Greenpeace Australia Pacific believes Woodside cannot be trusted when it comes to our oceans, reefs and marine life.
INTRODUCTION
Woodside’s Burrup Hub, Australia’s largest proposed fossil fuel project, presents a severe threat to our oceans, wildlife and climate. Woodside, known for its poor environmental and safety record, plans to extract gas from six fields off the coast of Western Australia. This mega-project involves constructing extensive undersea infrastructure and extending the life of existing gas plants until 2070, locking Australia into the use of toxic gas long after we should have transitioned to clean energy.
Aerial view of Scott Reef, next to which Woodside plans to drill up to 50 wells. The closest wells would be just over 2km from the reef itself. © Greenpeace / Alex Westover
ENVIRONMENTAL RISK
An oil spill from the Burrup Hub threatens 54 endangered species, including the critically endangered pygmy blue whale and green sea turtle. Gas flaring and lights disrupt turtle nesting, while subsidence threatens critical habitats. Shipping and drilling activities endanger whale migration pathways. A disaster at the project site could devastate marine ecosystems and coastlines as far as East Timor and Indonesia, causing long-term environmental damage.
Greenpeace has mapped Woodside’s Burrup Hub offshore infrastructure and its spill and accident scenarios using Geographic Information Software (GIS) data, based on Woodside’s own documents provided to state and federal regulators. © Greenpeace
CLIMATE IMPACTS
Emissions and methane leaks from the Burrup Hub’s operations will worsen Australia’s climate crisis. Greenpeace’s own analysis has revealed that Woodside’s Burrup Hub is Australia’s biggest climate threat, set to release 6.1 billion tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions over its proposed 50-year lifetime. Lifetime emissions from the Burrup Hub would be more than 13 times Australia’s annual emissions from all sources (and more than 73 times New Zealand’s annual emissions). This will not only impact Australia’s net zero commitments but also have far-reaching consequences globally.
Projected emissions from Woodside’s Burrup Hub Project. © Greenpeace
CONCERNING SAFETY RISKS
Woodside has a troubling history of environmental neglect, and has experienced at least six major incidents in the last decade, including an explosion, oil spill and whale calf collision. Additionally, it consistently fails to clean up its waste. Given this track record, why should we expect the Burrup Hub to be any different?
Greenpeace Australia Pacific activists climb and document a toxic, discarded oil tower owned by fossil fuel company Woodside, The Nganhurra Riser Turret Mooring. © Greenpeace
WOODSIDE’S TROUBLING RECORD
‘Explosion’ at Pluto LNG plant
In May 2023, an ‘explosion’ at the Pluto LNG plant caused the site to temporarily shut down during planned maintenance. Woodside had previously advised locals that it would be flaring gas and to expect ‘unusual dark smoke’ during the maintenance period. Unions accused Woodside of seeking to downplay the significance of the incident.
Woodside’s offshore rig leaks in the Cossack field
In 2016, one of Woodside’s oil rigs in the Cossack field, off the Dampier Peninsula, leaked 10,500 litres into the ocean. The source of the 175-litre-per-day leak was later found to be a degraded seal on a subsea hydraulic control line located on the rig. A spokesperson for Woodside claimed there was “no lasting impact to the environment”.
Woodside attempts to abandon decaying fossil fuel infrastructure in the ocean
When Woodside finished extracting oil from the Enfield field in 2018, it left behind the Nganhurra Riser Turret Mooring (RTM), an 83-metre-long, 2,452-tonne piece of infrastructure. The offshore regulator, NOPSEMA, chastised Woodside for failing to maintain the RTM.
In 2019, NOPSEMA ordered Woodside to remove the RTM. In 2021, Woodside proposed to sink the RTM, which reportedly contains toxic fire retardant foam, not far from biodiversity hotspots Ningaloo Reef and Exmouth Gulf. By 2022, the RTM had started taking on water and begun sinking. Woodside finally removed it in October 2023.
Woodside cuts maintenance budget despite multiple warnings
Woodside has been repeatedly warned by the offshore regulator, NOPSEMA, over its failure to properly maintain its aging offshore oil and gas rigs from corrosion. Nonetheless, in June 2021 Woodside announced that a 30% cut to operating costs will take place over three years. CEO Meg O’Neill was reported as saying, ‘a key focus area for us is maintenance which accounts for a significant portion of our production cost’.
