SYDNEY, Wednesday 22 April 2026 — A settlement has been agreed in a lawsuit brought by Greenpeace Australia Pacific against fossil fuel multinational Woodside, being heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

Greenpeace Australia Pacific filed the lawsuit against Woodside in December 2023, alleging the fossil fuel giant had misrepresented both its prior emissions reductions, and its emissions reductions targets for 2025, 2030, and 2050.

Greenpeace alleged, among other things, that Woodside represented that its emissions reduction targets will achieve substantial reductions in its actual scope 1 and scope 2 emissions, when in fact Woodside will rely heavily on offsets to achieve a decrease in net emissions.

Greenpeace also alleged that Woodside represented that its emissions reduction targets are consistent with what the most recent climate science sets out as necessary to meet the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement when in fact Woodside’s emissions reduction targets do not include Woodside’s scope 3 emissions (which account for over 90% of Woodside’s emissions) and Woodside has plans to significantly expand its oil and gas production and processing and thereby the sum of its actual scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions would not materially decrease by 2030 and may increase past 2030.

Greenpeace filed expert evidence which it alleges supported its claim and demonstrated why Woodside’s claims were misleading or deceptive or likely to mislead or deceive.

Woodside has since changed how it represents its strategy to respond to climate change. For example, initially, Woodside displayed a ‘Net zero by 2050 or sooner’ banner on its website, but around July 2025, Woodside removed the banner from its website.

Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said:

“Greenpeace Australia Pacific cares about transparent and accurate climate disclosures, and in December 2023, took Woodside to court challenging its claims. 

“During the course of the case, Woodside changed how it was presenting its plans on carbon emissions from what they had said prior to us bringing this case. We take that as a win and have decided to continue the fight against fossil fuel corporations outside of the courts. 

“Settling this case does not signal the end of our fight against Woodside’s climate and nature-destroying gas projects. While we may have agreed to resolve our court action against Woodside, in which we alleged it made misleading and deceptive claims to investors regarding its climate plans, the fact is the court of public opinion will judge Woodside for the harm it inflicts on our climate.

“Woodside’s greed-driven appetite to expand fossil fuel production is accelerating the climate crisis, putting the environment and communities at risk.

“Greenpeace strongly supports public interest litigation as a crucial tool in democratic engagement to protect our planet and holding large corporations accountable for their contributions to climate change. 

“Investors and the public deserve accurate information about a company’s true climate impact and strategy, especially when those strategies are presented as ‘Paris-aligned’ — an absurd claim for a company responsible for one of the largest LNG export terminals in Australia, and now the United States. 

“The expansion of fossil fuels is incompatible with a 1.5C-aligned world — Greenpeace will continue to campaign to fast-track the transition to homegrown, clean, affordable wind and solar energy, the only solution to the energy crisis we are currently all facing globally.”

Greenpeace and Woodside agreed for the proceeding to be dismissed on the basis that each party bears its own costs.

-ENDS-

Media contact

Kate O’Callaghan on 0406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org
Kimberley Bernard on 0407 581 404 or kbernard@greenpeace.org

Greenpeace Australia Pacific settles in lawsuit against Woodside

A new study finds that more than 70 percent of these protected zones are exposed to high levels of wastewater pollutants, making corals and other marine life more vulnerable to climate change.

By Teresa Tomassoni

Marine protected areas are designed to conserve coral reefs and other ocean ecosystems by restricting human activity within their boundaries. But most don’t account for one of the most severe and widespread threats to marine life that originates on land: sewage.

Sewage Is Threatening Coral Reefs Around the World, Even in Marine Protected Areas

In Florida, majority Black and brown communities face hotter temperatures, rising seas and more damaging storms. One advocacy group is considering other ways of helping them.

By Amy Green

Since returning to the White House for his second term, President Donald Trump and his administration have drastically cut environmental programs and programs designed to serve disadvantaged communities and communities of color. These are groups with the fewest resources to deal with climate impacts such as hotter temperatures and more damaging storms.

Trump’s Environmental Cuts Further Marginalize Vulnerable Communities