The Climate Wreckers Index

The Climate Wreckers Index is made up of the 190 publicly-listed companies from all over the world with the biggest plans to expand the scale of the fossil fuel industry. The list includes:

• The top 60 oil and gas producers by expansion plans
• The top 60 coal miners by expansion plans and coal reserves
• The top 30 companies by new gas power plant development plans
• The top 30 companies by new coal power plant development plans
• The top 10 companies by liquefied natural gas (LNG) import and export terminal development plans

Together, these companies are planning new coal, oil and gas projects that could add the equivalent of a staggering 277 years of Australia’s national annual emissions!

The combined emissions from these projects, totalling more than 129 gigatonnes, would eat up about half of the remaining global carbon budget for keeping global warming to 1.5°C.

Climate scientists have been telling us for years that achieving the climate goals of the Paris Agreement leaves no room for new coal, or oil gas projects. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been abundantly clear that emissions from existing fossil fuel infrastructure will take us past the Paris Agreement’s critical 1.5°C global warming threshold, let alone emissions from new projects.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) has also been clear that keeping global warming to 1.5°C means no new or expanded coal, oil and gas projects can go ahead, with its ‘Net Zero by 2050’ scenario designed to be the most cost-effective and technically-feasible pathway to achieving this temperature goal. Yet this small group of Climate Wreckers Index companies are forging ahead with their dangerous fossil fuel expansion plans, ignoring climate science and threatening a stable and habitable future for all.

Super funds’ investments in the Climate Wreckers Index

* In order to compare funds with different allocations to publicly-traded company shares (listed equities), we calculated each fund’s investment exposure to the Climate Wreckers Index as a proportion of its total allocation to listed equities, minus any investments in pooled or managed investment fund products, such as Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs). This allows us to properly compare funds’ direct investments in Climate Wreckers Index company shares. You can read the full methodology below.

Each fund in the above table was contacted ahead of publication and given the opportunity to provide any further disclosures not captured by our research and raise any issues relating to our analysis.

Almost all super funds in the above table acknowledge that climate change poses significant risks, and many of them are even committed to achieving net zero portfolio emissions by 2050. Yet they all remain invested in the small group of companies actively undermining the net zero transition and a stable climate future through their dangerous fossil fuel expansion plans.

Of these companies, three of them are particularly appalling – oil and gas companies Woodside Energy and Santos, and coal miner Whitehaven Coal. All three companies are Australian-based and have significant plans to expand the fossil fuel industry, flying in the face of climate science and the wishes of local communities that will be (or already are) impacted by these companies’ projects.

These three companies are responsible for the majority of most super funds’ portfolio emissions attributable to fossil fuel expansion (see Figure 2). While most super funds are invested in a significant number of Climate Wreckers Index companies, Woodside, Santos and Whitehaven alone are responsible for 59% of emissions tied to fossil fuel expansion in the average super fund’s portfolio.

These companies are responsible for an astounding 97% of ESSSuper’s expansionary fossil fuel emissions in its Balanced investment option, with Whitehaven alone accounting for 65%! While Active Super has divested from Whitehaven, Woodside makes up 45% of its High Growth investment option’s overall fossil expansionary fossil fuel emissions. On the other end of the scale, NGS Super has no exposure to any of these companies, and while Woodside, Santos and Whitehaven make up about 36% of AustralianSuper’s Balanced option’s expansionary fossil fuel emissions, Woodside alone is responsible for more than nine tenths of those emissions.

Super funds therefore have no excuse to continue ignoring the climate-wrecking behaviour of Woodside, Santos and Whitehaven, and could make material progress towards their climate commitments by rapidly forcing these three companies onto a Paris-aligned pathway of sharply declining fossil fuel production and publicly divesting if this fails.

Our research has demonstrated that funds seeking to live up to their climate commitments through ‘active ownership’ must identify and prioritise problem companies for targeted engagement, if they are to avoid scrutiny from regulators or face potential legal action for greenwashing. Corporate regulator ASIC has repeatedly warned it is on the lookout for super funds without a ‘reasonable basis’ for having made net zero claims or those without effective climate-related active ownership strategies, meaning funds that have let these companies get away with climate destruction for far too long should be very concerned.

