@MelissaBenyon Yes, without key pieces of context for that very misleading final quote:
“This [North West Shelf] project is subject to those reforms, which means this plant is required to bring their emissions down each year and reach net zero by 2050 under the safeguard mechanism.”
Context: by "their emissions", the (unnamed) government spokesperson does *not* include the >4b tonnes of CO2 emissions that will result when the gas extracted from the project is burned (called 'scope 3 emissions' in technical jargon), and is only referring the (far smaller) emissions that result from the extraction process itself. However, most readers of the article are unlikely to be aware of this crucial distinction and so miss the verbal sleight of hand at play.
Also missing: even these latter emissions are very likely underestimated by current Australian government methods of accounting for gas extraction, which are not based on the latest research into the scale of methane leakage that occurs during extraction, processing and transport of #FossilGas.
Also also missing: the safeguard mechanism allows #Woodside to 'reduce' 'their emissions' via dodgy #CarbonOffset scams that frequently fail to do anything like what is claimed on the tin.
#Auspol #ClimateJournalism #NorthWestShelf #DirtyEnergy