains go to owners of those businesses.' The $30bn proposed development of other offshore gas fields to feed Woodside's Karratha plant on the Burrup peninsula would, if it goes ahead, again be used to offset PRRT liabilities. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion Alison Reeve, the deputy program director of the Grattan Institute's energy program, said extending the life of the project would have no impact on the major national policy challenges of power costs, availability and reliability. 'It might lower prices in WA because under WA's gas reservation policy a certain amount of gas needs to be put aside for domestic use,' she said. 'But WA already has lower gas prices than the east coast, and it will do nothing for east coast gas prices.' The NW Shelf project was essentially a huge export project, Reeve said. 'There's no benefit from this project to Australia's energy transition at all.' She said Australia had largely missed the opportunity to properly tax the gas boom but it must get the settings right in time for the next resources boom. 'If, as part of the energy transition, we are going to be exporting lithium or cobalt to the world, then we want to start pricing resource taxes properly now so we can actually do better next time.' Bob Breunig, the director of the Australian National University's Tax and Transfer Policy Institute, said resources rent taxes were highly efficient as they levied excess profits rather than production. Lobby groups and gas companies have long argued a less generous PRRT would lead to a drop in investment, but Breunig said the evidence did not support that argument. 'Norway has really high rent taxes and it doesn't stop companies drilling because they are still making profits,' he said, saying a rent tax of 50% in Australia would not be too high. 'The PRRT is a great structure for a tax. Really it's about fiddling with its setting.'