The warnings continued. One week after Meg O’Neill’s announcement, NOPSEMA ordered Woodside to analyse the structural integrity of fourteen 24-tonne caissons located beneath its North Rankin A Platform. NOPSEMA warned that ‘loss of hydrocarbon (gas and condensate) from these pipelines may result in a major accident event.
Also in 2021, propane pipework at Woodside’s North West Shelf facility was found to have corroded to half the original wall thickness. In 2023, a NOPSEMA inspection of the North Rankin Complex concluded the ‘Flare Bridge and Flare Support Structure (including Guy Wires) to be defective in many places as a consequence of inadequate maintenance’.
Woodside contractor hits whale calf
In August 2023, a whale calf was hit by a tugboat operated by a Woodside contractor in the Port of Dampier. The collision, confirmed by the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (DBCA), was only made public when a local reporter made inquiries.
Woodside uses a legal loophole to dump the Northern Endeavour
In 2015, Woodside used a loophole to sell the aging Northern Endeavour oil vessel to “a small, inexperienced, financially weak one-person company”, Northern Oil and Gas Australia (NOGA). Woodside had left the Northern Endeavour corroding over time, in preparation for its decommissioning. But when presented with an opportunity to offload it, they used a complex web of legal maneuvers to transfer title to NOGA, using a loophole to escape the usual assessment of the capacity of a new entity to safely operate and decommission an oil rig. NOGA even ‘inherited’ Woodside ‘oil response plan’ for the Northern Endeavour, despite having never operated an offshore drill rig before, and not having the capacity for responding to an oil spill that Woodside relied upon when drafting the original plan. In response, NOPSEMA issued an escalating series of breach notices to NOGA, who were eventually forced to cease operations at the Northern Endeavour, and promptly went bankrupt, passing the liability for decommissioning to the Federal Government. This debacle led to a change in laws to establish trailing liability and decommissioning bonds. The Northern Endeavour incident shows the poor corporate behaviour of Woodside, and their willingness to use whatever legal means they have available to avoid responsibility for decommissioning, regardless of the environmental risk it creates.
Climate Change
DeBriefed 15 August 2025: Raging wildfires; Xi’s priorities; Factchecking the Trump climate report
Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed.
An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.
This week
Blazing heat hits Europe
FANNING THE FLAMES: Wildfires “fanned by a heatwave and strong winds” caused havoc across southern Europe, Reuters reported. It added: “Fire has affected nearly 440,000 hectares (1,700 square miles) in the eurozone so far in 2025, double the average for the same period of the year since 2006.” Extreme heat is “breaking temperature records across Europe”, the Guardian said, with several countries reporting readings of around 40C.
HUMAN TOLL: At least three people have died in the wildfires erupting across Spain, Turkey and Albania, France24 said, adding that the fires have “displaced thousands in Greece and Albania”. Le Monde reported that a child in Italy “died of heatstroke”, while thousands were evacuated from Spain and firefighters “battled three large wildfires” in Portugal.
UK WILDFIRE RISK: The UK saw temperatures as high as 33.4C this week as England “entered its fourth heatwave”, BBC News said. The high heat is causing “nationally significant” water shortfalls, it added, “hitting farms, damaging wildlife and increasing wildfires”. The Daily Mirror noted that these conditions “could last until mid-autumn”. Scientists warn the UK faces possible “firewaves” due to climate change, BBC News also reported.
Around the world
- GRID PRESSURES: Iraq suffered a “near nationwide blackout” as elevated power demand – due to extreme temperatures of around 50C – triggered a transmission line failure, Bloomberg reported.
- ‘DIRE’ DOWN UNDER: The Australian government is keeping a climate risk assessment that contains “dire” implications for the continent “under wraps”, the Australian Financial Review said.
- EXTREME RAINFALL: Mexico City is “seeing one of its heaviest rainy seasons in years”, the Washington Post said. Downpours in the Japanese island of Kyushu “caused flooding and mudslides”, according to Politico. In Kashmir, flash floods killed 56 and left “scores missing”, the Associated Press said.
- SOUTH-SOUTH COOPERATION: China and Brazil agreed to “ensure the success” of COP30 in a recent phone call, Chinese state news agency Xinhua reported.
