In response to comments made by Woodside CEO Liz Westcott at a business breakfast in Perth this morning, CCWA Executive Director Matt Roberts said:
“Time and again it has been shown that Western Australia has more than enough gas to responsibly manage the transition to renewable energy, with no need for polluting new fossil fuel projects like Browse.
“As it becomes clearer that our state doesn’t need the Browse gas export project for domestic supply, Woodside is inventing new reasons that WA will supposedly benefit from the project. But do we really need American nuclear submarines or gas-powered American data centres in our state?
“Federal Energy Minister Chris Bowen has made clear that any new data centres built in Australia should be 100% powered by renewables, not dirty fossil fuels like gas.
“Communities around the world have serious and valid concerns about data centres, their impact on local environments and water sources, and the huge amounts of energy they’ll use.
“If we are going to build data centres in this country, Australian governments must enforce clear regulations to ensure they have community support and are built responsibly in a way that doesn’t delay or hamper Australia’s renewable energy transition.
“What Woodside fails to acknowledge is that the Browse gas export project would have disastrous impacts on marine species at Scott Reef, a spectacular, ancient coral atoll. We know Western Australians want to see their marine life thrive, and we doubt they’re willing to sacrifice it so multinational companies can build more AI data centres.
“The fossil fuel industry has made billions from conflict in the Middle East, and now Woodside wants to lock gas into an expanding military industry here in WA, as part of the federal government’s AUKUS plans with the US. It’s a dark, self-motivated bid from Woodside to secure profits with confected concerns about the needs of the WA community.
“It’s also worth remembering that Woodside consistently underdelivers on its current domestic gas obligations – yet now claims to care about our energy security. Woodside has sent less than 4% of the gas from its Pluto project to the domestic market, yet we’re supposed to believe it will provide energy security through Browse?
“Woodside wants to ride on the coattails of two contentious issues that weren't even on the radar when it tried to tell us that it needed to drill gas from underneath Scott Reef. This is more corporate spin from a company that will say anything for future profits.”
ENDS
Media contact: Matt Roberts - 0430232070