BHP has made grand climate commitments, but leaked documents reveal the mining giant is backpedaling on key projects, raising questions about its dedication to reducing emissions. The company shelved a major solar farm and delayed a larger renewable energy development, while continuing to rely on diesel-powered trucks. This reversal matters not only for the additional greenhouse gas pollution but also for BHP's potential to drive global industrial decarbonization.
BHP's Climate Backtrack
Internal memos obtained by Guardian Australia and the ABC show that BHP canceled its first big investment under its decarbonization plan—a massive solar farm—after board approval. A larger solar, wind, and battery project in Western Australia has been delayed by at least five years. The company also doubled down on diesel trucks, contradicting its pledge to switch to electric vehicles powered by renewables. These actions conflict with BHP's own climate targets.
Corporate Climate Retreat
BHP is not alone in stepping back from climate action. Rio Tinto has cut spending on emission-reduction projects and disbanded its decarbonization unit. Many corporations cite fear of Donald Trump's return as an excuse to drop climate commitments. However, BHP's scale of reversal is significant. The company's full decarbonization could cost US$7.5 billion over 25 years, yet it generates equivalent revenue from its WA operations in under six months.
Historic Polluter, Current Responsibility
BHP is known as the Big Australian, but it is also a historic global-scale polluter. The thinktank InfluenceMap ranks it as the 31st biggest cumulative contributor to the climate crisis, responsible for over 11 billion tonnes of CO2 since its inception. While BHP has sold some coal mines and its petroleum arm, it still mines metallurgical coal and other minerals. Selling assets does not reduce global emissions; the operations continue under new owners.
Emissions Reduction Claims vs. Reality
BHP claims a 36% reduction in emissions since 2020, ahead of its 2030 target. However, this reduction stems from renewable energy purchases in Chile and the suspension of its nickel operations. Direct onsite emissions from diesel persist, and scope-three emissions—from product use—have increased by 7% since 2020, an additional 25 million tonnes annually. This dwarfs the claimed reductions.
Government Policies Undermine Climate Goals
The Australian Labor government sends mixed signals. While pledging net-zero by 2050, it provides over $4 billion annually in diesel rebates to mining companies, with BHP as the biggest beneficiary—receiving about $620 million last year. This subsidy makes fossil fuels cheaper, discouraging uptake of electric trucks and renewable energy. The safeguard mechanism allows unlimited carbon offsets instead of direct cuts, further weakening climate action.
BHP could reduce its reliance on offsets and does not need the diesel rebate. Stronger policies are needed to encourage the company to live up to its rhetoric and accelerate the transition to clean energy.
