The required pace of change is well beyond what has been delivered
Western Australia stands at a crossroads familiar to industrial societies the world over: the gap between climate ambition and the pace of transformation required to honour it. Modelling commissioned by Woodside and conducted by Deloitte Access Economics has found that the state cannot reach net-zero by 2050 under either of the two futures it examined — with or without the Browse offshore gas project — unless it deploys renewable energy at rates that dwarf anything in its history. The finding is less a verdict on Browse than a mirror held up to the scale of change that decarbonisation actually demands.
- WA's net-zero 2050 target is slipping out of reach: without Browse, renewables must be built at eleven times historical rates; even with it, the state would only halve its emissions by mid-century.
- The Browse project, despite its $48.7 billion price tag and promises of energy security, barely shifts the emissions dial — its presence or absence changes the pace of the challenge, not the destination.
- The state government has quietly abandoned interim emissions targets, leaving a political vacuum where accountability milestones once stood, while a cabinet minister refused in parliament to say when emissions would even begin to fall.
- Woodside frames Browse as a necessary stabiliser for the transition; the Conservation Council calls the same report a smoke screen designed to obscure the project's true costs.
- In place of binding interim targets, the government is pivoting to renewable energy generation goals, carbon capture targets, and green export ambitions — a reframing that critics say sidesteps the harder question of when emissions actually decline.
Western Australia is not on track to meet its net-zero emissions target by 2050 — and that conclusion comes from modelling commissioned by Woodside itself. Conducted by Deloitte Access Economics, the analysis was intended to examine the role of the Browse offshore gas project, Australia's largest undeveloped offshore gas resource, in the state's energy transition. What it found instead was a challenge that dwarfs the Browse question entirely.
The core issue is pace. Without Browse, WA would need to deploy solar, wind, and battery infrastructure at eleven times its historical rate. With Browse providing a supporting energy source during the transition, that figure drops to five times historical rates — but even then, emissions would only fall to around half of current levels by 2050, leaving the net-zero target unmet. The Deloitte report was unambiguous: the required pace of change is well beyond anything delivered in the past decade.
What makes the finding striking is how little Browse actually changes the outcome. The project would require roughly $48.7 billion in capital investment and generate significant economic returns, yet none of that translates into a meaningfully different emissions trajectory by mid-century. The transition, in both scenarios, is driven by electrification and renewable generation — Browse can ease the coordination burden, but it cannot alter the fundamental arithmetic.
The political backdrop deepens the tension. WA is the only Australian state without interim emissions targets before 2050, and the ABC recently revealed the government had abandoned plans to introduce them. Premier Roger Cook has reaffirmed the 2050 commitment while acknowledging emissions may keep rising short-term. When parliament pressed a cabinet minister on when emissions would actually begin to fall, the question went unanswered. The government is now pivoting toward targets for renewable generation, carbon capture, and green exports instead.
Woodside's CEO argued Browse remains essential for energy security and economic benefit. The Conservation Council called the report a smoke screen. The Deloitte analysis itself takes no side — it simply maps two futures and finds that in both, Western Australia faces a renewable energy transformation without historical precedent.
Western Australia is not on track to meet its net-zero emissions target by 2050, even if the state proceeds with Woodside's massive Browse offshore gas project. That's the conclusion of modelling commissioned by Woodside itself and conducted by Deloitte Access Economics, released this week. The finding cuts against the grain of what the gas giant hoped to demonstrate: that Browse, Australia's largest undeveloped offshore gas resource and a multi-billion dollar undertaking, would serve as a stabilizing energy source during the transition to renewables. Instead, the analysis suggests the state faces a far steeper challenge than simply choosing between gas and renewables.
The core problem is one of pace. To reach net-zero by 2050 without the Browse project, Western Australia would need to deploy solar, wind, and battery infrastructure at eleven times the historical rate of renewable energy rollout. That's not a gradual acceleration—it's a compression of what would normally take decades into a much shorter window. Even with Browse in place, the state would still need to deploy renewables at five times historical rates. At that slower pace, the modelling suggests emissions would only fall to around 50 percent of current levels by 2050, leaving the net-zero target out of reach. The Deloitte report was explicit about the scale of the challenge: the required pace of change is "well beyond what has been delivered across the past decade."
