– Dr. Megan Kessler, Acting Policy & Research Director.

Five years after a landmark review of our national environmental laws, in late November 2025 the Federal Government passed major amendments to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (or EPBC Act), the largest changes in the 25 year history of the Act. 

Much has been written about what the revised Act will, or won’t, do. Here’s our take on some of the key changes regional communities interested in renewable energy should be aware of.

National Environmental Standards
Like all large infrastructure, renewable energy projects have an impact on the environment. However, from deciding where a project will be sited, through to what happens when that project reaches retirement age, there are tried and true ways to avoid impact, mitigate residual impacts, and give back to local environments and species. Done well, our new national environmental laws can help provide clear guidance on how new renewable energy projects can contribute to a ‘nature positive’ future.

One of the main criticisms of the EPBC Act has long been that it’s not clear what  environmental outcomes it delivers. The recent changes to the Act have introduced National Environmental Standards - new legal instruments that, as the name suggests, are designed to set the standards that decisions under the legislation must meet. This should provide improved protections for the environment as well as make the system clearer for developers - making it easier for them to design projects that will be approved - or refused - quickly under the Act. 

While the changes to the law introduced the concept of National Environmental Standards, the actual Standards will be developed over the coming months and years. 

Unacceptable impacts
The changes introduced a new definition of ‘unacceptable impacts’ – impacts which, in most cases, should lead to a project being refused. Unfortunately, the amended Act largely maintains and expands Ministerial discretion in decision-making. Leaving Ministers to decide when and how rules regarding unacceptable impacts will be applied could risk undermining the improved certainty that the changes were intended to deliver.

Climate change
The glaring gap in the legal changes to the EPBC Act is the absence of any meaningful requirement to consider the impacts of climate change. Climate change is one of the key threats to Australia’s plants and wildlife, making this a significant omission. However, we are hopeful that there remains an opportunity to integrate climate change into decisions under the EPBC Act through the development of supporting regulations, including through National Environmental Standards as outlined above. 

Regional planning
The EPBC Act already included two forms of regional planning. The amended Act made some changes to the existing processes and created a new bioregional (or landscape scale) planning process. The more holistic consideration that regional planning can provide is something that communities have long been calling for. Unfortunately there are a range of discretions within the new planning process which risks limiting its effectiveness. There is a need to establish clear regulations and guidelines for the development of bioregional plans to ensure strong community engagement, clear environmental protections, and a process that delivers comprehensive regional planning for communities.

National Environmental Protection Authority and Environment Information Australia
The amended Act includes the creation of two new institutions - a National Environmental Protection Authority designed to be a ‘tough cop on the beat’, and Environment Information Australia designed to improve accessibility and sharing of environmental data. This has previously been identified as an important tool to facilitate faster and better renewable energy development. Both institutions are welcome and will have an important role under the amended legislation.

Community and First Nations consultation
More needs to be done to ensure adequate community consultation for all decision making pathways under the EPBC Act. National Environmental Standards provide an opportunity to deliver this, with a standard for community engagement that ensures practices are collaborative and empowering. We would also like to see a National Environmental Standard for First Nations Participation developed as a matter of priority. These standards will need to apply to all decision-making pathways.

Offsets and net gain
For the first time, biodiversity offsets have been formally embedded into the EPBC Act, including a requirement for offsets to deliver a ‘net gain’. Before allowing the use of offsets, the decision maker will be required to consider whether a developer has first taken appropriate measures to avoid, mitigate, and repair the impact or damage. Offsets must then pass a ‘net gain test’, which is unfortunately set at a very low bar. Even more concerning, the changes have introduced offset payments in the Act, which allow developers to make financial payments to the Federal Government rather than source offsets, with no guarantee that offsets will be found for those plants and animals being impacted by a development. Strong regulations will be needed to ensure that biodiversity offsets and ‘net gain’ deliver meaningful improvements for matters that are protected under the Act, such as nationally threatened plants and animals, Ramsar wetlands and migratory species.

Conclusion
With the laws now passed through Parliament, there remains a lot of work still to be done to ensure they deliver on their promise of faster, better decisions. We’ll be keeping a close eye on the new institutions, regulations and standards that will be rolled out to implement these laws, to ensure they really do deliver a shift to renewable energy that delivers positive outcomes for regional communities.

Our full submission to the EPBC Senate Inquiry can be accessed here.