The revolt of giant oil shareholders on the green strategy in U-Turn

Petroleum giant BP Thursday is preparing for a violent reaction in its annual general meeting (AGM), with a choir of unhappy investors who plan to express their concerns about the company’s green strategy.

A planned resolution on the re -election of the outgoing president of BP, Helge Lund, has been considered an opportunity for investors to indicate the discontent of climate change, corporate governance and the influence of the American coverage fund Elliott Management.

The besieged specialty of Great Britain, who has been left behind the companions of the industry more focused on hydrocarbons in recent years, has tried to solve something of an identity crisis by launching a fundamental restart.

Seeking to reconstruct the confidence of investors and increase the yields of short -term shareholders, BP in February promised to reduce renewable expenditure and increase annual expense in its main oil and gas business.

The restart of the strategy was widely welcome by energy analysts, and the CEO of BP, Murray Auchincloss, has since said that the pivot attracted a “significant interest” in the non -basic assets of the company.

The Legal British & General Asset Manager, a leading BP shareholder with a participation of approximately 1%, said it intends to vote against Lund’s re -election on Thursday, a position that would challenge the BP management recommendation.

Legal & General cited dissatisfaction on the main revisions to the company’s energy strategy, together with the BP decision not to allow a shareholder to vote on the new address.

The Legal & General plans are aligned with those of the International Assets Manager Robeco, the United Kingdom’s pension funds and the border to the coast, as well as activist investors, including the Dutch group, follow this, all which have indicated that they will vote against Lund’s re -election.

However, the gigantic background of Sovereign wealth of Norway and several American pension funds have said that they will support Lund’s re -election. The institutional services of institutional shareholders of Proxy Advisors and Glass Lewis have also recommended a vote in favor of Lund, according to Reuters.

There the way for a shareholders’ confrontation in the AGM of BP, and the observers closely monitor the level of opposition of investors to the re -election of Lund. Historically, votes against the president of BP have remained below 10%.

A BP spokesman declined to comment when CNBC contacted.

The renewed BP approach in oil and gas occurs at a time when the energy firm in London is firmly in the center of attention as a potential acquisition objective. The British rival Shell and the American oil giants Exxon Mobil and Chevron have been promoted as possible suitors.

“We value the significant steps that BP has taken in recent years with respect to its climate -related commitments and efforts, which we have supported through extensive and constructive dialogues, destined to create a long -term value as the climatic transition takes place,” said the Legal & General Investment Administration team on April 11.

“However, we are deeply concerned about the recent substantive reviews carried out to the company’s strategy as announced on the day of capital markets of 2025 on February 26, together with the decision not to allow a shareholder to vote on the newly modified climatic transition strategy in the AGM 2025,” they added.

Legal & General said that the announcement of BP earlier this month that Lund will renounce, probably next year, it was seen “positively”, but the continuous concern about the company’s succession plan means that it intends to vote against the AGM resolution.

Five years ago, BP became one of the first energy giants to announce plans to reduce emissions to Net Zero “by 2050 or before.” As part of that impulse, BP promised to reduce emissions by up to 40% by 2030 and increase investment in renewable energy projects.

The company reduced this emission target at 20% to 30% in February 2023, saying at that time that it needed to continue investing in oil and gas to meet global demand.

Robeco said in his reason that BP had refused to repeat a so -called “climate” vote for his review of the strategy, despite requesting the previously support of the shareholders for the previous transition objectives and “more ambitious” of the company.

“We have unsuccessfully requested a feedback mechanism so consistent several times, even in a public letter along with other investors with GBP 5 billion in assets under administration,” said Michiel Van Eigh, Robeco Voting Chief.

“As a result, we have a growing concern for the company’s resilience through the energy transition and about the consistency of its approach to climate governance, which leads us to vote against the president and president of the Security and Sustainability Committee,” he added.

It is believed that Elliott’s management, meanwhile, is pressing BP to minimize low carbon investments and prioritize oil and gas. Recently it arose that the activist investor has built a participation of almost 5% in BP, which makes it one of the largest shareholders in the company.

The activist shareholder follows this, that he has a long story of pressing Big Oil doing more to address climate change, said the need to vote against Lund had not disappeared after the news of his imminent departure. The group added that investors concerned about good governance should express their dissatisfaction.

“Voting against the Board is the only way for shareholders to express their dissent about BP’s refusal to allow a vote on their U -strategy,” said Mark Van Baal, founder of Siting This, in a statement.

“Now, the Board has unilaterally changed a course without asking shareholders to support a vote. This raises serious government concerns. It seems that BP leadership is afraid of its own shareholders,” he added.

BP shares have dropped almost 10% in the year they will be held.