1.5% is all it takes to make tassie shoal fly?

On the 21/10/13 AFR Online reported: "Browse LNG Partners Chase 13pc Return - The Woodside Petroleum-led joint venture partners that propose to develop Western Australia’s large Browse Basin prefer a floating liquefied natural gas project over an onshore development because it would generate up to an additional 1.5 percentage point return on investment, a WA parliamentary inquiry has heard."

Does it follow then that the Evans Shoal Partners would be as similarly financially judicious in comparing the incremental internal rate of return of utilizing Tassie Shoals verse that of a land based solution?