“Non‑state actors cannot claim to be net zero while continuing to build or invest in new fossil fuel supply.”

– The Hon. Catherine McKenna, Chair, High‑level Expert Group on the Net Zero
Emissions Commitments of Non-State Entities

Super funds must spare no effort to end these companies’ destructive fossil fuel growth plans and loudly divest if they fail to step into line.

Check out the full list of climate-wrecking companies below and see our case studies section below for more information on climate wreckers like Woodside, Santos and Whitehaven.

The table below shows the full list of the 190 companies that make up the Climate Wreckers Index.

This is not an exhaustive list of companies involved in coal, oil and gas expansion, just the worst of the worst climate wreckers that our super funds can invest in.

BHP is a big problem – for the super industry and the climate

BHP is by far the biggest contributor to super funds’ investments in the Climate Wreckers Index overall, accounting for about 60% of the industry’s investments in the Index (see Figure 4). This shouldn’t be surprising – BHP is a behemoth in the Australian share market, accounting for about 11% of its value.* Super funds are required to match the investment performance of the broader share market, making BHP very difficult to avoid for many funds. Interestingly, the significant exposure to BHP in UniSuper’s Balanced investment option makes this option the most exposed to the Climate Wreckers Index – excluding BHP from all investment options, UniSuper’s Balanced option would be the least exposed!

But make no mistake: BHP absolutely deserves its place in the Climate Wreckers Index. BHP’s mines, which are mostly co-owned with Mitsubishi, churned out a mind-boggling 72 million tonnes of climate-destroying coal in financial year 2023. The company’s currently operating mines contain 1.9 billion tonnes of known coal reserves, which if burned would result in over 5 billion tonnes of CO2 released into the atmosphere, or 11 years of Australia’s annual emissions.

BHP is also pursuing several new destructive coal projects. In a show of complete disregard for the world’s climate goals, BHP is actively seeking approval to:

• Continue digging up coal at its Peak Downs mine for another 93 years;
• Extend the life of its Caval Ridge mine from the 2030s to the 2050s;
• Significantly expand the size of the massive Blackwater mine, which it offloaded in April 2024 to climate villain Whitehaven Coal; and
• Build a brand new coal mine called Saraji East.

It doesn’t have to be like this. In 2022, BHP committed to closing its Mount Arthur thermal coal mine by 2030, even though it holds enough coal to continue producing for another 38 years. The company needs to show the same leadership with its remaining mines and present a clear pathway to managing them down in line with global climate goals.

Super funds could play a major role in making that happen. The five largest funds – AustralianSuper, Australian Retirement Trust, Aware Super, UniSuper and Hostplus – collectively own nearly 8% of BHP across their dozens of investment options. This gives them significant influence over – and a responsibility for – the company’s strategy, including its coal expansion plans.

In response to BHP’s recent bid on fellow coal miner Anglo American’s assets, Vision Super’s Chief Investment Officer (CIO) made comments about the potential takeover, noting there could be favourable outcomes for the climate:

“It may be that [BHP] closes down some coal mines earlier than would be the case if Anglo American remained a stand-alone company. That would be a good thing.” – Michael Wyrsch, CIO, Vision Super

If super funds want to remain invested in BHP, they must push the company to transition its business to align with global climate goals, which would involve dropping its coal expansion plans and committing to managing existing dirty assets in line with those goals, rather than selling them on to even dirtier operators.

* ASX300 index at 31 December 2023.

If the Climate Wreckers Index is a group of the worst of the worst companies with fossil fuel growth plans, then the below companies are a small subset of climate wreckers that are hell-bent on pursuing fossil fuel expansion at all costs.

These are the diehard climate wreckers.

