This article is more than 1 year old

This article is more than 1 year old

The former environment minister Josh Frydenberg went against the advice of his departmental experts when he blocked two wind turbines on Lord Howe Island in 2017, consigning the world heritage-listed island to relying on diesel fuel for the bulk of its electricity.

A freedom of information request by the Guardian has uncovered that the minister took the unusual action of blocking the project under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, deeming it “unacceptable”.

It was one of two projects that Frydenberg rejected while environment minister, the other being a nursing home at Sydney’s Middle Head on federal land. Both were criticised by the broadcaster Alan Jones, who particularly campaigned against the Middle Head development.

Projects are rarely ruled “unacceptable” under federal environmental laws but are often approved with modifications or strict conditions.

'Dark satanic mills': Tony Abbott continues his crusade against wind turbines Read more

For instance, the Adani coal project’s groundwater plan was approved in 2019 with conditions; the Abbot Point coal terminal was judged not to have unacceptable impacts on the Great Barrier Reef; and the Watermark coal project near Tamworth was waved through in 2015.

But two medium-sized wind turbines on Lord Howe Island proved a bridge too far for Frydenberg as environment minister.

Now the Guardian can reveal that his decision was taken despite the advice of his own department, strong support from the majority of residents on Lord Howe Island, the governing board of the island, and even another federal government agency – the Australian Renewable Energy Agency – which had offered $4.6m in funding towards the renewable energy project.

The department’s natural heritage section 23 November 2016 advice was that “the proposed action is unlikely to significantly impact the Island Group’s world heritage values” and that moving the island away from reliance on weekly deliveries of diesel would help secure its Unesco world heritage status.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest FOI document Photograph: None

The department went on to say: “The proposed turbine site was selected because it is in close proximity to the existing powerhouse and electricity network and is one of the least visible cleared pieces of elevated land on the island.”

“Practical access and operation considerations limit the turbines’ physical size. The turbines are not permanently fixed but can be lowered for maintenance and other purposes.”

It said the proposed turbines were a similar scale to the existing aviation towers near the project site.

Lord Howe Island coral bleaching 'most severe we've ever seen', scientists say Read more

There was some concern expressed from the migratory birds section of the department about whether the turbines might harm Lord Howes’ bird population.

But the final recommendation from the department was that risks could be mitigated by the Lord Howe Island board’s proposal to shut down the turbines at sunset when shearwaters returned to their nests.

“The department considers that impacts on listed migratory birds could potentially be mitigated, for example through development and implementation of the adaptive management approach proposed in the referral,” it said.

But having outlined the reasons why the project should be given the go-ahead, the department, perhaps pre-empting the minister’s attitude, advised that he could still oppose it, and included the paperwork for him to do so.

Sign up to receive the top stories from Guardian Australia every morning

The Guardian understands that the rejection of the Lord Howe project wind turbines caused concern within the department.

At the time, Jones was regularly railing against windfarm projects, and there was opposition to windfarms within the Coalition. In 2014, the then treasurer, Joe Hockey, called wind turbines “utterly offensive”, while former prime minister Tony Abbott said in 2015 they were “ ugly” and “noisy”.

The case raises questions about political influence in environmental decision making.

“Former environment minister Josh Frydenberg’s rejection of the Lord Howe Island windfarm is inconsistent with many other environmental approvals where there was strong departmental advice about unavoidable risks to internationally protected places and wildlife,” Basha Stasak, the Australian Conservation Foundation’s nature campaign manager, said.

“For example, Frydenberg ignored clear departmental advice urging a rejection of the Toondah Harbour property development because it would destroy part of an internationally protected wetland.

“These inconsistencies go to the heart of the environmental law reform Australia needs. We need strong laws and decisions made under them by an independent national Environment Protection Authority,” she said.

A spokesperson for the current environment minister, Sussan Ley, said then minister Frydenberg considered that “the proposed wind turbines would create a considerable, intrusive visual impact and that this would affect the spectacular and scenic landscapes for which the island group is recognised”.

“The minister concluded that the proposal would be an inappropriate development for Lord Howe Island and that the impacts on the island group’s heritage values could not be sufficiently avoided or mitigated,” she said.

The spokesman said the minister had given “thorough consideration to a range of matters” before deciding that the wind turbine proposal would have clearly unacceptable impacts and that the decision did not affect the solar component of the island’s energy project.

Lord Howe Island resident Craig Thompson, who had helped conduct the community consultation among its 350 residents, said the island had carefully researched options and employed consultants to find the best source of power for the island.

“With a savings of nearly 70% in both diesel and money, the Hybrid Energy System with two mid-sized wind turbines, a solar array and a battery for storage was deemed the best option,” he said.

“For now, a future relying on burning diesel is the reality we must face. Climate change and the hardships it will bring to our island is something the future generations of islanders will have to face and start planning for.

“Sustainable clean energy for a world heritage site like Lord Howe should be mandatory. We should be setting an example to the whole world, not being held back by a minister’s political ideology or personal opinion.”

Lord Howe Island’s Unesco listing has identified “human-caused climate change” as a key threat. The organisation has a policy which calls on world heritage sites to investigate renewable power options.

Lord Howe Island is now exploring what can be done with solar and batteries to meet the island’s needs. New South Wales spends $750,000 a year on shipping diesel to the island to provide power for its 350 residents.