Woodside said it had engaged extensively with shareholders over the year prior to, and following, the release of its Climate Report 2021 in February.
This week in its Annual General Meeting, shareholders representing about 52 per cent of Woodside securities participated in the non-binding, advisory vote on the Climate Report.
Almost half of shareholders, or 44 per cent, voted against the report.
Previously these votes had been split evenly for and against the report.
Woodside chairman Richard Goyder said: “Woodside’s board and leadership team stands behind our climate strategy and its two key elements: to reduce our net equity scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions; and invest in the products and services our customers need, as they reduce their emissions.
“We believe the Climate Report 2021 is an accurate and transparent summary of Woodside’s approach to climate change, and we are focused on delivering the commitments we have made in this report.
“We acknowledge that the energy transition is a complex and ongoing process.
“Our shareholders’ views are important to us and will continue to inform our approach as it evolves.”
Woodside chief executive Meg O’Neill said: “We are proud of our contribution to meeting the world’s energy needs and confident of our ongoing role as a low-cost, lower-carbon energy provider.
“We have set targets to reduce our own net equity emissions and to invest $5 billion between now and 2030 in lower-carbon products and services that will support the decarbonisation journeys of our customers.”
Greenpeace Australia Pacific chief executive David Ritter said Woodside’s leadership team displayed both breathtaking arrogance and a fundamental misunderstanding of the global energy transition.
Ritter said: “Woodside chair Richard Goyder seems to think his company, one of the world’s biggest fossil fuel producers, knows more about keeping the world’s climate trajectory under 1.5 degrees of warming than the United Nations.
“Woodside’s primary concern is rushing through expansion of the Burrup Hub, the most climate-polluting project currently proposed in Australia, and they’re prepared to bulldoze anyone in their way, disregarding shareholder and community concern as well as the expertise of the world’s leading climate and investment experts.
“When grilled on their flimsy climate plan, Woodside’s leaders had no legitimate answers, because their business model rests solely on the aggressive expansion of fossil fuels.
“Woodside’s arrogant strategy is to deflect and dismiss anyone who questions them, even denigrating the expertise of the Climate 100, one of the world’s leading investment institutions.
“Woodside chief Meg O’Neill went so far as to disregard the findings of a CSIRO report Woodside itself commissioned, finding that Woodside’s gas exports could delay the transition to renewables in Asia, at a time when the imperative to decarbonise has never been higher.
“This company seems to think it can flout climate science and deep community anxiety in pursuit of profit.”
Also at the AGM, shareholders voted in favour of Woodside merging with petroleum behemoth BHP, making the merged entity one of the top ten fossil fuel producers in the world.
The BHP merger will see shareholders saddled with $6.7 billion worth of decommissioning costs for fossil fuel infrastructure, according to a report Woodside released ahead of its London Stock Exchange listing.
