Woodside and BHP Scarborough project conflicts with a net zero future

The Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility​ (ACCR) continues to urge Woodside and BHP to stop their pursuit of the Scarborough Project. The Conservation Council of WA has released a  report, Why the Scarborough LNG Development Cannot Proceed, noting that the WA Government will imminently make a decision on critical approvals for the project, and news that Woodside appointed former Western Australian Treasurer Ben Wyatt to its Board yesterday.

Commenting on the Woodside and BHP Scarborough Project, Dan Gocher, Director of Climate & Environment at the Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility (ACCR) said:

“The Woodside and BHP Scarborough project is at odds with the expectations of investors for companies to align their capital expenditure and decarbonisation strategies with the Paris Agreement.

“Both Woodside and BHP have committed to net zero emissions by 2050, yet have underwhelming targets to 2030. Scarborough seems like the last roll of the dice before the sustained decline of the gas industry that is necessary to prevent dangerous global warming.

“The Scarborough project will jeopardise the climate targets of both Western Australia and Australia’s already meek 2030 target.

“By investing so much focus and capital on this marginal project, Woodside has missed a crucial opportunity to transition its business away from fossil fuels, increasing the vulnerability of the company as the world moves towards net zero.

“According to Carbon Tracker, the Scarborough and Pluto Train 2 projects are already inconsistent with the IEA’s central scenario (STEPS) and of course any new oil and gas project conflicts with the recent IEA Net Zero 2050 Scenario.

“The recent announcement that former WA Treasurer and Energy Minister Ben Wyatt has joined the Woodside board, less than three months after exiting State politics shows the need for a cooling off period for politicians and at the very least, a pause of the revolving door.  This appointment can only be seen as Woodside seeking to influence critical government decisions currently being taken on the Scarborough project.

“Until recently, the only GHG abatement strategy that Woodside has proposed for the Scarborough project has been the use of offsets, which is simply not credible. The only viable abatement option for the oil and gas industry is to cease the development of new projects.