Mining Giant Fortescue Slams Big Oil for Misstep on Renewables Transition
Perth, Australia – March 24, 2025 – Fortescue Metals Group, one of the world’s largest iron ore producers, has publicly criticized Big Oil companies for their sluggish approach to renewable energy adoption, accusing them of prioritizing short-term profits over long-term sustainability. Speaking at a renewable energy conference in Perth on Monday, Fortescue’s executive chairman, Andrew Forrest, argued that oil giants like BP and Shell are misreading market demands and underestimating the potential of renewables to reshape global energy systems.
Forrest’s comments come as Fortescue accelerates its own green energy initiatives, with a bold target to eliminate fossil fuel use in its Australian iron ore operations by 2030. The company estimates that transitioning to renewables—primarily solar, wind, and green hydrogen—could save it $1.2 billion annually in operating costs while positioning it as a leader in sustainable mining. “Big Oil is betting on another two decades of fossil fuels when the world wants clean energy now,” Forrest said. “They’re stuck in the past while we’re building the future.”
In recent years, major oil companies have scaled back their renewable energy investments. BP, for instance, reduced its wind power portfolio and shifted focus to oil and gas projects after reporting record profits in 2023, driven by high oil prices. Shell, meanwhile, has slowed its push into solar and hydrogen, citing shareholder pressure for near-term returns. These moves contrast sharply with Fortescue’s strategy, which includes a $6.2 billion investment in renewable energy projects over the next five years, including a massive green hydrogen plant in Queensland.
Global energy data paints a complex picture. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), clean energy investment reached $1.7 trillion in 2024, surpassing fossil fuel investments of $1.1 trillion for the second consecutive year. Yet fossil fuels still account for over 75% of the global energy mix, and oil demand remains robust, particularly in developing economies. Critics of Fortescue’s position argue that Big Oil’s cautious approach reflects practical realities—renewables can’t yet fully replace the scale and reliability of fossil fuel infrastructure.
Forrest dismissed such arguments as shortsighted, pointing to Fortescue’s timeline of 20 months to achieve significant renewable integration in its operations. “Big Oil thinks in 20-year increments; we’re proving it can be done in 20 months,” he stated, urging oil companies to pivot faster or risk obsolescence. He also highlighted the growing demand from customers, including steelmakers in Asia and Europe, for low-carbon products—a market Fortescue aims to dominate with its green iron ore.
Energy analysts are divided on the debate. Some see Fortescue’s aggressive timeline as overly optimistic, noting that scaling renewables for heavy industry involves logistical and technological hurdles, such as grid reliability and hydrogen storage. Others argue that Big Oil’s reluctance risks missing a critical window to build expertise in renewables, especially as governments tighten emissions regulations and investors increasingly favor sustainable portfolios.
The clash underscores broader tensions in the energy transition. While Fortescue positions itself as a pioneer, Big Oil’s hesitance reflects the industry’s deep-rooted reliance on fossil fuels—a dependency that won’t unravel overnight. As the debate heats up, all eyes will be on whether Fortescue’s gamble pays off, potentially setting a new benchmark for industrial giants worldwide.
