Climate Policy Engagement Analysis
Climate Policy Engagement Overview: BHP has a strategic level of engagement with climate policy. The company displays mostly positive positions on specific climate-related regulations in Australia but shows more negative positioning on the energy transition, generally advocating a technology-neutral approach that appears to entail support for fossil gas and a future role for nuclear and biofuels alongside renewables in the energy mix, as well as a long-term role for metallurgical coal in the steelmaking process.
Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: BHP’s top-line messaging on climate policy is largely positive. In its Climate Transition Action Plan (CTAP) 2024, published August 2024, the company recognized the need to limit global temperature rise to well below 2°C and supported efforts to reach the 1.5°C target while also backing the goals of the Paris Agreement. In addition, BHP supported several climate policies in its CTAP, recognizing their role in facilitating the decarbonization of business.
Engagement with Climate-Related Policies: BHP appears to engage with mostly positive positions on federal climate-related policy in Australia. The company consistently supported Australia’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions targets, including in a May 2024 consultation submission on the Climate Change Authority’s 2024 Issues paper, yet provided no clear position on the proposal of Australian 2035 targets in the range of 65% to 75% below 2005 levels in the same submission. BHP also broadly supports Australia’s 2030 Renewable Energy Target, as seen in its CTAP 2024. In addition, the company supported the federal Safeguard Mechanism (SGM) in its CTAP 2024 and called on the Australian Government to cover a greater proportion of the economy with the SGM in its May 2024 consultation submission to the Climate Change Authority.
However, BHP appears to be unsupportive of the introduction of a carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) in Australia. In its December 2023 consultation submission on the proposed approach to assess and address carbon leakage risk as part of the Carbon Leakage Review, the company appeared to suggest that an import-oriented measure to address carbon leakage like the European Union’s CBAM would not be appropriate in the Australian context. BHP also appeared unsupportive of GHG emissions product standards in its December 2023 consultation submission on the Carbon Leakage Review. In addition, the company appeared to not support the introduction of a climate trigger in Australia’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 in a July 2024 Australian Financial Review article.
Positioning on Energy Transition: BHP displays a mix of positive and negative positions on the energy transition, generally advocating a technology-neutral approach that appears to entail support for fossil gas and a future role for nuclear and biofuels alongside renewables in the energy mix, as well as a long-term role for metallurgical coal in the steelmaking process. In its May 2024 consultation submission to the Climate Change Authority, BHP broadly supported the electrification of vehicles and mining equipment and an increased use of biofuels in hard-to-abate sectors to support the energy transition while backing the role of renewable and low-emissions energy sources in driving large-scale emissions reductions. In addition, the CEO of BHP, Mike Henry emphasized concerns that US protectionism could delay the global shift to green energy as he appeared to support the US Inflation Reduction Act in a December 2024 Financial Times article.
However, BHP stressed the need for fossil gas as a transitional fuel in an April 2024 consultation submission on Australia’s Electricity and Energy Sector Plan and called for government efforts to ensure gas infrastructure can deliver an increased volume of fossil gas into the Australian market. Mike Henry also argued that nuclear should be considered as part of the energy mix in a February 2025 ABC News interview, emphasizing that all technologies should be able to compete “on an equal footing.” In addition, BHP repeatedly opposed the reduction of metallurgical coal in the steelmaking process. For example, in a September 2024 speech at the Queensland Resources Media Club, Adam Lancey, Asset President of the BHP Mitsubishi Alliance, advocated for continued investment in metallurgical coal projects in Queensland, suggesting that metallurgical coal will be in demand for decades into the future.
Industry Association Governance: BHP has published a review of its alignment with its industry associations in its 2023 Industry Association Review and 2024 update. The company found some, non-material, misalignment between the climate policy advocacy of five associations and BHP’s August 2020 Global Climate Policy Standards, including the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, Minerals Council of Australia (MCA), NSW Minerals Council, Queensland Resources Council and US Chamber of Commerce. InfluenceMap analysis indicates that all five groups have engaged with negative positions on climate policy across Australia, Canada and the United States between 2022 and 2025.
A detailed assessment of the company's review of its climate policy engagement can be found on InfluenceMap's CA100+ Investor Hub here.
InfluenceMap collects and assesses evidence of corporate climate policy engagement on a weekly basis, depending on the availability of information from each specific data source (for more information see our methodology). While this analysis flows through to the company’s scores each week, the summary above is updated periodically.
This summary was last updated in Q3 2025.