2023-07-02
WA’s Environmental Protection Authority Greenhouse Gas Guidelines were recently revised, but they can only recommend rather than regulate
By Nicholas D’Alonzo, Climate Action Campaigner
Environmentalists and environmental activists are used to protesting the action or inaction of governments or corporations but there is another layer of governance that makes or breaks new fossil fuel projects and that is the regulators. In Western Australia that job falls to the WA Environmental Protection Authority (EPA). The EPA was originally established in 1971 and consists of a panel of five experts appointed by the Governor. (1) The EPA is supposed to be independent and not directed by the Minister even if they had a hand in picking its members and all its advice to Government is public. (2)
The Authority's operations are governed by the Environmental Protection Act 1986 which stipulates that the objective of the EPA is to: 'use its best endeavours – a) to protect the environment; and b) to prevent, control and abate pollution and environmental harm'. (2) The EPA has many duties but it takes an important role in conducting environmental impact assessments of new projects; preparing environmental protection laws; preparing and publishing guidelines for managing environmental risks; and providing advice to the Minister for The Environment. (2)
The EPA produces greenhouse gas guidelines that have the objective to minimise the risk of environmental harm associated with climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions “as far as practicable”. (3) These guidelines are used by the EPA in its environmental impact assessments to outline how and when greenhouse gas emissions will be considered. (3) If they are appropriately rigorous, they could prevent companies from even trying to start new fossil fuel projects.
Usually the writing of new guidelines would be routine, however, in 2019 when the EPA last attempted to update their guidelines it caused a stir among the gas industry and government. (4)
Those guidelines recommended that all new large resource projects fully offset their direct greenhouse gas emissions. (5) Despite the offset industry itself having dubious effectiveness (6) (7) in preventing climate change this requirement threw the whole resources industry into a tizzy. This resulted in a crisis meeting between the EPA, the McGowan and the resources industry representatives that forced the shelving the original draft. (8) The EPA should be independent and this was pretty clear example of government and industry intervention. The final guidelines in December 2019 instead required that these projects would have the “aspiration” of reaching net zero by 2050 and a clear plan towards the offsetting all their emissions. (5)
With the sudden politicisation of the previous guidelines there has been increased focus on these revised guidelines. On April 5 2023, just days before Easter, the EPA published their new greenhouse gas guidelines. (3) This was after a long consultation process where the EPA received over a thousand submissions many urging it to tighten its guidelines.
There are some key improvements over the 2019 guidelines. The most important is the formation of a mitigation hierarchy where avoiding emissions completely, then attempting to reduce emissions should be considered before offsets. (3) Offsets have been primary mitigation strategy employed by the resource companies, effectively paying away their pollution. (9) The second big improvement is that scope 3 emissions will now be considered when giving a project the go ahead. (3) Scope 3 emissions are emissions embedded in the material and equipment needed for the project and downstream where the gas is burnt or material used. It is however, very difficult for the EPA to regulate emissions outside Western Australia. The EPA hands over responsibility when gas is being sold into developed countries with their own greenhouse gas emissions laws including Japan or Korea where a lot of gas is sold. (3) For developing countries without strong climate legislation, it does expect that project proponents make estimates for their downstream emissions and this will be considered when deciding to recommend the project go ahead. (3) However, there is no explicit targets for scope 3 emissions listed. Together these two new regulations should make it much harder for new gas projects to be started in Western Australia.
The big downside of the regulations is that any new gas projects could even be considered to go ahead instead of just being outright banned. The EPA considers that the realm of politics and will not entertain the idea. The regulations also only apply to projects with over 100 000 tonnes CO2-e of direct emissions, the worst of the worst that probably shouldn’t be going ahead anyway. (3) We are sure to see a lot of projects with 99 999 tonnes of emissions to limbo under the extra regulation and projects exporting gas can reduce emissions below that threshold in WA without needing to consider their scope 3 emissions at all. (10) These regulations do not apply retroactively so projects that were approved under older regulations will not be reconsidered, such as Woodside’s Scarborough gas project. (10) Resources companies also like to slip out of regulation through the various loopholes around “best practice” and “as far as practicable” that do not consider new technology.
