Opinion: how did the regulation of Australia's offshore oil and gas industry become so problematic?
It's easy to point the finger at NOPSEMA, but the truth is more complex
Senator Peter Whish-Wilson
Credits: ENB
21 February 2025
As reported in ENB, yesterday the Australian Greens' Senator Dorinda Cox branded the federal government's offshore energy regulator NOPSEMA as "the puppets of the industry."
Her outburst came as the regulator announced what she called a "reckless" approval of Woodside's Scarborough offshore facility and trunk line operations, clearing the way for the company to advance its expansion plans for the next 30 years.
In her statement she said: "While this decision meets procedural requirements, it raises serious concerns over the safeguarding of the marine environment and the cultural heritage of First Nations communities.
"It is unacceptable that fossil fuel companies can submit Environmental Plans for offshore projects without consulting Traditional Owners and it is time to change that in favour of free, prior and informed consent to satisfy the requirement of genuine and meaningful consultation."
"We cannot stand by while the gas industry puppeteers the Government to push through projects that endanger our future. It's shameful that this was approved at all given NOPSEMA are fully aware of the rules they need to follow."
Today, her senate peer Senator Whish-Wilson, writing exclusively for ENB, outlines his thoughts on what he sees as the ineffectiveness of the regulator.
For more than 60 years fossil fuel corporations have been running rampant in Australia's oceans. As new evidence emerges about the risks oil spills, seismic blasting, and carbon capture and storage have on our marine environment, there is an ever-growing need to decommission aging oil and gas infrastructure and implement new frameworks for offshore wind licences.
Hence, there has never been a better time to re-think and overhaul the regulations and legislation that govern our offshore regulator, the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority (NOPSEMA).
NOPSEMA is supposed to have oversight and regulate the environmental management of the offshore fossil fuel industry, under the purview of the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006 (OPGGS Act). It is also tasked with maintaining regular inspections of offshore operations, and importantly, may take enforcement action to rectify breaches, and hold the responsible parties to account.
However, concerns have been increasing about the ineffectiveness of the regulator, which has been criticised as a "toothless tiger" by unions and is considered to be more of an enabler than an investigator of offshore oil and gas projects.
Only last week NOPSEMA approved of leaks at plugged and abandoned wellheads in West Australia's Legendre field being left, and seepage rates merely monitored.
The week prior to that NOPSEMA waved through Esso's Bass Strait Development, regardless of the fact the company self-reported three spills in six months at its existing Bass Strait facilities last year (bringing the total number of recorded failures to 39 over a nine year period). This is despite damning findings that the problem is "likely to occur again", with the potential for a "significant threat to the environment", including possible lethal impacts.
NOPSEMA's response, or lack thereof, to decaying and abandoned oil and gas infrastructure, is a particular point of concern.
The impact that abandoned wells, pipelines, anchors, chains, rigs, towers, cabling and floating platforms can have on the marine environment and the safety of offshore oil and gas industry workers are well documented. Yet in 2012, when NOPSEMA became responsible for the offshore industry's environmental management, eight years passed before a single clean-up notice was delivered, and the first approved environmental clean-up plan wasn't implemented until 2022.
And it's not just the environment at stake.
The fact fossil fuel corporations pay negligible taxes or royalties, then get to walk away with the lion's share of profit without cleaning up their mess rightly draws the ire of many. Without tough regulatory action from NOPSEMA, taxpayers are left to foot the clean up bill, which in Australia currently sits at more than 60 billion dollars.
So how did the regulation of Australia's offshore oil and gas industry become so problematic?
When I moved for a Senate inquiry into seismic testing in 2020 it took three attempts to get the inquiry established. Evidence provided to the Committee revealed government ministers were keen on the offshore fossil fuel industry, and NOPSEMA, avoiding the scrutiny of a senate inquiry. Unsurprisingly, the Committee heard evidence that the current regulatory framework does not provide sufficient environmental or economic protection from the impacts of oil and gas exploration and development, and gives too much latitude to NOPSEMA, which is perceived to be too close to the petroleum industry.
The latter claim was hardly surprising given appointments of former employees of major fossil fuel companies to senior positions in NOPSEMA are well documented, as are claims of the regulator shepherding rather than scrutinising fossil fuel companies through their environmental management processes.
While it might be easy to point the finger at NOPSEMA for failing to regulate properly, the truth is more complex. The regulator's hands are often tied by the grossly inadequate legislation of the OPGGS Act, and changing the legislation would require the backing of one of the major parties.
Sadly, offshore oil and gas corporations have been buying their influence in the corridors of power with hefty political donations for decades and have had governments eating out the palms of their hands. While this cosy relationship might suit Labor and LNP governments and the fossil fuel industry, it isn't in the interest of our marine environment or our global climate.
New laws and stronger compliance and enforcement are urgently needed to ensure oil and gas companies don't further risk our marine environment or operate in an unsafe way – and importantly, to ensure companies remove infrastructure from the ocean at the end of their operations.
In the next parliament Labor must commit to fixing the broken laws and regulations that govern the offshore fossil fuel industry. Better yet, Labor could listen to the International Energy Agency and stop all new fossil fuel development, let the offshore regulator get on with managing the infrastructure we already have, and focus on the critical transition and rollout of offshore renewables.
Senator Peter Whish-Wilsonis the Australian Greenss senator for lutruwita/Tasmania
A growing series of reports, each focused on a key discussion point for the energy sector, brought to you by the Energy News Bulletin Intelligence team.
A growing series of reports, each focused on a key discussion point for the energy sector, brought to you by the Energy News Bulletin Intelligence team.
