The Federal Court has today delivered its decision in an important case brought to protect Northern Territory water from fracking – leaving serious concerns that national environment laws remain too weak to safeguard groundwater from the risks posed by unconventional gas projects.
National grassroots organisation, Lock the Gate, represented by Environmental Justice Australia, sought an injunction to prevent Tamboran B2 from continuing its Shenandoah South fracking project without federal assessment of the risk posed by the project to groundwater resources.
The Court rejected Lock the Gate’s argument, finding that the EPBC Act’s water trigger does not apply to this project and that it therefore does not require assessment under national environmental laws.
Tamboran B2 has drilled and fracked the first five of 15 planned wells. The company plans to continue work this year, including converting the project to pilot production and selling gas to the NT government.
The hearing of the proceeding in June last year was the first time that detailed, independent expert evidence about the specific risks of a Beetaloo fracking project has been provided in an open forum, with the Court hearing detailed information about how unconventional gas wells are drilled, a close examination of the rates of unconventional gas well failures around the world, and consideration of the challenges created by the complex geological formations in the Beetaloo.
There has not yet been any site-specific assessment of any Beetaloo fracking project’s risks to groundwater by the federal government, despite the Independent Expert Scientific Committee on Water identifying the need for detailed local-scale studies to understand risks to water in areas where unconventional gas development is planned, in advice provided on Beetaloo fracking in December 2024.
Lock the Gate’s head of research and investigations Georgina Woods said:
“This outcome leaves big question marks over the security of water resources in the Northern Territory, but we are proud to have stood up for the Territory’s lifeblood and grateful to our legal team.
“We knew going into this that it was a risk. Our national environment laws are not strong. But we were willing to take this risk to protect the Territory and stand up for the communities that don’t want fracking to harm its pristine waters.
“The Independent Expert Scientific Committee on water resources made it clear that detailed studies are required to assess the risks of unconventional gas production, including baseline data and detailed site-specific water modelling, but as fracking in the Northern Territory shifts from exploration to pilot production, the federal government is sitting on its hands.
“What really worries us now is that the fracking industry is gearing up to expand this year and go into commercial pilot production and Territorians are in the dark about what scale of risk it needs to reach before the federal government will call it in and require full assessment of water impacts.
“There are three commercial production pilots proposed or underway in the NT and, with the outcome of this case, it’s still very unclear to us how far this industry has to go before the government will step in and apply the water trigger to it.
“This is not a stamp of approval for the fracking industry. This was about one project, and just five years of gas appraisal.”
Environmental Justice Australia Special Counsel Inshani Ward said:
“This case has exposed a serious flaw in Australia’s national water protections. Our client believes projects posing clear risks to groundwater, demonstrated by an independent expert panel, should not proceed without detailed federal assessment.
“The engineering problems that create the risk of future integrity failure down the track are literally set in stone in the drilling process. And once groundwater is contaminated, it’s virtually impossible to fully remediate.
“That is why it is so important for risk assessment to occur at the outset – and why the federal government must step up to call in projects that may risk contaminating vital groundwater resources.
“While the Court has found that the water trigger doesn’t apply to this specific project, our client is still concerned about risks to groundwater.
“Our client continues to call on the federal government to do the right thing and take a precautionary approach, to ensure that all risks to water are properly assessed – including by independent scientific experts – before more fracking goes ahead.”
Background:
- This is the first legal challenge to fracking under the water trigger in Australia’s national Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (‘EPBC Act’).
- Tamboran has already drilled and fracked the first five of 15 planned wells, despite not referring the project to the federal minister for a water-impact assessment.
- The court heard four days of evidence in June last year, which showed the wells are expected to transition into production and be supplemented by further expansion.
- An independent engineering expert gave evidence in the Federal Court about the design and construction of unconventional gas wells and how drilling through the kinds of rock layers found in the Beetaloo Basin can create significant risk of well integrity failure.
- An independent petroleum engineering expert also gave evidence that while companies like Tamboran B2 may adopt well designs that seek to minimise the risk of integrity failures, in reality it is impossible to ‘engineer out’ risk - especially in difficult and complex geological conditions like those in the Beetaloo.
- Tamboran’s project involves drilling longer and deeper wells, with more fracking stages, than have been drilled in Australia before – and with these increased depths and pressures come additional challenges in successfully constructing the wells and a greater chance that something might go wrong.
More information: https://envirojustice.org.au/legal-work/climate-justice/nt-fracking-case/
Images available here
Media contact: Jessa Latona, [email protected] or 03 8341 3110
– ENDS –