- PLASTIC ‘DEADLOCK’: Talks on a plastic pollution treaty have failed again at a summit in Geneva, according to the Guardian, with countries “deadlocked” on whether it should include “curbs on production and toxic chemicals”.
15
The number of times by which the most ethnically-diverse areas in England are more likely to experience extreme heat than its “least diverse” areas, according to new analysis by Carbon Brief.
Latest climate research
- As many as 13 minerals critical for low-carbon energy may face shortages under 2C pathways | Nature Climate Change
- A “scoping review” examined the impact of climate change on poor sexual and reproductive health and rights in sub-Saharan Africa | PLOS One
- A UK university cut the carbon footprint of its weekly canteen menu by 31% “without students noticing” | Nature Food
(For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)
Captured
Factchecking Trump’s climate report
A report commissioned by the US government to justify rolling back climate regulations contains “at least 100 false or misleading statements”, according to a Carbon Brief factcheck involving dozens of leading climate scientists. The report, compiled in two months by five hand-picked researchers, inaccurately claims that “CO2-induced warming might be less damaging economically than commonly believed” and misleadingly states that “excessively aggressive [emissions] mitigation policies could prove more detrimental than beneficial”80
Spotlight
Does Xi Jinping care about climate change?
This week, Carbon Brief unpacks new research on Chinese president Xi Jinping’s policy priorities.
On this day in 2005, Xi Jinping, a local official in eastern China, made an unplanned speech when touring a small village – a rare occurrence in China’s highly-choreographed political culture.
In it, he observed that “lucid waters and lush mountains are mountains of silver and gold” – that is, the environment cannot be sacrificed for the sake of growth.
(The full text of the speech is not available, although Xi discussed the concept in a brief newspaper column – see below – a few days later.)
In a time where most government officials were laser-focused on delivering economic growth, this message was highly unusual.
Forward-thinking on environment
As a local official in the early 2000s, Xi endorsed the concept of “green GDP”, which integrates the value of natural resources and the environment into GDP calculations.
He also penned a regular newspaper column, 22 of which discussed environmental protection – although “climate change” was never mentioned.
This focus carried over to China’s national agenda when Xi became president.
New research from the Asia Society Policy Institute tracked policies in which Xi is reported by state media to have “personally” taken action.
It found that environmental protection is one of six topics in which he is often said to have directly steered policymaking.
Such policies include guidelines to build a “Beautiful China”, the creation of an environmental protection inspection team and the “three-north shelterbelt” afforestation programme.
“It’s important to know what Xi’s priorities are because the top leader wields outsized influence in the Chinese political system,” Neil Thomas, Asia Society Policy Institute fellow and report co-author, told Carbon Brief.
Local policymakers are “more likely” to invest resources in addressing policies they know have Xi’s attention, to increase their chances for promotion, he added.
What about climate and energy?
However, the research noted, climate and energy policies have not been publicised as bearing Xi’s personal touch.
“I think Xi prioritises environmental protection more than climate change because reducing pollution is an issue of social stability,” Thomas said, noting that “smoggy skies and polluted rivers” were more visible and more likely to trigger civil society pushback than gradual temperature increases.
The paper also said topics might not be linked to Xi personally when they are “too technical” or “politically sensitive”.
For example, Xi’s landmark decision for China to achieve carbon neutrality by 2060 is widely reported as having only been made after climate modelling – facilitated by former climate envoy Xie Zhenhua – showed that this goal was achievable.
Prior to this, Xi had never spoken publicly about carbon neutrality.
Prof Alex Wang, a University of California, Los Angeles professor of law not involved in the research, noted that emphasising Xi’s personal attention may signal “top” political priorities, but not necessarily Xi’s “personal interests”.
By not emphasising climate, he said, Xi may be trying to avoid “pushing the system to overprioritise climate to the exclusion of the other priorities”.
There are other ways to know where climate ranks on the policy agenda, Thomas noted:
“Climate watchers should look at what Xi says, what Xi does and what policies Xi authorises in the name of the ‘central committee’. Is Xi talking more about climate? Is Xi establishing institutions and convening meetings that focus on climate? Is climate becoming a more prominent theme in top-level documents?”
Watch, read, listen
TRUMP EFFECT: The Columbia Energy Exchange podcast examined how pressure from US tariffs could affect India’s clean energy transition.
