It's the first time researchers have quantified the impacts of individual projects on climate change. But Woodside has argued it is not possible to pin rising temperatures on one operation.

New research from the Australian National University challenges the claim emissions from Woodside's $18.9 billion Scarborough gas project off WA's coast will be "negligible", while also directly quantifying a project's climate impact for the first time.

journal on Monday, also directly attributed nearly 0.0004 degrees of additional global warming to the project's at least 31 years of emissions from 2026.While the number may appear small, report lead author Professor Sarah Perkins-Kirkpatrick said the consequences would be great. The study pointed to an additional 516,000 people around the world exposed to unprecedented heat and hundreds of heat-related deaths in Europe by the end of the century. It also claimed exposure to heat at the Great Barrier Reef would result in an additional 16 million coral colonies lost in each future bleaching event - which themselves would become more common.Perkins-Kirkpatrick said this was the first time research had quantified the impacts of individual projects on global warming. She said while Scarborough had been used as an example, it was possible to apply to formula to other operations and companies. "The majority of Australia's new fossil fuel projects describe their anticipated greenhouse gas outputs as negligible in the context of global emissions and claim they're unable to measure contributions to global warming, while also ignoring expected impacts," Perkins-Kirkpatrick said."The site's developers claim it is not possible to link greenhouse gas emissions from Scarborough with climate change or any particular climate-related impact given that the estimated emissions associated with Scarborough are negligible in the context of existing and future predicted global greenhouse gas concentrations.Perkins-Kirkpatrick said the report had quantified the impact on places like Europe and the Great Barrier Reef as there was already research on climate change at those sites. But she said that it was clear both people and coral reefs closer to the Scarborough project would also be affected. "If we can show impacts for the Great Barrier Reef then we know that Scott Reef or Ningaloo will also be impacted," Perkins-Kirkpatrick said. However, a Woodside spokesperson remained adamant climate change "cannot be attributed to any one event, country, industry or activity", and pointed to reports from the CSIRO and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that supported the company's position."The Scarborough reservoir contains less than 0.1 per cent carbon dioxide. "Combined with processing design efficiencies at the offshore floating production unit and onshore Pluto Train 2, the project is expected to be one of the lowest carbon intensity sources of LNG delivered into north Asian markets." They said Woodside would reduce the Scarborough Energy Project's direct greenhouse gas emissions to "as low as reasonably practicable" by incorporating "energy efficiency measures" in design and operations. The ANU research calculated that, by 2049, the anticipated Australian emissions from the Scarborough project alone would comprise almost half of Australia's annual carbon emissions budget. Report co-author Dr Nicola Maher said beyond 2050, all emissions from Scarborough would require durable carbon removal from the atmosphere if Australia was to meet its emission reduction targets. "That would require a huge increase in the effectiveness and scale of carbon capture and storage technology," Millar said. Perkins-Kirkpatrick claimed the capabilities of carbon capture and storage would not meet the scale Woodside would need in the next 25 years.Woodside told the federal environment regulator in a 2022 submission that capturing and storing the reservoir carbon dioxide for its Browse gas export project was a "high-risk, high-cost" option that "remains technically challenging; however, with time, carbon capture and storage technology will improve".to stop the Scarborough gas project on the basis that its contribution to global warming would harm the Great Barrier Reef - the same concerns discussed in the latest study.A lawyer for the group claimed Woodside's court submission misinterpreted the federal regulator's reasons for approval, in suggesting the regulator considered Scarborough's projected emissions negligible to its assessment.Doctors for the Environment Australia executive director Dr Kate Wylie said it was "clear that Australia's offshore gas regulations are not living up to the broader public interest". "The offshore gas industry in Australia is one of the most significant sources of greenhouse gas emissions, so the Australian community should be able to expect the government to regulate those impacts seriously," she said. Perkins-Kirkpatrick said she was hopeful the latest research could help with future court cases against mining projects. The study is contributing to a research project about lethal humidity, which is funded by Andrew and Nicola Forrest's Minderoo Foundation.

Australia Latest News, Australia Headlines

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

Australia's household energy bills will halve by 2050, modelling suggestsGrattan Institute report argues fall in costs will provide federal government room for more action on climate

Read more "

Climate Integrity asks regulator to investigate claim 'distorted research' used to influence government policyAdvocacy group Climate Integrity has accused the gas industry of using 'distorted research', produced by the accounting firm EY, to influence the Australian government's Future Gas Strategy.

Read more "

Activists take Labor to court over controversial gas project extensionLabor's decision to extend the life of Woodside's North West Shelf Gas project faces a new legal challenge in the Federal Court.

Read more "

Legal Challenges Launched Against Woodside's North West Shelf Gas Project ExtensionThe Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) and Friends of Australian Rock Art (FARA) are appealing in the Federal Court to overturn the extension of Woodside's North West Shelf gas project. The ACF argues the minister wrongly considered economic benefits, left out critical details, and failed to consider climate change impacts. FARA highlights the potential devastating impact on Indigenous rock art, human health, and the planet.

Read more "

ANU Study Challenges Woodside's 'Negligible' Emissions Claim for Scarborough Gas Project, Quantifies Climate ImpactA new study from the Australian National University directly challenges Woodside's assertion that emissions from the Scarborough gas project will be 'negligible'. The research quantifies the project's specific contribution to global warming and projects significant negative impacts on both human populations and the Great Barrier Reef.

Read more "

ANU report puts a number on climate impact of Woodside's $19b Scarborough gas project