OPINION
Opinion: how did the regulation of Australia's offshore oil and gas industry become so problematic?
It's easy to point the finger at NOPSEMA, but the truth is more complex
Credits: ENB
As reported in ENB, yesterday the Australian Greens' Senator Dorinda Cox branded the federal government's offshore energy regulator NOPSEMA as "the puppets of the industry."
Her outburst came as the regulator announced what she called a "reckless" approval of Woodside's Scarborough offshore facility and trunk line operations, clearing the way for the company to advance its expansion plans for the next 30 years.
In her statement she said: "While this decision meets procedural requirements, it raises serious concerns over the safeguarding of the marine environment and the cultural heritage of First Nations communities.
"It is unacceptable that fossil fuel companies can submit Environmental Plans for offshore projects without consulting Traditional Owners and it is time to change that in favour of free, prior and informed consent to satisfy the requirement of genuine and meaningful consultation."
"We cannot stand by while the gas industry puppeteers the Government to push through projects that endanger our future. It's shameful that this was approved at all given NOPSEMA are fully aware of the rules they need to follow."
Today, her senate peer Senator Whish-Wilson, writing exclusively for ENB, outlines his thoughts on what he sees as the ineffectiveness of the regulator.
For more than 60 years fossil fuel corporations have been running rampant in Australia's oceans. As new evidence emerges about the risks oil spills, seismic blasting, and carbon capture and storage have on our marine environment, there is an ever-growing need to decommission aging oil and gas infrastructure and implement new frameworks for offshore wind licences.
Hence, there has never been a better time to re-think and overhaul the regulations and legislation that govern our offshore regulator, the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority (NOPSEMA).
NOPSEMA is supposed to have oversight and regulate the environmental management of the offshore fossil fuel industry, under the purview of the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006 (OPGGS Act). It is also tasked with maintaining regular inspections of offshore operations, and importantly, may take enforcement action to rectify breaches, and hold the responsible parties to account.
However, concerns have been increasing about the ineffectiveness of the regulator, which has been criticised as a "toothless tiger" by unions and is considered to be more of an enabler than an investigator of offshore oil and gas projects.
Only last week NOPSEMA approved of leaks at plugged and abandoned wellheads in West Australia's Legendre field being left, and seepage rates merely monitored.
The week prior to that NOPSEMA waved through Esso's Bass Strait Development, regardless of the fact the company self-reported three spills in six months at its existing Bass Strait facilities last year (bringing the total number of recorded failures to 39 over a nine year period). This is despite damning findings that the problem is "likely to occur again", with the potential for a "significant threat to the environment", including possible lethal impacts.
NOPSEMA's response, or lack thereof, to decaying and abandoned oil and gas infrastructure, is a particular point of concern.
The impact that abandoned wells, pipelines, anchors, chains, rigs, towers, cabling and floating platforms can have on the marine environment and the safety of offshore oil and gas industry workers are well documented. Yet in 2012, when NOPSEMA became responsible for the offshore industry's environmental management, eight years passed before a single clean-up notice was delivered, and the first approved environmental clean-up plan wasn't implemented until 2022.
And it's not just the environment at stake.
The fact fossil fuel corporations pay negligible taxes or royalties, then get to walk away with the lion's share of profit without cleaning up their mess rightly draws the ire of many. Without tough regulatory action from NOPSEMA, taxpayers are left to foot the clean up bill, which in Australia currently sits at more than 60 billion dollars.
So how did the regulation of Australia's offshore oil and gas industry become so problematic?
When I moved for a Senate inquiry into seismic testing in 2020 it took three attempts to get the inquiry established. Evidence provided to the Committee revealed government ministers were keen on the offshore fossil fuel industry, and NOPSEMA, avoiding the scrutiny of a senate inquiry. Unsurprisingly, the Committee heard evidence that the current regulatory framework does not provide sufficient environmental or economic protection from the impacts of oil and gas exploration and development, and gives too much latitude to NOPSEMA, which is perceived to be too close to the petroleum industry.
The latter claim was hardly surprising given appointments of former employees of major fossil fuel companies to senior positions in NOPSEMA are well documented, as are claims of the regulator shepherding rather than scrutinising fossil fuel companies through their environmental management processes.
While it might be easy to point the finger at NOPSEMA for failing to regulate properly, the truth is more complex. The regulator's hands are often tied by the grossly inadequate legislation of the OPGGS Act, and changing the legislation would require the backing of one of the major parties.
Sadly, offshore oil and gas corporations have been buying their influence in the corridors of power with hefty political donations for decades and have had governments eating out the palms of their hands. While this cosy relationship might suit Labor and LNP governments and the fossil fuel industry, it isn't in the interest of our marine environment or our global climate.
New laws and stronger compliance and enforcement are urgently needed to ensure oil and gas companies don't further risk our marine environment or operate in an unsafe way – and importantly, to ensure companies remove infrastructure from the ocean at the end of their operations.
In the next parliament Labor must commit to fixing the broken laws and regulations that govern the offshore fossil fuel industry. Better yet, Labor could listen to the International Energy Agency and stop all new fossil fuel development, let the offshore regulator get on with managing the infrastructure we already have, and focus on the critical transition and rollout of offshore renewables.
Senator Peter Whish-Wilsonis the Australian Greenss senator for lutruwita/Tasmania
RELATED ARTICLES
THEMES:
TOPICS:
< PREVIOUS ARTICLE
Opinion: Why Energy Exchange Australia 2025 is a must-attend event
NEXT ARTICLE >
Slugcatcher: Woodside's new problem - Trump the LNG salesman
Get the Energy News Bulletin Newsletter delivered free each day