The Albanese government has cleared the Australia gas project extension 2070. The move allows Woodside to continue operating the North West Shelf gas hub for four more decades. Officials say the plan comes with strict rules to cut emissions and safeguard Indigenous Murujuga rock art. Critics warn it is a carbon bomb that threatens climate goals and heritage values.
Government approval of Australia gas project
The Australia gas project extension 2070 was confirmed by Environment Minister Murray Watt who announced that the North West Shelf will now operate until 2070 under strict new rules. He said 48 conditions were imposed on Woodside Energy focusing mainly on controlling emissions of nitrogen and sulphur oxides. These gases must be cut by 60 percent by 2030 and up to 90 percent by 2061. The minister stressed that the conditions are designed to balance job security with protection of the Murujuga rock art and climate responsibility. This decision extends the life of one of the world’s largest gas projects well beyond its previous 2030 deadline.
Rock art under partial protection
The gas hub is located close to Murujuga in Western Australia which holds more than one million ancient petroglyphs. These carvings are considered the oldest known examples of human expression with some dating back 50,000 years. The Australia gas project extension 2070 included a partial protection order under the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act. This means that while the rock art cannot be moved or physically damaged the order does not cover harm caused by industrial emissions. Many Indigenous leaders argue this leaves the artwork vulnerable.
Voices from the community
Peter Hicks chair of the Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation welcomed the declaration saying it adds another layer of recognition for the cultural value of Murujuga. On the other hand Raelene Cooper of Save Our Songlines expressed anger and disappointment. She described the approval as a betrayal of Indigenous communities and warned that the gas extension threatens heritage as well as the climate. Cooper has also sought further legal advice and suggested the decision may face challenges in court.
Climate concerns over the project
The Australia gas project extension 2070 has drawn heavy criticism from climate groups who call it a dangerous setback. The Australian Conservation Foundation labelled it a carbon bomb with the potential to release almost 88 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent each year. Greenpeace and the Australian Greens argued that this single project will undermine global climate goals and make it impossible for Australia to claim credibility on emissions reduction. Experts warn that the project could account for as much as 20 percent of Australia’s current annual carbon footprint once its gas is sold and burned overseas.
Expert warnings
Prominent climate scientist Bill Hare said the extension risks putting Australia at odds with international law. He explained that approving such a large fossil fuel project while pledging climate action could lead to legal challenges in global courts. Hare described the approval as a rejection of climate science and a slap in the face to Pacific Island nations already suffering from rising seas.
Government response to criticism
Minister Murray Watt defended the decision arguing that the conditions imposed are among the strictest in the world. He said they provide certainty for workers while also setting enforceable limits on harmful gases. Woodside Energy also welcomed the extension. The company’s chief operating officer Liz Westcott said it ensures reliable energy supplies and supports the economy while operating under clear environmental conditions. Woodside highlighted its long history of supplying energy for over 40 years and claimed the extension offers stability for the decades ahead.
Economic and political impact
The Australia gas project extension 2070 reflects the ongoing tension between economic growth and climate responsibility. The North West Shelf has been central to Australia’s energy exports creating thousands of jobs and billions in revenue. Extending it to 2070 secures long term economic gains but also raises questions about whether Australia can meet its pledge to cut emissions by 43 percent by 2030 and achieve net zero by 2050. Critics argue that relying on gas for so many more decades undermines investments in renewable energy.
Albanese under pressure
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese entered office in 2022 promising stronger climate action. Conservationists now argue that his credibility is at risk. By approving the Australia gas project extension 2070 his government faces accusations of siding with fossil fuel companies over global climate goals. The Greens described the decision as disastrous and Greenpeace called it grotesque. Many observers believe this approval will define Albanese’s legacy on climate policy.
Looking ahead
The future of the Australia gas project extension 2070 will depend on how strictly the new conditions are enforced and whether emissions cuts are achieved on time. Monitoring systems and consultation with Indigenous communities are required under the approval but environmental groups fear oversight will not be enough. The decision highlights the ongoing challenge of balancing energy security with cultural and climate responsibility. As Australia continues to face climate driven disasters such as bushfires and floods critics argue that approving a project of this size is a step in the wrong direction.
