Australian sport accepts up to $18 million a year from fossil fuel companies despite mounting risks of reputational damage, a new study shows.
The report prepared by Swinburne University for the Australian Conservation Foundation is the first to quantify coal, gas and oil sponsorships in sport.
It comes amid heated debate on the role of ethics in sponsorships after Gina Rinehart's mining company axed a netball deal following player concerns about racist comments made by her late father.
The study identified 51 partnerships between sports and coal, gas and oil brands, as well as providers of gas and electricity, worth an estimated $14 to $18 million a year.
That's across Australia's 14 top-tier sports including Australian Rules football, rugby league, rugby union, soccer, cricket, basketball, netball, tennis and six major Olympic sports including cycling and swimming.
The study says companies have leveraged those sponsorships "to greenwash their role as major climate polluters" while contributing to global warming that could make some sports unplayable.
"By 2040 heatwaves in Sydney and Melbourne could reach highs of 50C and threaten the viability of iconic sporting events such as the MCG Boxing Day Test and the Australian Open," the report warns.
But some of Australia's most high-profile teams continue to accept the sponsorships, even as they act to reduce their own carbon footprints and promote their climate conscious behaviours.
The report uses AFL club Fremantle Dockers as a case study to demonstrate the pitfalls.
Woodside Energy, a major sponsor of the club since 2010, was revealed as one of the 10 worst climate polluters in Australia by the Clean Energy Regulator in 2019/20.
Around the same time, the Dockers joined the Sports Environment Alliance. Earlier this year released its own sustainability strategy, with a focus on climate change education and action.
Those pitfalls now appear to be materialising with high-profile Dockers fans and insiders releasing an open letter last week saying Woodside shouldn't continue as a sponsor in the face of climate change.
The report's lead author Emma Sherry says fossil fuel companies provide a relatively small slice of the sponsorship pie, which may make it easier to shift.
"Sport organisations have a history of moving away from corporate sponsors with growing public awareness of their harms - as they have done around tobacco, alcohol and gambling," said Professor Sherry, who specialises in sport development.
"While we have seen some sport teams move away from coal, oil and gas sponsorship, most have simply focused on climate campaigns and environmental sustainability initiatives rather than more direct actions."
The Dockers declined to comment on the report but Woodside says it stands by the sponsorship and the mutual social benefits it provides.
The company says it's working to reduce its net equity greenhouse gas emissions, while investing in products and services consumers need as they reduce their emissions.
Hancock Prospecting, which primarily mines iron ore and only recently acquired natural gas producer Senex, also declined to comment on the report's reference to its axed $15 million deal with Netball Australia, among other sponsorships.
The offer was withdrawn after Diamonds players expressed concern about ugly comments her father Lang Hancock made about Indigenous people in 1984.
The company and Mrs Rinehart have since said it's unnecessary for sports organisations to be used as a vehicle for social or political causes and there are better ways to progress issues "without virtue signalling".
Netball Australia boss Kelly Ryan says sports organisations have an important role to play in social conversations but there's also a need for "balance" to ensure continued investment in sport.
The study was funded by the Australian Conservation Foundation, which Prof Sherry said was the extent of the group's involvement. It has not been peer reviewed.
The foundation is challenging Woodside's new offshore Scarborough gas project in the Federal Court.
