CO2 / PPM /Annual Averages / Data Source: noaa.gov 1980 338.91ppm 1981 340.11ppm 1982 340.86ppm 1983 342.53ppm 1984 344.07ppm 1985 345.54ppm 1986 346.97ppm 1987 348.68ppm 1988 351.16ppm 1989 352.78ppm 1990 354.05ppm 1991 355.39ppm 1992 356.1ppm 1993 356.83ppm 1994 358.33ppm 1995 360.18ppm 1996 361.93ppm 1997 363.04ppm 1998 365.7ppm 1999 367.8ppm 2000 368.97ppm 2001 370.57ppm 2002 372.59ppm 2003 375.14ppm 2004 376.96ppm 2005 378.97ppm 2006 381.13ppm 2007 382.9ppm 2008 385.01ppm 2009 386.5ppm 2010 388.76ppm 2011 390.63ppm 2012 392.65ppm 2013 395.39ppm 2014 397.34ppm 2015 399.65ppm 2016 403.09ppm 2017 405.22ppm 2018 407.62ppm 2019 410.07ppm 2020 412.44ppm 2021 414.72ppm 2022 418.56ppm 2023 421.08ppm 2024 424.61ppm 2025 427.35ppm
CO2 / PPM /Annual Averages / Data Source: noaa.gov 1980 338.91ppm 1981 340.11ppm 1982 340.86ppm 1983 342.53ppm 1984 344.07ppm 1985 345.54ppm 1986 346.97ppm 1987 348.68ppm 1988 351.16ppm 1989 352.78ppm 1990 354.05ppm 1991 355.39ppm 1992 356.1ppm 1993 356.83ppm 1994 358.33ppm 1995 360.18ppm 1996 361.93ppm 1997 363.04ppm 1998 365.7ppm 1999 367.8ppm 2000 368.97ppm 2001 370.57ppm 2002 372.59ppm 2003 375.14ppm 2004 376.96ppm 2005 378.97ppm 2006 381.13ppm 2007 382.9ppm 2008 385.01ppm 2009 386.5ppm 2010 388.76ppm 2011 390.63ppm 2012 392.65ppm 2013 395.39ppm 2014 397.34ppm 2015 399.65ppm 2016 403.09ppm 2017 405.22ppm 2018 407.62ppm 2019 410.07ppm 2020 412.44ppm 2021 414.72ppm 2022 418.56ppm 2023 421.08ppm 2024 424.61ppm 2025 427.35ppm
Briefs

Proxy adviser backs investor campaign against Woodside chair

The position of Richard Goyder, chair of the energy giant Woodside, has come under further pressure as proxy adviser CGI Glass Lewis has told its investor clients to vote against his reappointment.

CGI Glass Lewis is the first proxy adviser to release its recommendations for the upcoming Woodside AGM on 24 April. The decision follows a sustained investor campaign around Woodside’s climate policies.

In 2022, the firm’s Climate Plan was rejected by nearly half of all shareholders. In 2024, activist shareholders are criticising that the firm’s Scope 1 and 2 emission reduction plans are not Paris aligned and that it continues to invest more in new oil and gas extraction.

Among others, Woodside’s development of an oil and gas plant in the Western Australian Burrup Hub which could emit double the greenhouse gas emissions as all other new Australian fossil fuel projects combined, according to Greenpeace.



Net Zero Investor's Nature Positive Investment Forum

24 April, London Stock Exchange sign up here



This year, both the Australian superannuation fund HESTA and the Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility (ACCR) have put pressure on Woodside to overhaul its leadership. HESTA has called on the company to take on new directors who are better equipped at managing climate challenges while ACCR has campaigned against the reappointment of Woodside chair Goyder. 

It is not unusual for CGI to advise against the reappointment of directors. Its voting policy guideline for the Australian market states that it believes shareholders should hold directors accountable for management and policy decisions through the election of directors. ”We will recommend shareholders vote against the re-election of one or more members of the board if we consider they have not handled key issues effectively” CGI Glass Lewis states.

However, the decision to oppose a reappointment on climate grounds was unusual, according to Brynn O’Brien, executive director at the ACCR: “It is a world first for an incumbent chair of a major oil and gas company to face the threat of being held personally accountable for company climate failings.

“We are unsurprised that CGI Glass Lewis has also recommended a vote against Woodside’s climate plan. Despite four years of persistent investor feedback Woodside has once again failed to bring anything of substance to the table” she added.


More on this:

Investors put pressure on Woodside Energy over climate concerns


Related Content