
Australian taxpayers on the hook to pay Chevron more than $500m to clean up oil wells
The Western Australian government also faces a hefty bill – estimated to be $129m – to help repair an offshore nature reserve where about 900 wells have been drilled over the past six decades.
Chevron says it has paid more than $1bn in royalties – about $3 a barrel – for oil and gas extracted from beneath the island, which is about 70km off the state's north-west coast. Under state legislation written especially for the project, federal and state taxpayers will have to pay them back about nearly half that amount to help cover remediation costs.
A WA government minute obtained by independent news site Boiling Cold under freedom-of-information laws suggests it will cost Chevron and its venture partners more than $2.3bn to fix the site, which has produced 335m barrels of oil.
Sign up: AU Breaking News email
The legislation stipulates that the company would pay 40% of the difference between Chevron's sales revenue and operational costs, with 75% of the payment going to the federal government and 25% to WA.
The legislation stated that once production ended at the site the calculation would operate in reverse. Chevron and its partners, ExxonMobil and Santos, would be refunded 40% of what they spent on decommissioning the oilfield infrastructure for the following three years, with the federal and state governments again splitting what they paid back 75%-25%.
Oil production at the site stopped in May. According to the newly released documents, the WA Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety did not have an estimate of the expected cost until Nine's WA Today reported on the issue in 2022. That report suggested Chevron could spend $1.3bn on the clean-up in the covered timeframe, triggering a cost to the state of about $129m.
Officials said they intended to 'approach Chevron directly to request cost estimates'. The documents do not show what those discussions yielded.
Under the terms of the deal, the commonwealth would be required to pay three times as much as the state government, implying it could face a bill of $387m. It suggests a total payment to Chevron and its partners of $516m. The final sum could be higher if Chevron spends more on the clean-up before 2028 to maximise its royalty refund.
In response to questions about the expected cost, a WA department spokesman said the refund cost was not included in the state budget forward estimates – covering the next four years – but the potential liability was recognised as 'a non-quantifiable contingent liability' in an annual report on state finances. The finances report acknowledged that 'a significant amount of royalties will need to be refunded' after Chevron paid the costs and the state verified and audited them.
The federal Department of Industry, Science and Resources declined to comment. It is waiting on a WA government assessment of what refund is required under state law.
The clean-up cost may include dealing with a gas leak near old Barrow Island oil wells that Chevron reported to the state regulator in May. The company said an unknown amount of gas was seeping to the surface near its old Barrow Island oil wells.
A Chevron spokesman said data analysis had indicated 'an environmental risk from the subsurface migration of hydrocarbons, primarily gas, to groundwater and the surface'. They said the company had informed regulators and would work with them to 'develop and implement a comprehensive investigation program'.
Sign up to Afternoon Update
Our Australian afternoon update breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters
after newsletter promotion
The spokesperson said the company took its stewardship of Barrow Island seriously and was 'committed to the responsible management of environmental impacts and risks at our sites in accordance with relevant laws and regulations'.
Mark Ogge, from the Australia Institute, said the revelation showed the 'extraordinary scale of the mismanagement of Australia's gas resources by our governments'.
'Not only have our governments been giving our resources away for free and failing to tax these foreign-owned corporations properly but they are also handing back much of the meagre royalties they have collected,' he said.
'This is entirely the responsibility of the Australian and WA governments. They had 40 years to fix this terrible deal but they have chosen not to. They need to be held to account.'
A WA government database sets out the scale of the required clean-up. About 700 of the wells on the island are more than 40 years old. Up to four drilling rigs will be used to plug the wells before they are abandoned. The procedure is designed to permanently seal the oil and gas underground, usually using cement. Remediation will be needed at 16 sites contaminated with hydrocarbons.
