The company's Climate Report presentation, released yesterday, outlines its targets of reducing emissions by 15% by 2025 and 30% by 2030.
On page nine, the presentation charts the downward trajectory of its emissions, expecting them to rise once its freshly sanctioned Scarborough project comes online in 2026 - to around 4.5 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent per year across scope 1 and 2 emissions.
Up to 2030, Woodside sees slithers of its emissions being either designed out, such as by using a battery storage system rather than gas on its Scarborough FPSO, or operated out with "incremental improvements to operating practices as well as minor modifications to plant and infrastructure".
The bulk of its emissions reductions to meet its 2030 targets will be delivered via offsets, with Woodside pointing out that it will be able to do so thanks to an international framework for carbon offset trading being established through Article 6 of the Paris Agreement.
By 2030 it expects net Scope 1 and 2 emissions to be around 2.9MMtCO2e.
Beyond 2030, it expects around 1MMtCO2e of emissions to be removed due to what it describes as "field decline without further development" however a Woodside spokesperson told Energy News the chart only looks at current producing assets and sanctioned projects.
Aside from that it says "residual abatement is expected to be required in 2050".
The Woodside spokesperson said residual abatement is what still needs to be designed out, operated out or offset.
"It is incorrect to report that Woodside is ‘planning to not develop any new oil and gas projects beyond 2030 to meet its emissions reduction targets'," she said.
"Post-2030, we have an "aspiration" not a target for now, which reflects that we don't have detailed business plans that far ahead."
Energy News was told by an industry source that the phrase "residual abatement" is similar to the federal government's phrase "further technological breakthroughs" it used to map out its own economy-wide transition to net zero.
The government's plan was widely-derided as having a lack of detail or ambition.
Analysts pointed out during the company's investor call last month that around 60% of production in the North West Shelf, and Gippsland Basin - which Woodside is set to inherit via the BHP merger - are rapidly in decline. The company expects to shut one train of five at the NWS by 2024.
Woodside CEO Meg O'Neill was asked whether the company planned to replace production or whether the company was happy to see production rates go backwards and run the business for more cash.
The CEO said "we want to make sure that we are disciplined in our investment decision making," while also saying the company was "talking to everyone" in regards to backfill opportunities.
She referred to the capital framework the company announced in December which includes investment criteria depending on the type of investment.
"The impact on the wider portfolio under different scenarios is considered, along with shareholder returns in carbon emissions, to make sure we are maintaining a profitable, resilient and diversified portfolio," O'Neill said at the time.
She said how the company planned to allocate capital was informed by analysis on market behaviour to evaluate product demand, as well as "an awareness of our role in broader society - our people applying an ESG mindset to guide responsible decision making at all levels of the business".
O'Neill also stated that under all scenarios it measured in its analysis of IEA Energy Outlooks that there was "an important role for oil, gas and hydrogen".
Woodside has three hydrogen projects in development in Tasmania, Western Australia and Oklahoma, US - each using various methods of hydrogen production.
The company expects to remain free cash-flow positive in the long term, saying its strategy has the option to modify the makeup of its portfolio to ensure shareholder returns across various scenarios as the market evolves in the coming decades.
Climate and environmental groups have been critical about Woodside's emissions reduction plans given that it fails to address its scope 3 emissions, the largest part of its carbon footprint.
The company released a Scope 3 emissions plan last month, however it was described by the Australasian Centre of Corporate Responsibility as "a joke".
