Open Letter Requesting to Engage with TotalEnergies, ExxonMobil, Santos and ENEOS to stop the Papua LNG project
In order to stop the Papua LNG project, 9 NGOs jointly submitted the open letter to 50 financial institutions who have shares of TotalEnergies, ExxonMobil, Santos and ENEOS.
January 20, 2025
Dear Shareholders of TotalEnergies, ExxonMobil, Santos and ENEOS,
Open Letter Requesting to Engage with TotalEnergies, ExxonMobil, Santos and ENEOS to stop the Papua LNG project
Asian People’s Movement on Debt and Development (APMDD)
BankTrack
Center for Environment Law and Community Rights (CELCOR)
Japan Center for a Sustainable Environment and Society (JACSES)
Jubilee Australia
Market Forces
Reclaim Finance
Solutions for Our Climate (SFOC)
Urgewald
TotalEnergies, ExxonMobil, Santos and ENEOS Xplora Inc. (a major subsidiary of ENEOS Holdings, Inc.) are investing in the Papua LNG project which is aimed at developing the Elk and Antelope gas fields in the Gulf Province of southeastern Papua New Guinea and constructing liquefied natural gas (LNG) production facilities near Port Moresby. However, this project is not aligned with the 1.5 degree goal of the Paris Agreement and lacks the “Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC)” with affected Indigenous Peoples as required in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
We, as civil society organizations (CSOs), are sending this request to 50 financial institutions that hold shares in the four owners of the Papua LNG project mentioned above. We are asking you to engage with the four companies to stop developing the Papua LNG project. The main three issues concerned are the following:
Issue 1. The Papua LNG project is not aligned with the 1.5-degree goal of the Paris Agreement, nor are the business plans of these four companies.
The Papua LNG project is expected to emit approximately 240 million MtCO2e (metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent) over the entire lifecycle of the project. The International Energy Agency (IEA), in its 2023 report, titled “Net Zero Roadmap: A Global Pathway to Keep the 1.5 °C Goal in Reach”, reiterated the conclusion from its 2021 report that in order to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and maintain 50% chance of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees, no new coal, oil or natural gas projects are needed. Therefore, the currently planned Papua LNG project is not aligned with the 1.5-degree goal of the Paris Agreement.
Although the four companies aim to achieve net zero by 2050, they have not committed to stop developing new fossil fuel projects (*1-4). Moreover, Financial Exclusions Tracker (*5) notes that 33 financial institutions have already ended investment in TotalEnergies, ExxonMobil has been excluded by 82 institutions, Santos by 29 institutions, and ENEOS by 10 institutions, citing climate action as a reason for divestments. The LNG expansion plans of these four companies, including the Papua LNG project, demonstrate they are misaligned with the goal of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees. Investors must engage with these companies to oppose the Papua LNG project. If the companies continue to pursue LNG expansion, investors should use their power to drive leadership change and deliver 1.5 degree-aligned strategy shifts.
Issue 2. The “Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC)” required in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) has not been clearly secured.
CELCOR, a non government organization (NGO) in Papua New Guinea, has expressed concerns that the project has failed to prove that the communities have received accurate information about the project’s environmental impacts or climate impacts, and note that a protest was held in 2023 to block the waterways used by the project. Local authorities, members of Parliament, and Indigenous Peoples also pointed out that there are omissions in the list of landowners released by the government. Fundamental to the ‘consent’ aspects of FPIC, communities must be fully informed of their FPIC rights and receive accurate information about the project’s climate, environmental, health and human rights risks before any decisions are made. The project has not demonstrated this. There are also issues such as police presence at consultation meetings with Indigenous Peoples. Clearly, TotalEnergies and other partners have failed to show that the FPIC of affected Indigenous Peoples has been secured. Even though the 4 companies claim to respect the rights of Indigenous Peoples and have related policies, those policies have failed to ensure the FPIC of affected Indigenous Peoples regarding this project.
Issue 3. Offsetting measures for impacts on biodiversity are insufficient.
