Woodside in talks to buy $20b BHP Oil, Gas Assets., page-10

I think they do plan to benefit form ESG but judiciously. E.g. They have not put much money into Cu for around a decade. They have got their fingers in a number of Cu pies Including Oak Dam & Solgold (which I hold). Olympic dam cna be ramped yup too. They did a contract for Ni with Ni West & Ni & PGM's with Eagle is in the wings. The Jantsen project is a huge ESG play because with Global warming there will be a shortage of water and what there is will need to be used efficiently that's where the Potash comes in. The K+ actually catalyses uptake of water for the soil improving crop yields. So in short IMVHO they're doing exactly enough to benefit form ESG to not "screw the pooch". (Sorry if I don't sound like a BHP blue blood).

I did fight for BHP with this post on the DNK thread today 16/08/21 07:49 Post #: 55312198
With due respect. From BHP's disclosures, I think they plan it as a multi-decade play so their action in conjunction with Mosiac will to some extent determine the potash cycle and world food production during global warming. I followed BHP with their belief that Cu demand would keep going in 2011 and suffered for it. Their actions on capital restraint in project in conjunction with Rio and other major miners in the decade since have set us up for the super or very strong cycle in green metals. I suspect this week we will see further action of devolution of their oil assets.

I could draw a parallel to OZL who destroyed a huge amount of capital, then changed their name and now look to have redeemed themselves. Even I am prepared to look past previous actions (from my jealousy) now that I've had some good results too.

Note: I debated whether to say any of this, but BHP carries the flag for Aust. and is at the coal face (pun intended) with the battle with China for Aust. values and I disagreed with the very strong sentiment displayed in support of your comment.