Investigation finds EY produced deceptive report for gas lobby, influencing government policy
Ernst & Young (EY) is under fire for producing distorted research for Australian Energy Producers which misrepresents the future role of gas in Australia’s energy transition and has been used to influence government policy, in an investigation from Climate Integrity. The analysis further reveals how Australia’s big consultancy firms are concerningly compromised by fossil fuel money.
EY authored the flawed ‘Future Role of Natural Gas in Australia and the Region’ report for fossil fuel lobbyists, Australian Energy Producers (AEP), in 2023. AEP strategically used the EY report to push for new gas fields, pipelines, and long-term LNG export contracts, via their private lobbying and submission to the Federal Government’s Future Gas Strategy, which now supports gas expansion through 2050 and beyond.
Independent analysis by the Institute for Sustainable Futures at UTS, commissioned by Climate Integrity, analysed the AEP’s submission, including EY's report. The analysis found that scenarios promoting a significant role for gas through to 2050 are not consistent with limiting global warming to 1.5°C. In 1.5°C-aligned models, gas production and use decline substantially, requiring either a complete phase-out or reliance on unproven levels of carbon capture and storage.
Further analysis by Climate Integrity found that EY had used unverifiable scenarios – including 134 non-existent “IPCC” pathways – that inflated future gas demand, and unfairly assumed Australia could carve out a bigger share of a shrinking fossil fuel export market, leaving others to cut deeper.
“AEP, with the support of EY, produced sophisticated disinformation that misled policymakers and influenced the national climate strategy to expand gas production, and delay the energy transition under the guise of credible analysis,” says Claire Synder, Director of Climate Integrity.
“This kind of disinformation is called data washing, and is particularly harmful because it’s so hard to spot. It positions itself as an independent technical assessment and uses the language of expertise and the aesthetics of research to embed fossil fuel-friendly narratives deep within the policy-making process. The so-called ‘independent research’ gives vested interests a veil of credibility, which they exploit to lobby parliamentarians and the broader public, distorting the framing of policy debates.”
Using this flawed EY modelling as ‘evidence’, AEP told the Federal Government in its Future Gas Strategy submission: “independent analysis confirms new gas supply is needed in all net zero pathways” – a false claim that contradicts authoritative scientific bodies, internationally and in Australia, including IPCC, IEA, IRENA, UNEP and CSIRO.
“EY’s hands are tied by the fossil fuel industry,” says Snyder. “Despite the firm claiming a commitment to the Paris agreement goals and promoting a strong positive sustainability brand it also continues to provide services that directly promote fossil fuel expansion. Their real impact lies in what they enable – modelling, branding, and lobbying that shape government decisions and public narratives in favour of whoever pays.”
Impact and Implications
Since publishing the Future Gas Strategy in May 2024, the Federal Government has approved 12 major coal and gas projects, and issued 9 offshore exploration permits for gas supply, with projected lifetime emissions reaching billions of tonnes of CO2 equivalent. This expansion directly contradicts the International Energy Agency’s Net Zero by 2050 pathway.
EY’s report is now under legal scrutiny, with Climate Integrity and the Environmental Defenders Office formally requesting the ACCC investigate the AEP for allegedly making misleading or deceptive claims in its submission to the Federal Government’s Future Gas Strategy. The complaint has also been put to the Senate Inquiry on Information Integrity in Climate Change and Energy.
AEP is the peak body for oil and gas producers in Australia. It represents 52 full members who account for 95% of national petroleum production. It also includes over 100 associate members – including major consultancies EY, PwC, and KPMG.
“This issue goes beyond poor modelling,” says Claire Synder. “It speaks to how compromised Australia’s ‘big four’ consultancies really are. Fossil fuel companies have deep pockets and when they pay consulting firms to produce modelling that aims to justify their existence and influence government policy and public opinion, how can we expect them to remain neutral?”
Climate Integrity has engaged EY’s leadership on the findings of its investigation, and requested that EY publicly acknowledge the report’s inaccuracies; commit to no longer providing advisory services that support the expansion of fossil fuels; and drop their AEP membership. EY has acknowledged concerns, but will take no immediate action.