The fatal flaw in the EPA regulatory system is that it can only ever act as a recommendation to the environment minister rather than law. (2) This leaves the option for the environment minister to ignore the recommendations. On one such occasion the EPA recommended against the Gorgon gas project but was overruled by the Barnet government. (11) The Gorgon gas project and its failed carbon capture project has contributed to half of all Australia’s increase in emissions. (12) We also saw an overrule threatened by McGowan when the Conservation Council of WA sued the EPA for failing to take into account the greenhouse gas emissions for the whole of the Scarborough Gas project. (13) That court case was dismissed on a technicality that it was filed too late and so we didn’t have to see if McGowan would have overruled the EPA. (14) This means that even if the EPA succeeds in applying its regulations, we still have to fight the politicians to prevent new fossil fuel projects. The politicians that receive large donations from companies such as Woodside. (15)
Ultimately, the 2023 EPA Greenhouse gas guidelines are an improvement but not even close to what is needed for 1.5oC (10) that the EPA claims it is targeting (3), and not good enough for even the 2oC target agreed to in the Paris agreement. However, regulatory hurdles slow down fossil fuel projects and the more road blocks available the more time we have to build the necessary popular movement against the continued expansion of fossil fuels. As regulation increases, we will see many companies simply decide that it is too hard and not attempt it. For example, we have seen Shell pull out of the Browse project and Woodside boss Meg O’Neill specifically cited regulatory hurdles. (16) We must continue to put pressure on all decision makers, politicians, public servants, independent regulatory bodies like the EPA and business leaders to make sure their decisions are in line with their own emissions targets let alone what will actually protect the environment.
When we pass thresholds like 1.5oC we doom some of our beautiful natural world to death (17) and the failure of regulatory agencies and politicians to act leaves them complicit in this destruction. Why are we making these sacrifices? For gas company shareholders just to make a few more millions?
References
1. Government of Western Australian. Environmental Protection Authority. [Online] Government of Western Australian. https://www.epa.wa.gov.au/.
2. Government of Western Australia. Environmental Protection Authority. About the Environmental Protection Authority. [Online] Government of Western Australia. https://www.epa.wa.gov.au/about-environmental-protection-authority.
3. Environmental Protection Authority. Environmental Factor Guideline: Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Perth : Environmental Protection Authority, 2023.
4. Perpitch, Nicholas. EPA scraps new carbon emissions guidelines for resources companies amid industry pressure. ABC News. [Online] Australian broadcasting Corporation, 3 19, 2019. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-14/epa-scraps-carbon-emssions-guide….
5. Environmental Protection Authority. Environmental Factor Guideline: Greenhouse Gas Emissions . Perth : Environmental Protection Authority, 2020.
6. Niiler, Eric. Do Carbon Offsets Really Work? It Depends on the Details. Wired. Janurary 14, 2020.
7. Cox, Lisa. ‘Utterly damning’ review finds offsets scheme fails to protect NSW environment. The Guardian Australia. [Online] The Guardian, August 30, 2022. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/30/utterly-damning-rev….
8. Bell, Frances. ABC News. EPA releases fresh WA carbon emissions guidelines for industry after first draft officially scrapped. [Online] Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 12 9, 2019. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-09/new-wa-epa-carbon-emissions-guid….
9. Felix, Nick. The great stock ’n’ coal swindle . The Monthly. [Online] Schwartz Media, 3 2023. https://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/2023/march/nick-feik/great-stock-n-….
10. Kruijff, Peter de. New WA greenhouse gas guidelines labelled too weak by conservationists, too stringent by mining, energy companies. ABC News. [Online] Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 4 13, 2023.
11. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. $50b Gorgon gas project gets green light. ABC News. [Online] Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 4 30, 2009. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-04-30/50b-gorgon-gas-project-gets-gree….
12. Morton, Adam. Half of Australia's emissions increase linked to WA's Gorgon LNG plant. The Guardian Australia. [Online] The Guardian, 11 14, 2018. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/nov/14/half-of-australias-….
13. Manfield, Evelyn. Mark McGowan flags government action if Woodside Supreme Court ruling threatens industry. ABC News. [Online] Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 11 24, 2021. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-11-24/markmcgowan-woodside-scarborough….
14. Weber, David. Supreme Court rejects Conservation Council of WA's challenge against Woodside Scarborough project. ABC News. [Online] Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 3 1, 2022. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-03-01/supreme-court-rejects-ccwa-chall….
15. Kurmelovs, Royce. ‘More money than ever’: gas companies made almost $1m in donations to Labor and Liberals. The Guardian Australia. [Online] The Guardian, 2 2, 2022. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/feb/02/more-money-than-….
16. Thompson, Brad. Shell sells stake in $30b Woodside gas project to BP. Financial Review. [Online] Nine Entertainment Company, 4 29, 2023. https://www.afr.com/companies/energy/shell-sells-stake-in-30b-woodside-….
17. IPCC. Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva : Cambridge University Press., 2022.
Header Photo: The Author with Dale the Whale
[Opinions expressed are those of the author and not official policy of Greens WA]