Greenpeace statement on Browse project’s federal assessment timeline – Image for illustrative purposes only (Image credits: Unsplash)
The federal government is expected to issue a recommendation this year on Woodside’s proposed Browse gas development, a step that will determine whether drilling can proceed near one of Western Australia’s most sensitive marine areas. The announcement has renewed attention on the project’s potential effects on Scott Reef, a remote coral system that supports nesting sea turtles, endangered pygmy blue whales and other protected species. Environmental groups argue the timing places Environment Minister Murray Watt in a position to shape both the project’s future and the government’s record on ocean protection.
Project Details and Location
Woodside’s Browse plans involve drilling at least fifty wells in waters adjacent to Scott Reef, roughly 400 kilometres off the Kimberley coast. The development would also require carbon storage infrastructure and subsea pipelines to transport gas to processing facilities. Scott Reef itself is recognised for its biodiversity, including coral communities and feeding grounds for migratory marine life that travel through the region each year.
Industry documents describe the area as a prospective gas field, yet the proximity to the reef has drawn repeated scrutiny from regulators and conservation organisations. The project has been under assessment for several years, with earlier state-level reviews already flagging significant environmental hurdles.
Earlier Environmental Assessments
The Western Australian Environmental Protection Authority previously concluded that the drilling proposal posed unacceptable risks to the surrounding marine environment. That finding focused on potential impacts from noise, seabed disturbance and the long-term presence of industrial infrastructure near sensitive habitats. Federal authorities are now reviewing the same proposal under national environmental law, with a recommendation due before the end of 2026.
Supporters of the project point to its potential contribution to domestic and export energy supplies. Critics counter that international demand for liquefied natural gas has softened in recent years, reducing the economic case for new developments in frontier locations such as Scott Reef.
Public and Political Pressure
Greenpeace Australia Pacific senior campaigner Hannah Schuch described the plans as reckless, noting that no acceptable method exists to drill, store carbon or lay pipelines around the reef without harming its ecosystems. She urged Minister Watt to reject the proposal outright, arguing that protection of Scott Reef would represent a defining environmental decision for the Albanese government.
“Protecting Scott Reef by rejecting Woodside’s appalling Browse plans… would be a legacy moment for the Federal Labor government.”
More than half a million Australians have already signed petitions calling for the project to be stopped. The minister’s eventual decision will be watched closely by both industry and conservation communities as an indicator of how the government balances energy development against marine protection commitments.
Next Steps and Uncertainties
The federal assessment process remains ongoing, and the final recommendation could include conditions, modifications or outright refusal. Outcomes will depend on additional scientific advice, public submissions and the minister’s interpretation of national environmental standards. Even if approved, the project would still face further regulatory and commercial hurdles before any drilling could begin.
Observers note that the coming months will clarify whether the government chooses to advance or halt the development. The decision carries implications for Australia’s emissions trajectory and for the protection of remote marine environments that remain largely untouched by large-scale industry.