WA EPA Warns of 'Irreversible Damage' from Woodside's Browse Gas Project

Newly revealed letter says company's plans for protecting Scott Reef and marine life are inadequate, as federal approval decision nears

By LineZotpaper AI staff

Published27 October 2026

Updated27 October 2026

Read Time3 min

Sources4 outlets

Follow this storyHear when it moves

Illustration: WA EPA Warns of 'Irreversible Damage' from Woodside's Browse Gas Project

Western Australia's Environmental Protection Authority has warned that Woodside Energy's $30 billion Browse gas project off the Kimberley coast poses a threat of 'serious or irreversible damage', according to a newly revealed draft letter. The letter, written in December 2023 and obtained by the publication Boiling Cold, finds the company's proposed measures to protect the marine environment, including green turtles and pygmy blue whales, are inadequate and not proportionate to the risk of a catastrophic hydrocarbon spill.

The Woodside proposal involves drilling up to 50 new gas wells near Scott Reef and constructing a 900-kilometre underwater pipeline to transport the gas to the company's North West Shelf facility near Karratha. The project is currently being assessed at a federal level by Environment Minister Murray Watt.

In the letter, then-EPA chairman Matthew Tonts wrote that the authority had concerns about damage to the environmental values of Scott Reef and Rowley Shoals, citing a 'lack of full scientific certainty about the risk, nature and scope of that damage'. The letter states that Woodside had 'declined to propose contemporary world's best practise measures' and that the scale of potential impacts from any unplanned release of hydrocarbons was 'likely to be significant, serious and irreversible'. Of the five spill scenarios modelled, consequences ranged up to 'catastrophic'.

The document, described as the 'EPA preliminary view to the proponent that the proposal was unacceptable', was the subject of a 2024 freedom-of-information request that was denied.

Australian Conservation Foundation campaigner Piper Rollins said the imminent federal decision on Browse 'must reflect what reef experts and the WA EPA acknowledge'. She argued the project 'cannot proceed without risking grave and irreversible harm to the pristine Scott Reef and Kimberley marine environment'.

Matt Roberts of the Conservation Council WA urged the state and federal governments to 'heed the dire warnings'. Roberts noted the EPA was so concerned it had brought in independent experts to peer-review Woodside's claims dismissing potential impacts on threatened species, and had raised deep concerns about the risk of oil spills.

WA Premier Roger Cook said the letter, dating from 2023, demonstrated the level of scrutiny being applied. He stressed the need to 'get the balance right' between the economy and the environment, and confirmed that state and federal watchdogs were in the 'latter stages of their assessments'. He added that a period of appeal would follow any decision.

Woodside, contacted for comment, has previously told The Guardian that while whales do feed at Scott Reef, the behaviour is opportunistic and the area is not as important as other feeding grounds off Perth. The company acknowledged the exceptional environmental value of Scott Reef and Sandy Islet.

RSS

The Daily Edition

The front page in your inbox each weekday morning: the lead, the picks, and why each one earned its place.

Analysis

Why This Matters

The Browse project is a major test of how Australia balances its role as a major gas exporter with its commitments to environmental protection and emissions targets.
A catastrophic spill at Scott Reef, a pristine environment near the Kimberley coast, could cause long-lasting damage to unique marine ecosystems, including threatened populations of green turtles and pygmy blue whales.
The outcome of the state and federal assessments, and the inevitable appeals, will set a significant precedent for future offshore gas developments in sensitive marine areas.

Background

The Browse Basin, off Western Australia's Kimberley coast, holds vast natural gas reserves. Woodside Energy has pursued development of these reserves for years. The current plan to drill near Scott Reef and pipe gas 900 kilometres to the North West Shelf is a key part of Woodside's future production strategy but has drawn intense environmental scrutiny. The WA EPA's preliminary finding that the proposal is unacceptable, as revealed in the draft letter, is a major regulatory hurdle. A final decision now rests with the federal government, which is likely to trigger a prolonged political and legal battle.

Key Perspectives

WA Environmental Protection Authority (via letter from Matthew Tonts): Warned in a draft letter that the Browse project poses a risk of 'serious or irreversible damage' to the marine environment, and that Woodside's proposed protection measures are inadequate and not proportionate to the risk of a catastrophic hydrocarbon spill. WA Premier Roger Cook: Stated the government is trying to get the 'balance right' between maintaining a strong economy and protecting the environment, confirming assessments are in their final stages with appeals to follow. Piper Rollins, Australian Conservation Foundation: Said the project 'cannot proceed without risking grave and irreversible harm' to the marine environment, and that the federal minister's decision must reflect the science of the EPA's findings. Matt Roberts, Conservation Council WA: Urged governments to 'heed the dire warnings' and noted the EPA brought in independent experts to review Woodside's claims after finding the company's impact assessments inadequate. Woodside Energy: Argued that pygmy blue whale feeding at Scott Reef is opportunistic and not as critical as areas further south, while agreeing the reef has exceptional environmental value.

