<iframe src="//www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-K3L4M3" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden">

Features Australia

Business/Robbery etc

16 March 2019

9:00 AM

16 March 2019

9:00 AM

Is it $8.5 million of BHP’s shareholders’ money wasted on a directors’ virtue-signalling frolic to further their climate change credentials and justify the existence of a corporate vice-president for Sustainability and Climate Change? Or, as the New York Times suggests, a necessary response to mounting pressure from activist shareholders (including the politically-oriented industry superannuation funds)? Or is it simply a good investment in a potentially significant technological advance that could offset the huge CO2 emissions resulting from BHP’s role as the world’s largest mining company.

Already a subscriber? Log in

Easter flash sale:
10 issues for $1

Subscribe this Easter and get the next 10 issues of the magazine, plus website and app access, all for just $1.

  • Weekly delivery of the magazine
  • Unlimited access to spectator.com.au and app
  • Spectator Australia podcasts and newsletters
  • Full access to spectator.co.uk
Or

Unlock 3 articles a month

REGISTER

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first month for free, then just $2 a week for the remainder of your first year.


Comments

Easter flash sale: 10 issues for $1

Join the conversation with other Spectator Australia readers. Subscribe to leave a comment.

Already a subscriber? Log in

Close