NAMIBIAN ‘DESTRUCTION’: The National Observer investigated the failure to address “human rights abuses and environmental destruction” claims against a Canadian oil company in Namibia.
‘RED AI’: The Network for the Digital Economy and the Environment studied the state of current research on “Red AI”, or the “negative environmental implications of AI”.
Coming up
- 17 August: Bolivian general elections
- 18-29 August: Preparatory talks on the entry into force of the “High Seas Treaty”, New York
- 18-22 August: Y20 Summit, Johannesburg
- 21 August: Advancing the “Africa clean air programme” through Africa-Asia collaboration, Yokohama
Pick of the jobs
- Lancaster Environment Centre, senior research associate: JUST Centre | Salary: £39,355-£45,413. Location: Lancaster, UK
- Environmental Justice Foundation, communications and media officer, Francophone Africa | Salary: XOF600,000-XOF800,000. Location: Dakar, Senegal
- Politico, energy & climate editor | Salary: Unknown. Location: Brussels, Belgium
- EnviroCatalysts, meteorologist | Salary: Unknown. Location: New Delhi, India
DeBriefed is edited by Daisy Dunne. Please send any tips or feedback to debriefed@carbonbrief.org.
This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s weekly DeBriefed email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.
The post DeBriefed 15 August 2025: Raging wildfires; Xi’s priorities; Factchecking the Trump climate report appeared first on Carbon Brief.
DeBriefed 15 August 2025: Raging wildfires; Xi’s priorities; Factchecking the Trump climate report
Climate Change
New York Already Denied Permits to These Gas Pipelines. Under Trump, They Could Get Greenlit
The specter of a “gas-for-wind” compromise between the governor and the White House is drawing the ire of residents as a deadline looms.
Hundreds of New Yorkers rallied against new natural gas pipelines in their state as a deadline loomed for the public to comment on a revived proposal to expand the gas pipeline that supplies downstate New York.
New York Already Denied Permits to These Gas Pipelines. Under Trump, They Could Get Greenlit
A “critical assessment” report commissioned by the Trump administration to justify a rollback of US climate regulations contains at least 100 false or misleading statements, according to a Carbon Brief factcheck involving dozens of leading climate scientists.
The report – “A critical review of impacts of greenhouse gas emissions on the US climate” – was published by the US Department of Energy (DoE) on 23 July, just days before the government laid out plans to revoke a scientific finding used as the legal basis for emissions regulation.
The executive summary of the controversial report inaccurately claims that “CO2-induced warming might be less damaging economically than commonly believed”.
It also states misleadingly that “excessively aggressive [emissions] mitigation policies could prove more detrimental than beneficial”.
Compiled in just two months by five “independent” researchers hand-selected by the climate-sceptic US secretary of energy Chris Wright, the document has sparked fierce criticism from climate scientists, who have pointed to factual errors, misrepresentation of research, messy citations and the cherry-picking of data.
Experts have also noted the authors’ track record of promoting views at odds with the mainstream understanding of climate science.
Wright’s department claims the report – which is currently open to public comment as part of a 30-day review – underwent an “internal peer-review period amongst [the] DoE’s scientific research community”.
The report is designed to provide a scientific underpinning to one flank of the Trump administration’s plans to rescind a finding that serves as the legal prerequisite for federal emissions regulation. (The second flank is about legal authority to regulate emissions.)
The “endangerment finding” – enacted by the Obama administration in 2009 – states that six greenhouse gases are contributing to the net-negative impacts of climate change and, thus, put the public in danger.
In a press release on 29 July, the US Environmental Protection Agency said “updated studies and information” set out in the new report would “challenge the assumptions” of the 2009 finding.
Carbon Brief asked a wide range of climate scientists, including those cited in the “critical review” itself, to factcheck the report’s various claims and statements.
The post Factcheck: Trump’s climate report includes more than 100 false or misleading claims appeared first on Carbon Brief.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-trumps-climate-report-includes-more-than-100-false-or-misleading-claims/
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change1 year ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Carbon Footprint1 year agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Why airlines are perfect targets for anti-greenwashing legal action
-
Climate Change1 month ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Renewable Energy2 months ago
US Grid Strain, Possible Allete Sale