With strong public input, this inquiry can convince the Victorian Government to put workers, communities and Country ahead of corporate convenience.

Since the 1960s, oil and gas companies have been sucking fossil fuels up out of Australia’s continental shelf. Much of this activity has been offshore, using enormous rigs and hundreds of kilometres of pipelines.

Legally, the fossil fuel companies are required to clean up after themselves, but there’s legitimate concern they won’t. Globally, big oil and gas have a track record of drilling and dashing. They’ve abandoned wells in Canada, ditched rigs in Malaysia and bailed on cleaning up the Niger Delta (and more).

Oil and gas infrastructure is dirty industrial waste. It contains heavy metals, petroleum-derived contaminants, forever chemicals and radioactive scale.

Organisations like the Wilderness Society, Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace are worried fossil fuel companies operating in Australia are going to push state and federal governments into letting them dump their trash in the sea, or delay for so long that they go out of business before the clean-up happens.

Similarly the union movement knows firsthand how oil and gas companies operate when no one’s watching. For decades, workers have seen these companies cut corners, delay maintenance, and push people past the point of fatigue in the name of profit. Unions have had to fight every step of the way to expose unsafe practices, and demand accountability. That’s why they’re also calling for proper decommissioning—not just to clean up the mess, but to make sure it’s done safely, by skilled local workers, with effective oversight and compliance, delivering jobs that people can count on.

Around Australia, there’s an estimated $60 billion of oil and gas clean up. Victoria is at the forefront of the work that needs to happen. Already there are significant environmental concerns.

Woodside badly mishandled the clean up of the Minerva field off Victoria’s western coastline, resulting in hundreds of kilograms of plastic being “lost” into the ocean. Now the decommissioning is partly done and on hold.

On Victoria’s eastern coast. ExxonMobil is intending to demolish 12 oil and gas rigs at a small marine port in Corner Inlet, surrounded by protected wetlands and adjacent to a marine reserve. The company is also trying to leave behind pipelines and large chunks of the old rigs.

This inquiry is the public’s opportunity to let the government know Victorians expect all of this infrastructure to be cleaned up by the industry that profited from it, to protect the environment, communities and workers. 

We want this inquiry to do two things:

1. Shine a light on the failure of the oil and gas industry in Victoria to clean up its toxic infrastructure from the ocean.
2. Make strong recommendations to protect the environment, the workforce, and the community from inadequate or poorly regulated clean-up efforts.

To make your submission powerful and relevant:

1. Start out with a greeting and a quick ‘thank you’ for the opportunity to participate in the inquiry.
2. Introduce yourself. Describe your relationship with the Southern Ocean. Express your concern for marine life, communities, or workers. State your distrust of the fossil fuel industry. Make it personal to you.
3. Share your ideas on what a world class oil and gas clean-up should look like. For example, one where the work is done carefully and properly, with good jobs for workers and that fully remediates the marine environment.
4. Ask the Victorian Government for some or all of the following. We encourage you to pick the ones that most speak to you and explain in your own words why it’s important to you
   1. A publicly available register of oil and gas infrastructure so the public knows what infrastructure exists, who is responsible to clean it up and how much the clean up is estimated to cost.
   2. Confirmation that full infrastructure removal is expected from companies. Many companies try to get away with leaving infrastructure behind because it saves money on the clean up. (See below on oil and gas contaminants for why this isn’t acceptable).
   3. That oil and gas companies pay clean up bonds to ensure the money actually exists in the event that a company fails to undertake its own clean up. Bonds must be paid into a third party account and must be based on the cost as if the Government was required to undertake the clean up.
   4. Support to establish a decommissioning industry in Victoria. There are resources to be recycled and jobs for workers if decommissioning is done well. The Victorian Government could support this industry by ensuring there are suitable locations and supply chains in place.
   5. That all steel is recycled domestically. Victoria should place a moratorium on the export of scrap steel from offshore decommissioning projects. Recycling the steel here in Victoria would create three times more value and 3.5 times more jobs than exporting it and save up to 75% of the energy required to make new steel.
   6. Strong worker protections. Workers must be employed under appropriate industry agreements. Worksites must be safe and unionised. Procurement should be local and include opportunities for First Nations people.
   7. A prohibition on the reuse of old oil and gas ocean infrastructure, for example for carbon pollution dumping or artificial reefs. Companies use the argument about reuse to delay and minimise clean up, and save money. However abandoned infrastructure presents ongoing risks to the marine environment and other marine users.
5. Finish up by restating how important this inquiry is and why you want the oil and gas industry to clean up after itself. 