Woodside Energy

Woodside is pursuing massive new oil and gas projects consistent with the failure of the Paris Agreement, including the monstrous Scarborough gas field off the coast of Western Australia, and the associated Pluto Train 2 LNG processing plant. The Scarborough-Pluto 2 project could result in the emissions equivalent of running 15 coal-fired power stations every year, threatens to accelerate degradation of the Murujuga rock art due to industrial emissions, and would also cause significant impacts to the local marine environment. Independent analysis has concluded the Scarborough-Pluto combined project “…represents a bet against the world implementing the Paris Agreement.”

Woodside also intends to exploit the monstrous Browse offshore gas basin, a project even bigger and more polluting than the already out-of-line Scarborough project and which will threaten the pristine Scott Reef. The Browse, Scarborough and Pluto 2 projects are collectively referred to as the Burrup Hub, deemed “Australia’s biggest climate threat,” which could be responsible for a colossal estimated 6.1 billion tonnes of climate-wrecking emissions over its proposed 50 year lifetime.

Despite the urgent need for fossil fuel production to begin declining in line with global climate goals, Woodside plans to significantly increase oil and gas production this decade, with its overall emissions expected to rise at least 18% by 2028 from 2022 levels as weak emissions targets and plans are dwarfed by planned production growth. Beyond clearly contravening the IEA’s key conclusion that there is no room for new oil and gas production projects in the pathway to net zero emissions by 2050, Woodside inappropriately blends data from key climate scenarios in an attempt to portray new gas projects as ‘Paris-aligned,’ conflicting with the latest climate science.

Woodside recently suffered a world record-breaking vote against its climate plan, at the company’s 2024 annual general meeting. Beating its own world record vote against a climate plan in 2022, a staggering 58% of Woodside’s shareholders voted against the company’s poor excuse for a climate transition plan this year. After five years of blatantly disregarding shareholder concerns about its climate risk management plan, Woodside has not materially updated its inadequate climate transition plan since 2020.

The funds most exposed to Woodside, as a proportion of listed equities:

1. AustralianSuper: 1.69% (Balanced option)
2. Commonwealth Super Corp: 1.52% (PSS Default option)
3. Australian Retirement Trust and AMP: 1.37% (Lifecycle Balanced Pool and MySuper 1970s options, respectively)

Santos

Santos is also pursuing massive new oil and gas projects consistent with the failure of the Paris Agreement, including the dangerous offshore Barossa gas project and destructive Narrabri gas project. Santos is pursuing major new projects that would increase its emissions by 22% from 2023 to 2028, even assuming its inadequate emissions targets are implemented. Furthermore, Santos’ meagre commitment to help its customers reduce their Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 1.5Mtpa by 2030 would represent just 4.6% of Santos’ 2023 Scope 3 emissions.

Santos Scope 3 emissions, with climate target impact

Santos plans to drill 850 gas wells throughout the Pilliga Forest and surrounding farmland near Narrabri, New South Wales. The company is still desperately pursuing this toxic project, despite years of opposition from Gomeroi Traditional Owners and farmers, as well as former Chief Scientist Penny Sackett, who has confirmed the project is inconsistent with the Paris Agreement and net zero by 2050. Some Gomeroi Traditional Owners have recently won a landmark appeal against the Native Title Tribunal in the Federal Court, which found that the Tribunal had failed to consider climate change in its approval of the Narrabri project.

Santos is also pushing ahead with its Barossa gas project, a massive new proposed gas field 300km North of Darwin, in the Northern Territory. If the project goes ahead, Santos will transport gas from the Barossa field to an existing LNG processing facility in Darwin. The extremely high carbon dioxide (CO2) content of Barossa gas has led energy experts to state that the Barossa to Darwin LNG project looks like it’s shaping up to become “…a CO2 emissions factory with an LNG by-product.”

Santos’ oil and gas projects are not just damaging to a safe climate future, but Traditional Owners’ cultural heritage as well. Tiwi Islands Traditional Owners successfully challenged Santos over its Barossa project in the Federal Court in 2022 for failing to adequately consult with them, subsequently winning the follow-up appeal from Santos. Since then, further legal challenges have been mounted against Santos’ Barossa project, and some Tiwi Islands Traditional Owners have even travelled all the way to Tokyo to speak directly with the financiers of Santos and raise concerns about Barossa.

