Climate Lobbying Overview: Woodside appears to have broadly negative engagement on climate policy. The company’s top-line messaging suggests support for action on climate change, but appears supportive of a major role for fossil gas in the energy mix in the long-term. Woodside also retains a number of memberships to Industry associations which traditionally lobby negatively on climate policy.

Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: Woodside appears to support top-line climate targets. In Woodside’s 2022 climate report, published in 2023, it stated support for the Paris Agreement, but while the report acknowledged the temperature goals, it was unclear if the company was supporting. In its 2021 sustainable development report, published in 2022, Woodside stated that it was engaging with policymakers to inform policy development but did not state whether it supported the need for climate change policy.

Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: Woodside appears to be unsupportive in its engagement with specific climate-related policies. In a February 2023 consultation response on the proposed design of the Safeguard Mechanism Reforms, Woodside advocated for expedited access to international offsets, supported the proposed price cap on Australian Carbon Credits (ACCU's) as well as additional support for emissions intensive facilities, adding that current provisions for such facilities may not be sufficient. In the company's September 2022 response to an earlier consultation on the reforms, Woodside appeared to not support ambitious reform, advocating for Safeguard Credits (SMC's) to be fungible with ACCU's and opposing the proposal to limit Safeguard facilities ability to generate new ACCU's. Woodside also advocated for a similar position in it's consultation response on the Safeguard Crediting Mechanism in October 2021. In August 2020, Woodside appeared to oppose the inclusion of Scope 3 emissions in consideration during regulatory assessments under Australia’s federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. In March 2019, Woodside’s CEO appeared to strongly oppose proposals by the Western Australian Environmental Protection Authority that would require large facilities to offset GHG emissions.

Positioning on Energy Transition: Woodside’s public statements suggest support for a major role for fossil fuels in the future energy mix. In the company's 2022 Climate Report, published in February 2023, it stated that a stable energy transition will lead to new investments in oil gas and new energy while also disclosing that Woodside opposed the Australian Treasury Energy Price Relief Plan stating that it could discourage investment and inhibit the role gas can play in decarbonizing the economy.

CEO Meg O'Niell is also vocal in her support for fossil fuels, such as in a June 2022 AFR article where she did not appear to support a phase-out of coal-fired power in Australia and in May 2022, she stated that customers demand for low carbon energy “goes out the window” if it is not reliable or affordable, stating that after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine the industry needed to ‘double down’ on security and reliability and that the need for low carbon energy must ‘temporarily take the back seat’.

Woodside is also advocating for the continued role of fossil gas in its communications with policymakers. In a January 2023 submission on a mandatory code of conduct, Woodside stated it did not support state intervention in the energy market as it would risk a reduced level of investment in fossil gas, adding that the energy prices increases were partly caused by underinvestment in new supply. In December 2022, Woodside submitted a response to the inquiry into Australia's transition to a green energy superpower. In its response, Woodside stated that fossil gas remains Australia's 'key advantage' and that the transition is 'not a matter of gas or renewables ... it is gas and these solutions'.
Previously, in April 2021, Woodside submitted to the inquiry into the prudential regulation of investments in Australia’s export industries, in which it opposed any attempt to limit investments in the resource sector, including LNG, adding that LNG and gas have a significant role to play in the future.

Industry Association Governance: Woodside has disclosed a list of its direct memberships to industry associations on its corporate website. In 2020, Woodside published a review of alignment with its industry associations on climate change, terminating its membership with the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP). However, Woodside maintains links to several other industry associations that appear to be lobbying negatively on climate policy. Senior Woodside executives are present on the boards of the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association (APPEA), the Business Council of Australia, and the Chamber of Minerals and Energy of Western Australia, three organizations which have traditionally lobbied negatively on progressive climate policy in Australia. Woodside has also not appeared to have provided an update since 2020.

*A detailed assessment of the company's corporate review on 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 Q1 2023.