Woodside oil spill plan under fire as approval decision nears

A coalition of experts, fishers, and conservationists has criticized Woodside's Browse gas project, alleging the company has significantly underestimated the risks of an oil spill in the pristine Kimberley coast. Woodside's proposed $30 billion project, which the company claims will generate enough gas to power 800,000 homes, is currently under review by Western Australia's Environmental Protection Authority (EPA).

The company modified its proposal after receiving a preliminary rejection, relocating a drill center away from crucial turtle nesting grounds and reducing the project's overall footprint. Woodside's simulations suggest a worst-case scenario could involve a 12-hour leak in the Timor Sea, potentially releasing nearly 900,000 barrels of condensate and posing catastrophic consequences, extending as far as Indonesia and Timor-Leste.

However, the company maintains the likelihood of a catastrophe is low, with a more probable scenario unfolding over 12 hours, discharging around 5,600 barrels of condensate off Scott Reef. Woodside has implemented various strategies to mitigate spill impacts, including dual pyrotechnic shear rams, a novel technology utilizing controlled explosives to swiftly seal compromised wells.

Environmental consultant Rick Steiner, however, remains skeptical of Woodside's spill containment methods, citing past failures in other major oil spills. Chevron Australia, a key competitor of Woodside, has also expressed doubts about the effectiveness of pyrotechnic shear rams, stating they cannot be function tested due to their single-use nature.

Critics argue that deploying capping stacks and relief wells, relied upon by Woodside to manage spills, would require significant lead times and could be delayed. A recent independent review by John Wright, a former architect of the Deepwater Horizon response, echoed these concerns, indicating potential delays in mobilizing these critical response mechanisms.

Despite these criticisms, Woodside asserts it has invested heavily in prevention and rapid response measures, emphasizing its commitment to managing and minimizing potential environmental impacts.