What to Watch

The imminent federal decision from Environment Minister Murray Watt on whether to approve or reject the project under national environmental laws.
The appeal process: WA Premier Roger Cook confirmed that both proponents and opponents will have a period to appeal the final state and federal decisions.
The release of final EPA guidelines or assessment, which will indicate whether the concerns outlined in the 2023 draft letter have been resolved or deepened.

Sources

Woodside’s $30b gas project poses threat of ‘irreversible damage’, EPA warned · Brisbane Times
Woodside’s $30b gas project poses threat of ‘irreversible damage’, EPA warned · WAtoday
Woodside’s $30b gas project poses threat of ‘irreversible damage’, EPA warned · The Age
Woodside’s $30b gas project poses threat of ‘irreversible damage’, EPA warned · The Sydney Morning Herald

Checked

12 claims in this story checked against 1 source: 10 supported.

Show each claim

SupportedThe WA EPA warned that Woodside’s Browse project poses a threat of “serious or irreversible damage.”Brisbane Times - Latest News: “Western Australia’s environmental watchdog warned Woodside Energy’s proposal to drill for gas off the North West Shelf poses the threat of “serious or irreversible damage””
SupportedA newly revealed letter says Woodside’s proposed protections are inadequate, as a federal decision on Browse nears.Brisbane Times - Latest News: “measures Woodside had proposed to protect the marine environment, including green turtles and pygmy blue whales, were inadequate”
SupportedThe letter was obtained by Boiling Cold and was written in December 2023.Brisbane Times - Latest News: “Boiling Cold obtained a draft letter”
SupportedThe project is worth $30 billion.Brisbane Times - Latest News: “Woodside’s $30b gas project”
SupportedWoodside proposes up to 50 wells near Scott Reef and a 900-kilometre pipeline to its North West Shelf facility near Karratha.Brisbane Times - Latest News: “Woodside wants to drill up to 50 new gas wells near Scott Reef and construct a 900 kilometre-long underwater pipeline to send the gas to its North West Shelf facility near Karratha.”
Partly supportedThe letter says the proposed measures are not proportionate to the risk of a catastrophic hydrocarbon spill.Brisbane Times - Latest News: “The EPA does not consider the measures you have proposed are proportionate to the risk of serious or irreversible harm to Scott Reef, Rowley Shoals and the surrounding marine environments from unplanned hydrocarbon release and other cumulative and holistic impacts.”
SupportedTonts wrote that there was a lack of full scientific certainty about the risk, nature and scope of damage.Brisbane Times - Latest News: “the environmental values of Scott Reef, Rowley Shoals and the surrounding marine environments, and the lack of full scientific certainty about the risk, nature and scope of that damage”
SupportedThe letter says five spill scenarios were modelled, with consequences ranging up to catastrophic.Brisbane Times - Latest News: “The EPA notes that five scenarios were modelled, and that while likelihood for unplanned release is low, the consequences ranged up to ‘catastrophic’.”
SupportedPiper Rollins said the imminent federal decision on Browse “must reflect what reef experts and the WA EPA acknowledge.”Brisbane Times - Latest News: “Australian Conservation Foundation climate and energy exports campaigner Piper Rollins said Federal Environment Minister Murray Watt’s imminent decision on Browse “must reflect what reef experts and the WA EPA acknowledge”.”
SupportedRoberts said the EPA brought in independent experts to peer-review Woodside’s claims dismissing potential impacts on threatened species.Brisbane Times - Latest News: “The letter outlined how the EPA was so concerned about the proposal, it bought in independent experts to peer-review Woodside’s claims dismissing potential impact on threatened species, including green sea turtles and pygmy blue whales”
SupportedCook said state and federal watchdogs were in the latter stages of their assessments, and that a period of appeal would follow a decision.Brisbane Times - Latest News: “both state and federal watchdogs were in the “latter stages of their assessments”. “Then there will be a period of appeal as well”
Partly supportedWoodside said whales do feed at Scott Reef, but the behaviour is opportunistic and the area is not as important as other feeding grounds off Perth.Brisbane Times - Latest News: “Woodside has been contacted for comment, but told The Guardian the company understands whales did feed at Scott Reef, but that this was opportunistic and the area was not as important as the ocean off Perth and other areas further south.”