The Australian Conservation Foundation and Friends of Australian Rock Art are challenging the federal government’s approval of Woodside’s North West Shelf gas project extension in the Federal Court. The hearing in Melbourne centers on whether the environment minister adequately considered climate change and risks to ancient Indigenous petroglyphs before granting approval.
Federal Court Challenge Over North West Shelf Approval
The legal battle, which began in Melbourne this week before Justice Catherine Button, targets the federal government’s September 2025 decision to extend the operation of Woodside’s major North West Shelf gas export project. The Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) and Friends of Australian Rock Art (Fara) are running concurrent challenges, arguing the approval process was fundamentally flawed.
The project, which allows the Karratha gas processing plant to operate until 2070, has drawn intense criticism from environmental groups who label it a “carbon bomb.” According to the ACF, the extension could result in the release of about 4bn tonnes of CO2, a figure equivalent to about 10 years of Australia’s annual emissions.
“It will be up to the court to decide the merits of the case … We’re here saying the minister made the wrong decision and that some very significant factors including around climate change need to be taken into account.”
Adam Bandt, chief executive of the Australian Conservation Foundation
Murujuga Rock Art and Environmental Risks
A primary point of contention is the proximity of the Karratha facility to the Murujuga indigenous rock art complex. The site contains more than a million petroglyphs, some dating back 50,000 years, including the oldest known image of a human face. Fara, a volunteer organization that helped secure national heritage listing for the area in 2007, argues that industrial emissions are already causing erosion of the artwork.
In his “statement of reasons” regarding the approval, Environment Minister Murray Watt accepted advice that pollution from the liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility could lead to the degradation, damage, notable alteration, modification, obscuring or diminishing
of the area’s natural heritage. However, government-backed monitoring has mostly dismissed these risks, a conclusion that remains disputed by some scientists.
International Climate Obligations and Procedural Disputes
The case has gained an international dimension with the intervention of the United Nations special rapporteur on the human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, Astrid Puentes Riaño. Acting as a friend of the court,
Puentes submitted that Australia holds a specific duty under customary international law to prevent significant environmental harm.
The submission emphasizes the recent advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice, which clarified that state duties regarding environmental protection extend to the climate system.
The court rejected Fara’s initial request for these documents on Tuesday.
Woodside maintains that the approval followed a rigorous regulatory process. A spokesperson stated, The Australian Federal Government’s September 2025 approval of the North West Shelf Project Extension followed a comprehensive and extended assessment carried out by both Commonwealth and Western Australian State regulators in accordance with statutory processes.
The company declined further comment on the specifics of the ongoing litigation.
With the legal proceedings underway, the central uncertainty remains whether the court will find that the minister’s assessment of climate impacts and heritage risks met the required legal standards or if the approval process must be reopened to account for broader environmental obligations.
Sources: AFR.
Keep reading