The funds most exposed to Santos, as a proportion of listed equities:

1. ESSSuper: 1.39% (Balanced option)
2. Hostplus: 1.24% (Balanced option)
3. Equipsuper: 1.13% (MySuper option)

Whitehaven Coal

Whitehaven Coal is the biggest undiversified coal mining company on the Australian share market. Whitehaven’s plans to massively expand the coal industry are completely at odds with the Paris Agreement goal of limiting global warming to 1.5ºC.

Whitehaven is planning to spend around $4.5 billion on three new coal mines and expansions by the end of this decade: Vickery, Narrabri Stage 3 and Winchester South. In June 2023, the company lodged an application to extend the life of its controversial Maules Creek coal mine by another nine years. Additionally, in its acquisition of the Blackwater and Daunia mines from BHP, Whitehaven confirmed one of the other assets it received was the mining tenements for the Blackwater South project, a huge mine that could see Whitehaven mining coal until 2121 if approved, and is estimated to cost over $1 billion to develop. If all of these projects proceed as planned, when emissions from digging up and burning the coal are added, over their lifetimes these mines would unleash some 3.6 billion tonnes of carbon emissions, the equivalent of more than 7.5 times Australia’s annual emissions.

Whitehaven’s existing Maules Creek coal mine is one of Australia’s most controversial mining projects and was strongly opposed by local farmers and Gomeroi Traditional Owners. Despite a massive community campaign that included a two year blockade, Whitehaven bulldozed hundreds of hectares of critically endangered forest that provide important habitat for rare and endangered species like the Superb Parrot, Regent Honeyeater and Squirrel Glider.

Lock the Gate Alliance has compiled a comprehensive list of Whitehaven’s law-breaking over the last 10 years. This compilation shows the company and its subsidiaries have been found guilty or investigated 35 times and incurred almost $1.5 million in total penalties.

The funds most exposed to Whitehaven, as a proportion of listed equities:

1. ESSSuper: 0.55% (Balanced option)
2. Cbus: 0.21% (Growth option)
3. State Super: 0.16% (Balanced option)

Equipsuper, Spirit Super and Super SA appear to have removed Whitehaven from their default options since December 2022. Vision Super’s default option appears to have picked up exposure to Whitehaven since June 2023.

Adaro

Adaro Energy Indonesia (Adaro) is a pure play coal mining company with plans to expand. Adaro produced nearly 66 million tonnes of coal in 2023 alone – an increase of 25% from 2021 levels – and has coal reserves of 1 billion tonnes. Burning all of these reserves would release 2 billion tonnes of CO2-e, equivalent to nearly double Indonesia’s total annual emissions. Adaro has stated plans to ramp up coal production to 67 million tonnes in 2024. To justify its business plans, Adaro presents global coal demand forecasts that are even higher than the International Energy Agency’s 2.5°C-aligned STEPS scenario.

Adaro also plans to build an aluminium smelter through a subsidiary which would be powered by new coal-fired power plants in North Kalimantan, a province of Indonesia on the island of Borneo. At full capacity, the smelter would produce 1.5 million tonnes of aluminium per annum and at least two-thirds of its power needs would be met by burning coal. The first phase of the smelter project includes building a new 1.1GW coal power plant, meaning the smelter would emit 5.2 MtCO2-e per annum throughout the first phase.

State Super is the only fund with material exposure to Adaro (0.08% of its Balanced option’s listed equities). Mercer appears to have removed Adaro from its default option since December 2022. Cbus’ default option appears to have picked up exposure to Adaro since June 2023.

TEPCO & Chubu Electric

TEPCO, Chubu and their joint venture JERA are betting against the climate goals of the Paris Agreement and undermining their own net zero emissions commitments by expanding the LNG and coal power sectors.

JERA is responsible for a whopping 150 MtCO2-e annually, or 14% of Japan’s annual emissions (2022). JERA currently generates 100% of its electricity from fossil fuels (75% gas, 25% coal) with no phase out timelines.

