Rules of the game are changing — and football codes need to stay onside

“Give Woodside the boot!” 

Go to a Fremantle Dockers AFL home game these days and you’re likely to be greeted by fans with a message: our club shouldn’t accept sponsorships from the resource giant. They also shout “Go Dockers!”, just to make it clear they are both conservation-minded and footy fanatics.

It’s hard not to agree with them. Such sponsorships are on the same spectrum as sporting clubs taking money from alcohol companies — and previously cigarette and asbestos companies.

The community’s heightened awareness of climate change, as evidenced in the recent election results, must mean companies such as Woodside expect to be targeted by environmentalists — and footy clubs such as Freo must anticipate being called to account for accepting sponsorships from big polluters. It’s the same for the Wallabies: brought to you by Santos.

As Crikey’s Bernard Keane and others have pointed out, Woodside’s massive Scarborough project off the north-west of Western Australia, and similar projects, provide major challenges for the Albanese government to meet even its modest emissions target.

And it’s in WA where this paradox is clearest and the challenge is greatest — not only for the state but for the country. The McGowan government has made laudable announcements on environmental initiatives, including:

• Transitioning to net zero greenhouse gas emissions by committing to a whole-of-government 2030 reduction target of 80% below 2020 levels
• Retiring state-owned coal power stations by 2030
• Investing $3.8 billion in new green power infrastructure
• Establishing a $1.25 billion climate action fund for a low-carbon future
• Making available $3500 rebates for West Australians buying electric or hydrogen fuel cell vehicles
• Committing $22.6 million to increase EV charging across the state
• Launching a prospectus to promote WA’s battery and critical mineral industries to investors around the world.

But these worthwhile and ambitious steps are put at risk by the phenomenal success of the state’s resources industry, as well as by even more opportunities for exploration released by the government. Earlier this year it trumpeted that its resources sales for 2021 had increased by a “massive” 30%, or $53 billion, from 2020.

This followed an announcement by Mines and Petroleum Minister Bill Johnston that not only was WA Australia’s largest hydrocarbon producer but that the government was seeking applicants to bid on eight new areas in the Northern Carnarvon and the Amadeus basins for petroleum exploration. This is despite the United Nations International Panel on Climate Change calling for no new oil, gas or coal developments.

The WA government seems to be relishing having its cake and eating it too.

This dilemma poses a major, if not insurmountable, challenge to the federal government’s aim to cut emissions by 43% by 2030.

The WA paradoxical relationship to Australia’s emission target is exemplified by Woodside’s Scarborough project off the state’s north-west coast. Despite ditching an unfavourable CSIRO report it commissioned on “Modelling the emissions impact of additional LNG in Asia”, Woodside claimed the contrary in its application for Scarborough and said it would achieve net zero by 2050 or sooner.

And yes, Woodside won the approval of WA’s Environmental Protection Authority for its north-west gas expansion, and won a court appeal on the same matter against the Conservation Council of Western Australia.

But the scientifically informed naysayers — including the Australian Conservation Foundation, which is taking legal action in the Federal Court against Scarborough — doubt the energy giant will achieve its emissions target.

And this will mean WA’s gas expansion will not only increase its emission levels but will also put pressure on other states to do even more of the heavy lifting.