Climate Change

Chevron

Brands and Associated Companies Texaco Caltex
InfluenceMap Score
E-
Performance Band
23%
Organisation Score
34%
Relationship Score
Sector:
Energy
Head​quarters:
San Ramon, United States
Brands and Associated Companies
Texaco, Caltex

Chevron appears to be actively opposing most areas of climate change related regulation. Despite acknowledging the science of climate change on its website, in 2014 it reportedly sponsored a US conference at which climate denial was disseminated. In addition, Chevron appears not to support the need for dramatic reductions in GHG emissions and in 2015 and 2016 CEO John Watson has repeatedly emphasized the threats of energy poverty and energy security against the case for urgent climate action. In 2015 Chevron appears to have opposed cap and trade legislation in California, and in 2016 CEO John Watson spoke to the press, appearing to oppose any government regulation for climate change, suggesting that policy such as emissions trading and carbon taxes constitute an unnecessary cost to "the consumer and ... business". Further to this, Chevron appears to have opposed energy efficiency legislation in Australia in 2014 and GHG emissions standards in Oregon and California in both 2014 and 2015. Over the same period, it has also been implicated in funding others to oppose renewable energy standards in California. In 2016 Chevron has repeatedly suggested that it is opposed to a transition away from fossil fuels. Accordingly, in 2014 CEO John Watson criticized policy intervention in the market to support renewable energy and in 2015 the company advocated for increased fossil fuel subsidies in South Africa. Chevron has also been reported to have “stayed away” from an industry initiative supporting climate negotiations at COP21. Chevron executives hold positions in numerous trade associations that appear to be resisting climate change related regulations and policies, including a leadership position in the American Petroleum Institute, and direct memberships of CEFIC, Business Roundtable and the US Chamber of Commerce.

QUESTIONS SOURCES Main Web Site Social Media CDP Responses Legislative Consultations Media Reports CEO Messaging Financial Disclosures EU Register
Climate Science Transparency 1 NS NS NS -2 0 1 NA
Climate Science Stance -1 -1 NA NS -1 -1 -1 NA
Need for climate regulations NS NS 0 NS NS -2 0 NA
UN Treaty Support -1 NS NS NS -1 -1 -1 NA
Transparency on Legislation -1 NA 1 NA NA NA NA 2
Carbon Tax NS NS NS NS -1 -1 -2 NA
Emissions Trading NS -2 -1 NS -2 -1 -1 NA
Energy Efficiency Standards NS NS -2 NS -1 NS NS NA
Renewable Energy Legislation NS NS NS NS -2 -1 0 NA
Energy Policy and Mix -1 -2 -1 NS -2 -1 -1 NA
GHG Emission Standards NS 1 -1 NS -2 -1 -1 NA
Disclosure on Relationships -1 NS -1 NA NA NA NA 1
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
15%
 
48%
 
71%
 
25%
 
56%
 
21%
 
19%
 
7%
 
40%

How to Read our Relationship Score Map

In this section, we depict graphically the relationships the corporation has with trade associations, federations, advocacy groups and other third parties who may be acting on their behalf to influence climate change policy. Each of the columns above represents one relationship the corporation appears to have with such a third party. In these columns, the top, dark section represents the strength of the relationship the corporation has with the influencer. For example if a corporation's senior executive also held a key role in the trade association, we would deem this to be a strong relationship and it would be on the far left of the chart above, with the weaker ones to the right. Click on these grey shaded upper sections for details of these relationships. The middle section contains a link to the organization score details of the influencer concerned, so you can see the details of its climate change policy influence. Click on the middle sections for for details of the trade associations. The lower section contains the organization score of that influencer, the lower the more negatively it is influencing climate policy.