You don’t need to be an expert, just say what you think. If you want some facts and figures to fuel your message, check out the details section below. Good luck!

After you’ve made your submission, we’d love it if you could share it with us at [email protected] and [email protected]. 

Oil and gas infrastructure in Victoria

In Victoria, the majority of offshore oil and gas infrastructure is co-owned by ExxonMobil Australia and Woodside. The Bass Strait Joint Venture comprises 19 platforms and associated wells, pipelines and facilities in the Gippsland Basin. The oldest of these rigs date back to the mid 1960s and are in poor condition after decades out in the wild, salty Southern Ocean.

Some of the Bass Strait platforms have concrete structures, the majority are steel. All of the platforms are in commonwealth waters and 13 of them are no longer producing. Clean up efforts should have begun long ago. Instead the platforms have been left to corrode making them unsafe for workers and the environment. Since 2012 there have been 7 reported hydrocarbon spills or leaks from the ageing infrastructure, three in the last 18 months alone. For a more detailed list of the Joint Venture’s infrastructure failures check out this timeline.

The Joint Venture has announced its first decommissioning campaign to remove and demolish the topsides (the part of the rig above the water) and the shallow sections of the steel pile jackets (or SPJs, the steel legs that hold up the topside). Their intention is to take the removed infrastructure to the Barry Beach Marine Terminal in Corner Inlet for demolition onshore. The deeper sections of the SPJs and 800km+ of hydrocarbon pipelines are to remain in place until a decision is made regarding their future. 

Other companies with oil and gas infrastructure off the Victorian coast include Amplitude Energy, Beach Energy, Emperor Energy and ConocoPhillips. These operations largely use subsea facilities, meaning they don't have rigs or platforms but rather the infrastructure is hidden beneath the ocean’s surface. While smaller in scale than the infrastructure operated by the Joint Venture, it too will require cleaning up as hydrocarbon reserves run out.

Environmental risks from failure to clean up

Unsurprisingly, oil and gas infrastructure is not clean. Known contaminants include:

• Radioactive isotopes of radium, barium and lead, collectively referred to as naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM)
• Heavy metals and metalloids like mercury, arsenic, cadmium and zinc.
• Residual hydrocarbons, Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) and other toxics.

While some of these elements occur naturally, they are concentrated to toxic levels by the extraction of hydrocarbons. Studies into the impacts of NORM and heavy metals on marine ecosystems are limited. Scientific consensus says more research is required before oil and gas infrastructure is dumped at sea. 

The industry promotes the narrative that abandoned infrastructure provides habitat for marine species. The studies used to support this argument are largely inconclusive, almost always funded by the industry itself and generally ignore the toxic impacts of contaminants. The representation of infrastructure as valuable habitat is a cynical attempt from industry to avoid the cost of complete removal. 

How to say it in your submission: The known contaminants in rigs and pipelines include heavy metals and radioactive materials. Scientific research does not support leaving them in the ocean. The law says all infrastructure must be removed. Victoria should lead by example and refuse any attempt by industry to abandon it in State waters.

Rig demolition

The known contaminants in oil and gas infrastructure—including Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials (NORM), heavy metals, hydrocarbons, and other industrial pollutants—pose serious risks to workers, surrounding communities, and sensitive terrestrial ecosystems during the onshore demolition phase of decommissioning. Ideally, this work would be carried out at a purpose-built facility specifically designed to handle such materials, with sealed surfaces, containment systems, environmental controls, and specialist waste-handling protocols.

However, due to years of delayed action by industry and inaction by government, Victoria does not currently have such a site. As a result, the Joint Venture appears likely to receive approval for its plan to conduct rig demolition works at the Barry Beach Marine Terminal—a site not designed or equipped for large-scale hazardous material handling. This terminal sits adjacent to the internationally significant wetlands of Corner Inlet, raising additional environmental and biosecurity concerns.

Legitimate concerns exist about the proposed approach, particularly given the companies involved. Both ExxonMobil and Woodside have publicly documented histories of environmental breaches, regulatory non-compliance. If Barry Beach is to be used for rig breaking and materials processing, stringent independent oversight and environmental monitoring must be mandated from day one. This includes baseline environmental testing, real-time emissions and dust monitoring, worker health protections, public transparency around waste handling, and clear regulatory accountability mechanisms.