The Gorgon liquefied natural gas plant, also operated by Chevron, will remain on the island after the wells are decommissioned.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Reuters
26 minutes ago
- Reuters
Trump's short fuse could set off Russian oil sanctions timebomb
LONDON, July 29 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump unexpectedly shortened his deadline for hitting Russia with the most severe sanctions on its oil exports to date. While the market has called the president's bluff thus far, the sheer scale of the threat may force investors to start pricing in this meaningful tail risk. Speaking alongside British Prime Minister Keir Starmer in Scotland on Monday, Trump said he was giving Moscow only 10 to 12 days to reach a deal to end the war in Ukraine before he would impose so-called secondary sanctions on its oil exports, cutting short his previous 50-day timeframe set on July 14. The sanctions would slap 100% tariffs on buyers of Russian oil, with the biggest customers being India and China. This move has the potential to disrupt global oil supplies, given that Russia exported 4.68 million barrels per day of crude oil in June, around 4.5% of global demand, as well as 2.5 million bpd of refined products, according to the International Energy Agency. Will Trump actually follow through on his threat? That's anyone's guess. Going through with the secondary tariffs on Russia risks causing a severe spike in oil prices that could put upward pressure on U.S. inflation, an outcome that could stay Trump's hand, even if he is 'disappointed' in Russian President Vladimir Putin. And there have been several headline-grabbing moments in recent months where the Republican president has rowed back on his threats, including the "reciprocal tariffs" originally announced on April 2 that he quickly toned down in the face of market pressure. But Trump has also made good on some of his threats, most notably the bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities on June 22. Unlike his initial announcement on secondary tariffs, which investors appeared to shrug off, oil prices rose by nearly 3% on Monday. So his erratic Russia policy may make some investors wary of writing off the risk altogether. The next question is, would secondary tariffs – a relatively untested, blunt financial weapon – be effective? The answer is probably yes. One of Russia's key customers, India – the largest importer of seaborne Russian crude in June at 1.5 million bpd – is currently engaged in tense trade talks with the United States. New Delhi is therefore unlikely to want to exacerbate trade tensions with Washington and thus may be apt to ditch Moscow in favour of new, though undoubtedly more expensive, energy sources. On the other hand, China, which imported around 2 million bpd of Russian oil in June via pipeline and by sea, is less likely to change its buying patterns since it already faces several layers of U.S. tariffs and considers its ties with Moscow to be strategic. But the Kremlin's finances would still be squeezed regardless if India were to cease purchasing Russian oil, as China would likely be able to buy it even more cheaply. The scale of the potential new sanctions' impact on the global oil market is hard to gauge, given current supply and demand dynamics. World oil demand is expected to grow by 700,000 bpd in 2025, its lowest rate since 2009, while supplies are forecast to rise sharply by 2.1 million bpd to 105.1 million bpd this year, according to the International Energy Agency. The growth in supply has been driven in recent months mostly by output increases by the Saudi Arabia-led oil producing group collectively known as OPEC+. The group in April started unwinding 2.2 million bpd of production cuts and upped the United Arab Emirates' production quota by 300,000 bpd. The OPEC+ production increases have led, naturally, to a decline in the group's spare production capacity, but Saudi still held, as of June, 2.3 million bpd of production it can bring on stream within 90 days, while the UAE and Kuwait held 900,000 bpd and 600,000 bpd of spare capacity, respectively. This means that the three Gulf producers could ramp up output relatively quickly in the event of a sudden supply disruption. But that knowledge is unlikely to be enough to calm markets should Trump impose his secondary sanctions, partly because of the uncertainty surrounding possible retaliatory measures by Moscow. Revenue from oil and gas export taxes accounted for between 30% and 50%, opens new tab of Russia's federal budget in recent years, making these funds the single most important source of cash for the Kremlin. Putin is therefore likely to respond quite forcefully to any western measures constraining his revenue. One such hint was given last week, when Moscow temporarily blocked foreign tankers from loading crude at Russia's main Black Sea ports following the imposition of new regulations. Loadings from the port of Novorossiisk, which account for more than 2% of global supplies, were resumed the following day, meaning Moscow was likely sending a warning that it can easily introduce similar measures. Trump's latest threat could be an empty one, but regardless, it has shortened the fuse of a timebomb that oil markets might struggle to ignore. Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI),, opens new tabyour essential new source for global financial commentary. ROI delivers thought-provoking, data-driven analysis. Markets are moving faster than ever. ROI, opens new tab can help you keep up. Follow ROI on LinkedIn, opens new tab and X., opens new tab


Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Aldi Australia quietly discontinues crowd-favourite item: 'Saddest news'
Aldi shoppers have noticed that a popular snack sold at the budget supermarket has been quietly removed from shelves. Fans of the Food Envy High Protein Vanilla Flavoured Custard Pouch were devastated to discover that the product no longer appeared to be stocked in Aldi stores. An Aldi Australia spokesperson confirmed to FEMAIL that 'ALDI's popular Vanilla Protein Custard Pouch went on sale earlier this year as part of ALDI's Limited Time Only range'. 'As is the nature of ALDI's Limited Time Only range, these products were here for a good time, not a long time!' A search on the Aldi website under the brand listing for Food Envy also shows that there is no longer record of the product. Other Food Envy branded treats like two-packs of Creme Caramel and Strawberry Panna Cotta are still available. But in a small glimmer of hope, the supermarket spokesperson told FEMAIL that they may yet bring the beloved custard snack back. 'Customer favourites have been known to return, so shoppers should keep an eye on our website for information on our Limited Time Only and new product launches to find out if their favourite products are making a return,' the statement read. A conversation about the custard pouch's sudden disappearance was kickstarted on Reddit by a shopper in the popular Aldi Australia thread. A Redditor asked fellow Aldi shoppers whether they knew if the popular custard snack had been discontinued The upset Aussie explained that they had visited 'four different Aldi [stores]' but could no longer find the high protein snack. They explained that it was quite common for the popular high protein custard to be 'out of stock' in stores - but that on those occasions there would still be a 'price tag' visibly displayed on the fridge shelf, along with an empty spot where the product would usually sit. However, the customer became suspicious that the custard pouches had been permanently removed from Aldi stores when there was no longer 'even a space/tag for them' on the refrigerated shelves. In line with the official Aldi statement, commenters chimed in to confirm the unfortunate news that the popular custard had been 'discontinued'. 'They are [gone], sorry,' one apologetically wrote. 'RIP, loved those things,' another added. One commenter, who appeared to have inside intel about Aldi store operations, elaborated further. 'They've been taken off the shelves as part of the quarterly re-merch,' they explained. 'They may likely make a reappearance for a little while in another quarter as many products that are seasonal with Aldi follow this trend.' Other responses shared the original poster's frustration about Aldi's tendency to 'rotate products' out of their stores – with one declaring that it 'really sucks when an item you want disappears'. A news update on the store's own Aldi Unpacked feed earlier in the year flagged that the custard was always intended to be a 'Limited Time Only' item. In that news post, the Food Envy Vanilla Protein Custard Pouch 140g, priced at $1.99, was described as a 'high-protein, low cost, convenient' snack. The Reddit thread also made mention of the huge popularity of the Food Envy Custard Pouches after they were highlighted in several TikTok videos for being a great healthy snack option. A post shared by @TheMacroFoodBlogger showed the product in Aldi stores overlaid with the text: 'GYM RATS RUN TO ALDI'. Melbourne foodie @NectoriousPapi also shared a TikTok video about the Aldi custard, declaring it a cheaper alternative to another popular health snack in Paul's Plus+ Protein Vanilla tubs, which are priced at $2.90 and sold at major supermarkets.


Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Australia boosts underwriting scheme for renewables to meet clean energy target
SYDNEY, July 29 (Reuters) - Australia will expand the volume of solar and wind projects it underwrites in the race to stabilise an ageing power grid and hit a target of 82% renewable energy generation by 2030, the energy minister said on Tuesday. Energy Minister Chris Bowen said the Capacity Investment Scheme, the government's flagship program to boost private investment in clean energy projects, would be expanded by 25%. That will help underwrite an additional 8 gigawatts of generation and storage projects, taking the scheme's total coverage to 40 GW. "As our ageing coal-fired power stations only become more expensive and more unreliable we need new generation now," Bowen told the Investor Group on Climate Change. "Our energy grid's transition remains urgent," he added in an excerpt of a speech released to media. Analysts project Australia will fall far short of its goal of 82% renewable energy generation by 2030, thanks to inadequate investment and grid connection delays. Under the scheme, the government calls for competitive tenders and agrees floor and ceiling limits on project revenue, paying the difference if it falls below the floor, while sharing in profits if the ceiling is exceeded. The six tender rounds held since the scheme's 2022 launch were "consistently and massively" oversubscribed, said Bowen, who is also the minister for climate change. The declining costs of batteries and solar power gave the government an opportunity to "supercharge" the transition to renewable energy, he said. Underwriting an additional 5 GW of dispatchable capacity, such as batteries, is expected to support investment of A$21 billion ($13.7 billion). A further 3 GW of wind and solar projects is expected to help to power an additional 1 million households. ($1=1.5333 Australian dollars)