What makes this finding particularly striking is that Browse itself barely moves the needle. The modelling found that the gas project would not significantly alter where Western Australia's emissions end up by 2050. In both scenarios—with and without Browse—the energy transition is driven by electrification and the shift to renewable electricity generation. Browse provides what the report calls "an additional source of energy that helps mitigate" the delivery and coordination challenges of such a massive renewable rollout, but it does not change the fundamental arithmetic. The project would require about $48.7 billion in capital investment over its lifetime and would generate roughly $147 billion in total economic uplift and $56 billion in tax revenue, according to the modelling. Yet none of that economic benefit translates into a different emissions outcome by mid-century.
The political context sharpens the tension. Western Australia is the only Australian state except the Northern Territory without its own interim emissions reduction targets before 2050. The ABC revealed last week that the state government was abandoning plans to introduce those targets. Premier Roger Cook has maintained his government's commitment to the 2050 goal, but acknowledged that emissions may continue rising in the short term. When asked in parliament about when the state's emissions would actually begin to decrease, cabinet minister Stephen Dawson declined to answer, citing cabinet confidentiality. Instead of interim emissions targets, the government is planning to introduce targets for renewable energy generation, carbon capture and storage, and green exports.
Woodside CEO Liz Westcott framed the report as validation of Browse's necessity. "Browse is Australia's biggest undeveloped offshore gas resource and represents a major opportunity for the nation at a time where energy security matters more than ever," she said, arguing the project could power homes and businesses, support thousands of jobs, and generate government revenue while managing the risks and costs of the energy transition. The Conservation Council of Western Australia saw it differently. Senior campaigner Greta Carroll called the report a "smoke screen" designed to obscure Browse's economic and environmental costs. "Western Australia needs concrete emissions reduction targets and to prioritise renewables over new gas projects like Browse," she said.
The Deloitte analysis itself is careful not to make a case for or against Browse. It simply models two futures and finds that in both, the state faces an enormous renewable energy deployment challenge. The report notes that achieving net-zero by 2050 would require "significant delivery, coordination and system integration challenges" regardless of whether gas plays a supporting role. What the modelling does make clear is that Western Australia cannot rely on Browse, or any single energy source, to solve the problem. The state's path to net-zero, if it is to be achieved at all, runs through an unprecedented acceleration of renewable energy infrastructure—a transformation that would reshape the state's energy system in ways that have no historical precedent.
Citas Notables
Browse is Australia's biggest undeveloped offshore gas resource and represents a major opportunity for the nation at a time where energy security matters more than ever.— Woodside CEO Liz Westcott
Western Australia needs concrete emissions reduction targets and to prioritise renewables over new gas projects like Browse.— Conservation Council of WA senior campaigner Greta Carroll
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
So the report Woodside commissioned actually argues against the case for Browse?
Not quite. It argues that Browse won't hurt the case for net-zero, but it also won't help it much. The real story is that Western Australia has a renewable energy deployment problem that Browse doesn't solve.
But if emissions keep rising in the short term, as the Premier admitted, how does the state reach net-zero by 2050?
That's the tension the report exposes. You'd need to deploy renewables at rates never seen before, sustained over decades. The modelling shows it's theoretically possible, but it requires a pace of change that's well beyond anything delivered in the past decade.
Why would Woodside commission a report that doesn't make a strong case for Browse?
Because the report does show Browse provides energy security during the transition. It's framed as a stabilizing source while renewables are being built out at scale. But the modelling also shows that without Browse, you'd need to go even faster—eleven times historical rates instead of five times.
So Browse is presented as a way to make the transition easier?
In theory, yes. But the report is careful: it says Browse doesn't significantly change where emissions end up by 2050. It's a tool for managing the transition, not a solution to the emissions problem itself.
And the government abandoned interim targets?
Yes. Instead of setting milestones along the way to 2050, they're planning targets for renewable generation, carbon capture, and green exports. It's a different approach, but it leaves the question of when emissions actually start falling unanswered.