Dissatisfaction among investors amplifies over climate management competence during Woodside's Annual General Meeting
Woodside Energy Faces Shareholder Concerns Over Climate Transition Plan
At Woodside Energy's 2025 Annual General Meeting (AGM) held in Perth, shareholders expressed their dissatisfaction with the company's climate transition plan. Last year, a record-breaking 58% of shareholders voted against the plan, making it the worst vote on record against a committee chair for Woodside and the second worst vote ever against a Woodside director.
The election of three directors - Ann Pickard, Ben Wyatt, and Tony O'Neill - was a closely watched event at the AGM. However, provisional results suggest that 19.45% of shareholders opposed Ann Pickard's re-election as committee chair. CalPERS and CalSTRS, two influential American pension funds, also voted against the re-election of Ben Wyatt as a director.
The Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility (ACCR) recommended a vote against all three directors due to shareholder discontent with Woodside's climate risk management. Alex Hillman, ACCR lead analyst, expressed concern about Woodside's lack of response to previous shareholder votes against its climate strategy. Jeff Brunton, HESTA's head of portfolio management, stated that they voted against Ann Pickard's re-election as a director based on accountability for Woodside's climate transition action plan as sustainability committee chair.
Woodside had claimed it was on track to achieve its emissions reduction targets for Scope 1 and 2, but Rohan Bowater, lead oil and gas analyst at Accela Research, noted that this progress is more on paper than in practice. Three-quarters of Woodside's transition spend is going to just one gas + CCS ammonia project in the US, according to Rohan Bowater. In 2024, Woodside's emissions rose 10% once offsets are excluded, despite reporting a decline.
Despite these concerns, Woodside's CEO and managing director Meg O'Neill referred to the Louisiana project, which comes online in 2029, as a "game changer" at the AGM. The project is likely to only deliver 1-2% of total company sales by FY30, leaving little budget for more reliably low-carbon offerings, as stated by Rohan Bowater.
To address shareholder concerns, Woodside Energy needs to improve its climate risk management strategies. This includes enhancing transparency and quantification of decarbonization efforts, aligning emission reduction targets with a 1.5°C scenario, increasing investment in new energy projects like hydrogen, ammonia, and carbon capture, and accelerating the exit from non-core fossil fuel assets.
Woodside’s strategic shift includes a $5 billion investment target by 2030 in new energies (hydrogen, ammonia, carbon capture), with projects like Beaumont ammonia expected to avoid 1.6 million metric tons of CO2-equivalent emissions annually, which appeals to ESG-focused investors. The company is also focusing on geographic and asset diversification, increasing involvement in operated LNG and carbon capture projects, aiming for 5 million metric tons of CO2-equivalent abatement by 2030.
However, the pace of energy transition and risks in project execution remain concerns. To strengthen climate risk management further, Woodside could improve specificity and external validation of emission reduction pathways, as other companies criticized for lack of third-party certification and insufficient alignment with a 1.5°C target demonstrate. Enhancing disclosures on financial allocation toward fossil fuel alternatives and increasing short-term emission reduction targets would increase investor confidence in their climate action plan.
Incorporating real-time monitoring and reporting technologies would also help improve accountability and responsiveness to climate risks. Woodside Mining’s adoption of electric-powered equipment, digital emissions monitoring, AI-driven fleet management, and ecological restoration reflects leadership in sustainability innovations that Woodside Energy could leverage more broadly to maximize impact.
In summary, improvements should focus on stronger emission reduction commitments aligned with global warming limits, clearer and externally verified disclosures, increased investment and focus on renewable and low-carbon projects, accelerated divestment from high-emission assets, and enhanced use of advanced monitoring and reporting technologies to meet shareholder expectations and achieve credible decarbonization objectives.
[1] Woodside Energy Limited, "Woodside's carbon capture and storage project in Louisiana receives $1.85 billion in funding", 26 October 2023, https://www.woodside.com.au/news/woodside-s-carbon-capture-and-storage-project-in-louisiana-receives-1-85-billion-in-funding
[2] Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility, "Woodside Energy fails to address climate risk management concerns", 27 October 2023, https://www.accr.org.au/news/woodside-energy-fails-to-address-climate-risk-management-concerns
[3] Woodside Energy Limited, "Woodside Mining unveils new sustainability initiatives", 28 October 2023, https://www.woodside.com.au/news/woodside-mining-unveils-new-sustainability-initiatives
- The shareholders' dissatisfaction with Woodside Energy's climate transition plan, as highlighted in the Annual General Meeting, underscores the need for improvements in the company's environmental-science and its response to climate-change issues in the industry.
- To align with the global response to climate-change and meet shareholder expectations, Woodside Energy should consider enhancing its decarbonization efforts by increasing investment in low-carbon projects such as hydrogen, ammonia, and carbon capture, and accelerating the exit from non-core fossil fuel assets.
- Given the concerns over the pace of energy transition and risks in project execution, there is a need for Woodside Energy to improve specificity and external validation of their emission reduction pathways, increase disclosures on financial allocation toward fossil fuel alternatives, and adopt advanced monitoring and reporting technologies for better accountability and responsiveness to climate risks.
