Imagine a pristine wilderness, home to the world’s largest intact tropical savannah, a haven for rare wildlife, and a cultural treasure trove—now picture it at risk of being transformed by a controversial fracking project. This is the stark reality facing Western Australia’s Kimberley region, where the state’s Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) has recommended approving the Valhalla fracking project, a move that could add a staggering 1.8% to 2.6% to Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions. But here’s where it gets even more contentious: this decision comes just months after WA Labor members voted to extend a fracking moratorium across 98% of the state, leaving many to question the EPA’s priorities.
The Valhalla project, proposed by Bennett Resources (a subsidiary of U.S.-based Black Mountain Energy), aims to drill up to 20 gas wells in the Canning Basin, located about 123 kilometers southeast of Derby. Announced in 2020, the project has sparked fierce opposition from environmental groups, Indigenous communities, and tourism advocates. And this is the part most people miss: the Kimberley isn’t just a natural wonder—it’s a $500 million annual tourism hotspot, drawing visitors with its dramatic landscapes and unique biodiversity. Fracking here could jeopardize not only the environment but also the livelihoods of those who depend on its untouched beauty.
Climate scientist Bill Hare, CEO of Climate Analytics, has warned that if developed as planned, Valhalla would significantly contribute to Australia’s emissions, a stark contradiction to global efforts to combat climate change. Yet, the EPA’s recommendation, released on Tuesday, suggests the project can proceed under certain conditions. This has been slammed as “outrageous” by The Greens’ WA fossil fuels spokesperson, Sophie McNeill, who argues the decision flies in the face of overwhelming community opposition to fracking.
But here’s the controversial twist: while WA Premier Roger Cook insists this isn’t a “green light for fracking,” critics argue the EPA’s report downplays critical environmental risks. An Independent Expert Scientific Committee report published in December found Bennett Resources’ environmental assessment to be “limited and disjointed,” with unsupported conclusions about potential impacts on water resources. Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, involves injecting high-pressure water, sand, and chemicals into rock formations to extract oil and gas—a process notorious for its risk of contaminating groundwater and harming ecosystems.
Environmental groups like the Conservation Council of WA (CCWA) and Environs Kimberley have raised alarms about groundwater contamination, threats to endangered species like sawfish, ghost bats, and bilbies, and the project’s broader ecological footprint. Martin Pritchard, director of Environs Kimberley, warns that fracking could pollute the life-sustaining waters of the Kimberley and endanger the National Heritage-listed Martuwarra Fitzroy River. Is this a risk worth taking?
The final decision rests with WA Environment Minister Matthew Swinbourn, who has emphasized the importance of the 21-day public appeals period. Meanwhile, Black Mountain Energy’s executive chairman, Rhett Bennett, calls the EPA’s recommendation “an encouraging step forward,” highlighting the project’s potential economic benefits. But with growing public outrage and the project also under federal environmental scrutiny, the Valhalla saga is far from over.
Here’s the burning question: Can Australia balance its energy ambitions with its environmental responsibilities, or is this fracking project a step too far? Share your thoughts in the comments—this debate is too important to ignore.
