Minister Swinbourne must reject Drilling at Scott Reef

Send Minister Swinbourne a message about Scott Reef!

Newly appointed West Australian Environment Minister Matthew Swinbourne will be the one making the final decision on the future of Scott Reef – so let’s make sure he knows how we feel about it.

Scott Reef is a living marine ecosystem that has been a reef for 15 million years; perched on the edge of the Australian continental shelf and adjacent to the wild and intact Kimberley coast.

Nutrient-rich upwellings support an abundance of life, from the tiny reef-building coral polyps to endangered pygmy blue whales, which are known to feed around Scott Reef on their annual migration.

Manta rays glide freely around the extensive reef system, following food upwellings as they move with the change of tide, and a critically important island called the Sandy Islet provides essential nesting ground for endangered green sea turtles. These turtles are a genetically unique population which nest only on the Sandy Islet and nearby Browse Island.

Right now, Scott Reef and the wildlife that utilise the ecosystem live free from the burden of oil and gas development.

Australia’s largest oil and gas company, Woodside, is proposing to drill up to 50 gas wells around the reef and extract gas to pipe back to its North West Shelf gas factory on the Burrup Peninsula 900 km away, running their pipeline right past the incredible Rowley Shoals and processing gas adjacent to the ancient art gallery of Murujuga rock art.

Woodside is not operating alone in this monstrous proposal – British Petroleum (BP) holds the largest stake in the joint venture project. It should be noted that BP was the operator of the Deepwater Horizon rig when the devastating oil spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico occurred back in 2010.

Woodside wants to drill the closest well within 2 km of the reef, but still needs to gain full environmental approval to begin operations at Scott Reef and the West Australian Environment Minister Matthew Swinbourne will be making the final decision on whether this destructive project will go ahead or not.

We urge you to write to Minister Swinbourne to highlight how unacceptable it is to allow oil and gas drilling at Scott Reef, and suggest it be turned into a marine park to be enjoyed by generations to come.

 

Minister Swinbourne must reject Drilling at Scott Reef

    Dear Minister Swinbourne,

    1. New Scott Reef is a 15 million-year-old marine biodiversity hotspot which is already under pressure from global warming, rising sea temperatures and coral bleaching caused by fossil fuel burning.

    2. Scott Reef is home to an amazing variety of reef habitats and marine species, including, 

    • Corals down to 70 metres depth in the unique Deep Lagoon on South Reef; 
    • Population of 1000 genetically unique Green turtles that nest only on Sandy Islet and Browse Island;
    • Four species of whale recorded in the Scott Reef region - Pygmy blue, Humpback, Bryde’s and Dwarf minke;
    • In 2008, over 3000 dolphins were recorded from at least 10 species, including Spinner;  Bottlenose; Short-beaked, and two ‘oceanic dolphins’: Pilot ‘whales’ and False killer ‘whales’;
    • Scott Reef is potentially the last stronghold for the endangered Dusky sea snake - it hasn't been sighted anywhere else since 2002.

    3. The changes Woodside is proposing do not remove the unacceptable risks and impacts of a large scale gas extraction, processing and piping project in the midst of a unique and globally significant coral reef system.

    4. The technological fixes Woodside is proposing may reduce some impacts and risks but the significance of the reductions is overstated. For example, Woodside says,

    Underwater noise modelling conducted in support of the Browse EIS/ERD and summarised within the Pygmy Blue Whale Management Plan published as part of the Response to Submissions estimated that the underwater sound source level from a dynamically positioned MODU operating at Torosa would be up to 182.8 dB re 1μPa. The noise from drilling activities from a moored MODU when drilling is estimated to be lower, at 170.1 dB re 1μPa.

    In other words, the reduction in noise would only be about 6.6%. Woodside selectively claims this small reduction would be significant for some species, but such claims must be independently verified.

    5. In relation to the proposed use of ‘pyrotechnic shear ram’ technology, Woodside claims, 

    Within the ERD, it was noted that the worst ‘worst case credible’ scenario arising from Torosa drilling activities could result in a 77 day loss of containment event, releasing up to 142,154 m3 of condensate. Evaluation of pyrotechnic shear ram technology determined that the longest credible duration of a blowout would be 12 hours.

    To support the adoption of this technology Woodside cites an independent expert report it commissioned which also states, 

    There remains a risk no matter how small that the K-BOS [pyrotechnic shear ram] when activated does not function and this needs to be identified in any probabilistic analysis.  

    [Independent Review of Well Blowout Risk Management at Torosa. Stuart and Wright. 2024]

    The expert report also makes it clear that adoption of this technology does not mean Woodside could abandon the other 'loss-of-containment' measures it has already committed to, in order to save money.

    6. Woodside’s Browse fossil gas extraction project on Scott Reef can never be made environmentally acceptable. Woodside’s proposed modifications do not change that underlying reality. 

    While the EPA may choose to accept these changes on the basis that they do not make the project worse from an environmental standpoint, they cannot be used to claim that the overall project has now become acceptable. The EPA must stick with its ‘preliminary view’ that the Browse/Scott Reef fossil gas project is environmentally unacceptable and reject it accordingly.

    Yours Sincerely,
    [Your name will be automatically added]

    Become a Member
    Make a Donation
    Become a Volunteer