Rob Koh

Rob Koh questioned the composition of Woodside's unit production costs, noting good performance in 2025 but a changing structure with Beaumont New Ammonia. He asked how Beaumont's processing costs are accounted for and about the overall cost structure for the year.

Answer

Acting CEO Liz Westcott stated that operating assets maintain a cost efficiency focus, but 2026 will see increased costs from the Pluto turnaround, Scarborough, and Beaumont. CFO Graham Tiver added that Woodside is increasing transparency by distinguishing traditional production costs from new feed gas services and processing costs, including Beaumont.

Rob Koh asked for an update on Woodside's decommissioning activities, specifically inquiring about the timing of Bass Strait platform removals. He also questioned the composition of unit production costs, noting good performance in 2025, and how the cost structure is changing with the Beaumont New Ammonia Project, particularly whether its processing costs are included in unit production costs.

Answer

Meg O'Neill (CEO and Managing Director, Woodside Energy Group) reported that drilling and abandonment programs for closed facilities (Stybarrow, Griffin, Minerva, Enfield) were completed in 2025. She guided 2026 decommissioning expenditure to be between AUD 500 million and AUD 800 million, with Bass Strait platform removals targeted for 2027. On unit production costs, Meg O'Neill clarified that 2026 will see increased costs at Pluto due to a turnaround and Scarborough startup, and Beaumont New Ammonia will introduce new costs. She distinguished traditional production costs from Beaumont's tolling and feedstock costs, which will be separate line items. Graham Tiver (CFO, Woodside Energy Group) added that the new 'feed gas services and processing costs' line in the 2026 guidance provides increased transparency for these new cost components.

Rob Koh from Morgan Stanley asked about the potential for more executory contract deals similar to the Stone Peak transaction for other assets. He also inquired about contingencies in restoration provisions for pipeline removal and whether Woodside has any royalty refund deals for decommissioning.

Answer

CEO & Managing Director Meg O’Neill responded that while such models have been considered, they are more complicated for existing joint venture assets, and the current focus is on the Louisiana LNG HoldCo sell-down. Regarding provisions, she confirmed they include a risk-weighted cost for potential removal of pipelines. She also clarified that Woodside does not have royalty refund structures like Chevron's, but abandonment expenses are creditable against PRRT and income tax.