JERA is also pursuing significant involvement in the LNG sector, including gas fields, LNG terminals and LNG to power projects in countries such as Australia, Bangladesh, the United States, and Vietnam. This includes a stake in the Barossa gas field, discussed in the Santos case study above.

The funds most exposed to TEPCO, as a proportion of listed equities:

1. AMP: 0.02% (MySuper 1970s option)
2. Brighter Super: 0.02% (MySuper option)
3. GESB: 0.02% (My West State Super option)

Vision Super appears to have removed TEPCO from its default option since December 2022. CareSuper, Cbus, Mine Super and Russell Investments’ default options appear to have picked up exposure to TEPCO since December 2022.

The funds most exposed to Chubu, as a proportion of listed equities:

1. Vision Super: 0.07% (Balanced Growth option)
2. State Super: 0.06% (Balanced option)
3. AMP: 0.03% (MySuper 1970s option)

CareSuper, Cbus, Mine Super, NGS Super and Russell Investments’ default options appear to have picked up exposure to Chubu since December 2022.

Mitsubishi Corp

Mitsubishi Corp is a rare example of a company with a complete Climate Wreckers Index bingo card – it turned up in our research as expanding fossil fuels in all four areas considered for the Index: gas power plants, coal production, LNG terminals and oil and gas production.

Despite its stated goal of reducing its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to net zero by 2050, Mitsubishi is currently bidding for and investing in new LNG projects in Bangladesh and Vietnam.* If built, these proposed LNG projects are expected to operate for several decades and would continue to emit GHGs after 2050.

However, Mitsubishi has no policy to rule out or in any way restrict the development of new oil and gas fields or new LNG projects. Instead, the company plans to expand LNG and gas power operations and is at significant risk of contradicting the goal and the timeline of net zero emissions by 2050. These projects also risk destroying the lives and livelihoods of communities residing by these projects.

Mitsubishi is expanding its gas business by building gas fields, LNG terminals and LNG to power projects, contrary to the International Energy Agency’s Net Zero by 2050 scenario, which makes clear that achieving this goal means no new fossil fuel supply and an extremely limited and narrowing role for fossil fuels in electricity generation.

Meanwhile, Mitsubishi’s coal mining subsidiary is expanding its metallurgical coal mining operations in Australia, seeking a mine expansion that could see the mine operating beyond 2100!

The funds most exposed to Mitsubishi Corp companies,^ as a proportion of listed equities:

1. AMP: 0.06% (MySuper 1970s Super option)
2. HESTA: 0.05% (Balanced Growth option)
3. Qantas Super: 0.05% (Glidepath Altitude option)

Mine Super and State Super’s default options appear to have picked up exposure to Mitsubishi Corp companies since December 2022.

* According to financial subscription sources and news reports, in Bangladesh, Matarbari Summit LNG terminal and Matarbari LNG terminal and in Vietnam, Bac Lieu power plant and Long Son power plant

^ Excluding non-fossil fuel-related subsidiaries (see methodology below)

General Electric

General Electric (GE) has historically been heavily involved in coal power generation, both in the United States and also as a developer of coal power plants internationally. While the company announced it is exiting new coal power builds, it is planning major expansions in the LNG and gas power sectors.

GE’s stated mission of “addressing the climate crisis” rests in stark contradiction to pursuing and developing projects that are incompatible with global climate goals. Such a disconnect puts the company at risk of being accused of greenwashing.

Market Forces’ research has found GE is involved in new LNG to power plants in Vietnam and Bangladesh with combined capacity of almost 25 GW.

The funds most exposed to GE, as a proportion of listed equities:

1. IOOF: 0.23% (Balanced Investor Trust option)
2. Colonial First State: 0.22% (FirstChoice Wholesale Growth option)
3. Australian Retirement Trust: 0.21% (Lifecycle Balanced Pool option)

GESB appears to have removed GE from its default option since December 2022. CareSuper, Cbus, Colonial First State, IOOF, Mine Super, State Super and Vision Super’s default options appear to have picked up exposure to GE since December 2022.

¹ Only shows companies that matched in the disclosures. The parent company was always included.