Without such measures in place, there is a high risk that rig demolition will proceed without adequate containment or scrutiny—exposing workers, marine ecosystems, and local communities to avoidable harm. Given the proximity of the site to wetlands listed under the Ramsar Convention, any incident or contamination event could have significant and irreversible consequences. The precautionary principle must apply.

How to say it in your submission: Victoria should mandate strict, independent environmental oversight and monitoring for all decommissioning activities in the State's jurisdiction. Rig breaking is dirty work. The environment, workers and communities need to be protected.

Steel recycling

One of the hidden issues in offshore oil and gas decommissioning is what happens to all the recyclable steel that gets recovered from dismantled platforms, pipelines, and infrastructure.

ExxonMobil, and their demolition contractor, CMA, have publicly stated that the steel recovered from the Bass Strait will be shipped offshore for processing, likely to India or Bangladesh where poor labour standards and high-emissions steelworks are commonplace. 

This is inconsistent with the circular economy goals of the Victorian and Federal governments. It is also a lost economic opportunity. Modelling commissioned by the Australian Steel Institute (ASI) shows that recycling steel domestically generates 3 times more value and 3.5 times more Australian jobs than exporting it. Australian steel manufacturers have highlighted inadequate scrap steel supply and are having to import it to meet demand. The ASI is calling for a ban on the export of recyclable steel.

There are also major environmental benefits. Producing new steel from iron ore is highly energy-intensive and emits between 1.2 and 1.8 tonnes of carbon dioxide per tonne of steel. In contrast, recycling steel saves up to 75% of the energy required, especially when processed through electric arc furnaces powered by renewables. Victoria already has steel manufacturers and recyclers in places like Laverton who are seeking to expand. Retaining and recycling decommissioned steel locally would help drive Victoria’s transition to green manufacturing and ensure that the economic benefits of the energy transition are captured within the state. A scrap export moratorium would give the Victorian Government a practical, immediate lever to support jobs, cut emissions, and build industrial strength in regional Victoria.

How to say it in your submission: Victoria should place a moratorium on the export of scrap steel from offshore decommissioning projects. This would incentivise investment to build local processing capacity, support regional jobs, and contribute to Australia’s green steel manufacturing ambitions.

We should not allow our recovered resources to be shipped out—we need those materials here to power the next generation of clean manufacturing. Recycling steel here in Victoria creates three times more value and 3.5 times more jobs than exporting it.

The importance of a Victorian workforce in decommissioning

How decommissioning is done matters just as much as whether it’s done at all. Too often, oil and gas companies choose the cheapest and dirtiest options—such as leaving infrastructure on the seabed or shipping it overseas for dismantling—even though safer, cleaner, and more job-creating alternatives exist right here in Victoria. Every platform, pipeline, or subsea asset that is dumped offshore or towed away is a lost opportunity for skilled Victorian workers to do the job properly.

These projects could support a wide range of local workers, including boilermakers, riggers, crane operators, electricians, marine crews, and recycling workers. They could also offer training pathways for young apprentices and support the development of local capacity in regions like Gippsland, where Barry Beach Marine Terminal is already equipped to support offshore logistics. However, if Victoria doesn’t act, these opportunities will be outsourced—along with the jobs, skills, and economic benefits.

The workforce that built and maintained this infrastructure wants to be part of cleaning it up. But right now, there is no coordinated Victorian decommissioning workforce plan. Companies are increasingly relying on casualised or interstate labour hire, undermining the opportunity to build a sustainable, high-skill, unionised workforce in the regions that need it most. A forward-looking strategy is needed—one that includes jobs with fair wages and safety protections, formalised training pipelines for local and First Nations workers, and enforceable workforce conditions written into every decommissioning licence or contract.

When experienced union labour is on the job, safety standards are higher, accountability is clearer, and the local community has confidence that work is being done properly. Offshore dumping avoids all of that—it happens far from scrutiny and often without long-term oversight. Victoria can and should lead the way by requiring that decommissioning work is done onshore, done properly, and done by a well-trained local workforce.

How to say it in your submission: Victoria should develop a long-term decommissioning workforce plan that includes union jobs, proper safety standards, and training pipelines for local and First Nations workers.