While the willingness of the world’s largest extractive companies and biggest investors to exit fossil fuels has been seen as a positive sign for decarbonisation, the assets left behind — while likely to eventually become stranded — are toxic enough to still poison the politics of corrupt countries like Australia.
Take BHP’s enthusiasm for getting out of thermal coal, gas, and oil, which are increasingly a turn-off for investors and prone to generating headlines by activists shareholders pushing for the company to dump both fossil fuels and any involvement with lobby groups like the Minerals Council, which spruik them.
The Australian Financial Review reported this morning that the latest deal could see BHP flog all its petroleum assets to Woodside, including its current North West Shelf joint venture with Woodside. The mooted cost of the deal — $20 billion — isn’t much less than Woodside’s current $21.4 billion market capitalisation.
That would make Woodside the undisputed king of fossil fuel companies in Australia and further bolster its already remarkable capacity to influence public policy. Remember that it was to help Woodside that Alexander Downer and John Howard ordered ASIS to bug the Timor-Leste cabinet in 2004 in order to secure better access terms to hydrocarbon assets beneath the Timor Sea, with Downer, and DFAT Secretary Ashton Calvert, later taking roles with Woodside.
Woodside has handed $2.57 million in donations to all sides of politics since 2004, and routinely employs figures from both sides of politics — two of its current directors are former WA state Labor treasurer Ben Wyatt and former Coalition resources minister Ian Macfarlane. Its influence over the WA Labor government of Mark McGowan — which has delivered time and again for the company — is extraordinary.
In fact Woodside is better understood not as a large corporation but a private arm of state and federal governments, wielding the kind of influence a large and lucrative GBE can wield within the corridors of power.
It’s also already one of Australia’s largest carbon emitters, producing nearly 38 Mt of CO2-equivalent gases once emissions from its exports are added to the those produced in its LNG operations. The company claims to have committed to net zero by 2050 but insists it can develop new gas projects within that — and has been allowed by the WA government to increase its emissions significantly this decade.
An effective doubling in size of Woodside’s capitalisation, given its close integration into government policymaking apparatus already, would only increase its ability to dictate policy to the WA state government and in Canberra — perhaps even to a point where Woodside is deemed “too big to strand” and its preservation becomes a deliberate focus of national policy.
It would concentrate fossil fuel power more effectively within governments already too inclined to follow whatever orders come from fossil fuel boardrooms and management.
It’s a clever strategy by BHP. The shareholders take a tidy dividend and all of the legacy issues are left for Australia to fix when Woodside collapses (or sells their assets and liabilities to someone for $1).
Especially as evidence elsewhere suggests that fossil fuel related will become stranded assets in the future.
Murdoch media, Nine Entertainment, mining lobby, busted for record bullartistry, go into hiding
https://www.michaelwest.com.au/murdoch-media-nine-entertainment-mining-lobby-busted-for-record-bullartistry-go-into-hiding/
The Minerals Council of Australia, a foreign-controlled mining lobby, has duped Australia’s major media in an $80bn PR scam by not accounting for billions in GST refunded every year, exaggerating the contribution of the minerals industry to Australia. Callum Foote reports.
Australia’s major media organisations, News Corp and Nine Entertainment, have been duped by the mining lobby’s false claims about its contribution to Australia. The industry peak body, Minerals Council of Australia, has failed to include in its analysis the more than $72 billion in GST refunds the industry has received between 2010 and 2018, and an estimated $80.6 billion over the past 10 years.
The Australian, the Australian Financial Review, and the Minister for Resources Keith Pitt have consistently repeated the misleading claims provided to them by the mining lobby via the firm the MCA hired to conduct its reports, Deloitte Access Economics.
Deloitte found that the minerals industry had contributed more than $238 billion in company tax and royalty payments since 2010, with $132 billion from company tax alone.
However, the report avoids mentioning that the mining industry, as an exporting industry, receives a huge GST refund every year.
I’ve tried twice to post about the MCofA and tax evasion but it is rejected.
Google Murdoch media, Nine Entertainment, mining lobby, busted for record bullartistry, go into hiding
We’re screwed…
Succinct, mordant and, depressingly, very very true.
Makes them bigger, but that also allows those opposed to concentrate their efforts against an individual foe. There are many avenues, legal, financial, sharemarket activism, extinction rebellion type action.
I for one am very interested in how this goes. All we need is for a government to ban corporate donations and jobs for the boys after they leave politics and Woodside is stranded. Assets.
Now, for an honest government.
All we need is a carbon tax.
Pure, simple & straight forward – pay per emission potential.
And NO TRADING which is a job creation scam for merchant bankers, shysters & 3rd world autocrats.
Pardon my ignorance, and I am but if the emissions from the exported product is taken into account “It’s also already one of Australia’s largest carbon emitters, producing nearly 38 Mt of CO2-equivalent gases once emissions from its exports … ” then is the same logic applied to mineral exports such as iron, nickel and the like that are to the most part processed overseas? Should not the emissions not be counted or attributed to the party that actually produces the emission regardless of the origin of the product? If not then could it not be so argued that the emissions from carbon fuels burnt in Australia should really be attributed to the origin of the product. Dirty game regardless but a little confused as to who is accountable for an emission.
“Woodside is deemed “too big to strand” and its preservation becomes a deliberate focus of national policy”? Woodside is an 80% o’seas owned company – any of its stranded assets would not be the responsibilityv for Australian taxpayers. Whereas the big 4 banks, all o’seas majority owned, their local boards have been similarly peppered with locals like Ken Henry (past NAB chair) and Jane Halton (currently on ANZ’s board) – are a different matter! This is an all pervasive oligopoly that has to be propped up by this govt in the event of GFC 2! Some argue GFC 1 hasn’t ended – why else they argue is the RBA’s money tree being exclusively harvested by the big 4?
oops re typos