Woodside Energy has decided that climate targets are so last season, scrapping its long-term emissions and clean energy commitments right after pocketing a windfall from the Iran conflict - a move climate campaigners have dubbed 'grossly negligent', because apparently that's what we call 'putting profits before the planet' these days.
Australia's biggest oil and gas company reported a 27% jump in sales profit to $1.67bn (£A2.33bn) for the six-month period, according to financials lodged on Tuesday, thanks to surging crude prices amid global supply disruptions. Because nothing says 'energy transition' like cashing in on geopolitical chaos.
Woodside expects more trading gains by redirecting barrels to markets paying premium prices, because why not squeeze every last drop of profit from a burning planet? At the same time, the Perth-headquartered company said it would drop its commitment to invest $US5bn ($A7bn) in new energy products like hydrogen by 2030. That's a lot of zeroes for a company that just decided 'nah'.
It has also placed its new ammonia business in the US under strategic review - an asset once touted as one of Woodside's highest-potential options for decarbonising power sources. 'Strategic review' is corporate-speak for 'we're probably going to sell it or shut it down, but we want to sound thoughtful'.
Under new chief executive Liz Westcott, Woodside is doubling down on fossil fuels while shifting further away from clean energy and decarbonisation targets. Westcott told analysts on Tuesday the company would 'retire' its scope 3 investment and abatement targets - those are emissions produced by customers, in case you were wondering - because the targets 'were established in a different market context'. Ah yes, the 'different market context' excuse: the universal get-out-of-jail-free card for corporations everywhere.
'The reality is that markets for emerging lower carbon opportunities, including hydrogen, ammonia, and carbon capture and storage, have developed more slowly than anticipated,' Westcott said. Translation: 'We didn't make enough money fast enough, so we're bailing.' The company said its new energy business would now be guided by 'customer demand and commercial markets' - i.e., whatever makes the most money, climate be damned.
Woodside is one of a growing list of large oil companies amassing profits because of the Iran conflict, while emissions-fuelled climate change wreaks havoc worldwide. Recent deadly heatwaves in the northern hemisphere, made more likely and severe by burning fossil fuels, have reignited calls for these companies to shoulder the growing environmental costs. But Woodside's response is essentially: 'We hear you, but have you seen our quarterly earnings?'
Sophie McNeill, the Greens (WA) spokesperson on climate change, said Woodside had given up 'any pretence of trying to reduce emissions'. 'Everything the climate scientists warned us about is happening, but all Woodside cares about is trying to make as much money while they still can, burning up our planet in the process,' McNeill said. Because who needs a habitable planet when you have record profits?
Brett Morgan, investor campaigns manager at climate activists Market Forces, said big polluters must be held accountable for environmental damage. 'Woodside has ditched its already feeble scope 3 emissions reduction and new energy investment targets, despite years of investor pressure demanding stronger climate action,' Morgan said. He said major Woodside investors must respond by demanding an end to the company's plan to expand fossil fuel operations. Good luck with that.
A spokesperson for AustralianSuper, one of Woodside's biggest shareholders, declined to comment on the changes. Silence is golden, especially when you're complicit.
While Woodside has repeatedly said it supports the landmark 2015 Paris agreement to reduce emissions, its policies allow for the development of new fossil fuel reserves, which it argues are needed to fuel the energy transition to renewables. Because nothing says 'renewables' like drilling for more gas. It has also warned that protest groups risk choking crucial supplies required for energy security in Australia. Yes, those pesky protesters, demanding clean air and a future.
Woodside declined to respond to the criticism from climate groups on Tuesday. Shocking.
Woodside's plans to develop the Browse gasfields off the Kimberley coast are an emerging battleground between the company and environmentalists. The Conservation Council of Western Australia said Woodside's decision to abandon its Scope 3 investment and emissions targets was 'grossly negligent' and 'a dereliction of its clean energy obligations'. But hey, at least they're consistent: gross negligence seems to be their brand.