Washington: Australian mining billionaire Andrew “Twiggy” Forrest has launched a scathing critique of US President Donald Trump’s energy policies, labeling them as “gobsmackingly illogical.” Forrest, who is in New York for a major United Nations summit, accused Trump of yielding to oil and gas donors.
Forrest and his company, Fortescue Metals Group, are advocates for a net zero emissions regime for global shipping, a plan expected to be formally adopted next month by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO). This framework aims to introduce a carbon price and mandate the use of green fuels in an industry responsible for 3% of global emissions. However, the Trump administration has expressed strong opposition, describing the initiative as a “global carbon tax on Americans” and threatening retaliatory measures against supporting countries.
The Green Pioneer, Fortescue’s green ammonia-powered ship, docked in New York ahead of the UN summit, which will see attendance from Trump, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, and numerous other leaders. Forrest has also initiated a media campaign, taking out full-page advertisements in The New York Times and other New York venues, urging a shift in US policy.
Forrest’s Critique of US Energy Stance
In an interview, Forrest expressed surprise at the US stance, noting, “The Gulf states obviously aren’t in love with the policy … going to green shipping impacts their bottom line. But I’m really surprised to see the US line up on that side.” He further criticized the Republican Party’s historical alignment with the oil and gas sector, stating,
“[The Republicans] won an election on promoting oil and gas and saying global warming’s a hoax. There’s not a scientist in the world – and soon there won’t be many citizens in the world – who believe that.”
Trump’s administration has consistently promoted fossil fuel expansion, encapsulated in the slogan “drill baby, drill.” In August, US officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, condemned the IMO’s proposed policy, arguing it favored China and would increase consumer costs.
Economic and Environmental Implications
Forrest countered these claims, asserting that the policy is economically sound and environmentally necessary. He argued,
“My very clear message to the US administration is you shouldn’t care if your energy is black, white or brindle. To quarantine your people to just oil and gas, and geopoliticize it by saying, ‘Oh, you’re backing China instead of us’ – no. You, America, should be getting the lowest cost, highest volume energy you can into your economy.”
Australia’s stance on the maritime net zero framework remains undecided, with Federal Transport Minister Catherine King confirming the government’s position is still under consideration. Forrest emphasized Australia’s potential in renewable energy, stating, “We have more sun and wind than most countries in the entire world. We have very little oil. No bunker fuel oil. No diesel. So why the hell would we not vote for [it]?”
Global Reaction and Future Prospects
The Lowy Institute has described the maritime net zero proposal as “historic,” marking it as the first global carbon tax on a major polluting sector. Despite this, US opposition has led to calls for revisions from some major shipping companies. Reuters reported that over a dozen firms have expressed “grave concerns” about the draft framework.
The US State Department has reportedly increased pressure on the framework’s supporters, warning of potential tariffs, visa restrictions, and port levies. The department is also encouraging allied nations to consider similar countermeasures.
As the October IMO extraordinary session approaches, the international community remains divided. The outcome of this session could significantly influence global shipping practices and the broader fight against climate change. Observers will be keenly watching to see if Forrest’s advocacy and the mounting global pressure will sway US policy in favor of greener shipping practices.