The project area includes 48 new-to-formal science species and 15 species undescribed by formal science. TotalEnergies states that the project will clear 820 hectares of forest (including 662 hectares of primary forest), which is expected to impact biodiversity. To mitigate the impact on biodiversity, the operator intends to offset deforestation by planting 1,000 hectares of forest with zero net deforestation. However, afforestation with secondary forests, which have a degraded value compared to primary forests, cannot restore the original biodiversity and hydrological service values, and zero net deforestation does not fully compensate for deforestation of established forests. Thus, the operator’s biodiversity offset measures are inadequate and violate the Requirement 10 of the International Finance Corporation (IFC)’s Performance Standard 6 (*6).
＊ ＊ ＊
Therefore, we request shareholders of TotalEnergies, ExxonMobil, Santos and ENEOS to undertake the following engagement with these four companies:
- To engage with the four companies to stop developing the Papua LNG project and other new fossil fuel projects all over the world.
- To vote against re-elections of directors, remuneration and financial statements at the annual general meetings, to clearly oppose fossil fuel expansion plans.
- To stop buying new bonds from these companies, in order to halt providing fresh capital that can be used to fund climate-wrecking projects.
- To publicly define a time-bound escalation strategy for the four companies, with a complete divestment from shares and bonds as the last step of this strategy if the companies continue to develop new fossil fuel projects.
We would appreciate it if you could send us your response regarding this request and the result of your engagement via email, by February 20. Your response will be published on our website after excluding personal names and contact details.
Thank you for your consideration and we look forward to receiving your response.
Contact:
Japan Center for a Sustainable Environment and Society (JACSES)
Yuki Tanabe
tanabe@jacses.org
Ayako Honkawa
honkawa@jacses.org
Note:
*1: https://totalenergies.com/company/ambition
*2: https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/-/media/global/files/advancing-climate-solutions/2024/2024-advancing-climate-solutions-report.pdf
*3: https://www.santos.com/sustainability/climate-overview/
*4: https://ssl4.eir-parts.net/doc/5020/ir_material_for_fiscal_ym3/164364/00.pdf
*5: https://financialexclusionstracker.org/
*6: https://www.ifc.org/content/dam/ifc/doc/2010/2012-ifc-performance-standards-en.pdf
The letter was submitted to:
1. Amundi/Crédit Agricole
2. Argo Investments
3. Asset Management One Co., Ltd
4. Bank of America Corp
5. Bank of New York Mellon Corp
6. Blackrock Inc
7. BNP Paribas
8. California Public Employees’ Retirement System
9. Capital Group Cos Inc
10. Charles Schwab Corp
11. Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation
12. Daiwa Asset Management Co., Ltd
13. Deutsche Bank AG
14. Dimensional Fund Advisors LP
15. Dodge & Cox
16. Equity Trustees Ltd
17. Eurizon Capital S.A.
18. Firetrail Investments Pty Ltd
19. Florida State Board of Administration
20. FMR LLC
21. Franklin Resources Inc
22. Geode Capital Management LLC
23. Government Pension Investment Fund Japan
24. GQG Partners LLC
25. HUB24 Ltd
26. Invesco Ltd
27. JPMorgan Chase & Co
28. Kochi Shinkin Bank
29. Legal & General Group PLC
30. Marsh & McLennan Cos Inc
31. Massachusetts Financial Services Co
32. Mellon Investments Corporation
33. Mitsubishi UFJ Asset Management Co., Ltd
34. Morgan Stanley
35. Nomura Asset Management Co., Ltd
36. Norges Bank Investment Management
37. Northern Trust Corp
38. Nuveen LLC
39. Prusik Investment Management LLP
40. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
41. State Street Corp
42. Sumitomo Mitsui DS Asset Management Company, Limited
43. Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Asset Management Co., Ltd/Nikko Asset Management Co., Ltd
44. T Rowe Price Group Inc
45. TD Asset Management Inc
46. Tokio Marine Holdings Inc
47. UBS AG
48. Union Investment
49. Vanguard Group Inc
50. Wellington Management Group LLP
