ConocoPhillips

InfluenceMap Score
E+
Performance Band
43%
Organisation Score
31%
Relationship Score
Modifications to InfluenceMap Scoring
Sector:
Energy
Head​quarters:
Houston, United States

ConocoPhillips has previously taken an oppositional stance with regards to action on climate change, with CEO Ryan Lance appearing to express doubts about achieving the necessary level of emission reductions whilst meeting global energy demand in 2015. More recently, the company has moved this position, stating support in 2019 for large-scale action to keep global warming below 2°C. This follows ConocoPhillips calling on the U.S. to remain in the Paris Agreement in 2017. Despite this top-line positioning, however, the company does not appear to support the stringent measures recognized as necessary by the IPCC on the level of detailed climate and energy policy engagement. In particular, ConocoPhillips appears not to support a swift transition away from GHG emission intense energy and uses “grassroots activities” to politically organize in favour of measures that will maintain the role of fossil fuels in the energy mix, including campaigning in favour of fracking and oil sands production. The company’s climate policy position and other communications argue that policy initiatives should be practical and cost-effective, should not advantage specific energy sources and should not overly impact the economy. ConocoPhillips has supported the Baker-Schultz Carbon Dividends Plan and is a member of the Climate Leadership Council, a group which pushes for a carbon dividend. However, ConocoPhillips' support for a carbon price comes at the expense of additional forms of policy, stating on its website that a carbon price should ‘result in some relief via the elimination of other laws and regulations’. The company has, in particular, previously lobbied against US methane regulations, which CEO Ryan Lance has called a ‘federal overprint’ over something it is doing voluntarily. This lobbying has included opposition to many of the requirements related to methane emissions implemented by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management before their repeal in 2018 and also supporting revisions of the US EPA’s emissions performance standards for oil and natural gas facilities to remove what it considered ‘unnecessary’ and ‘burdensome’ obligations to inspect and monitor fugitive emission leaks in 2017. More recently, the company has pivoted to state that it supports some form of 'cost-effective' and 'fit-for-purpose' methane regulation, particularly in the absence of a carbon tax, however it is unclear what this means in practice. ConocoPhillips retains membership to several powerful trade associations actively opposing climate regulations in the US, including the American Petroleum Institute and the Western States Petroleum Association.

QUESTIONS
SOURCES
Main Web Site Social Media CDP Responses Legislative Consultations Media Reports CEO Messaging Financial Disclosures EU Register
Climate Science Transparency
0 0 NS NS -1 2 NS NA
Climate Science Stance
0 -1 NA NS NS 0 NS NA
Need for Climate Regulation
0 -1 NA NS -1 0 0 NA
UN Treaty Support
1 -1 NA NS 0 1 NS NA
Transparency on Legislation
1 NA -1 NA NA NA NS NA
Carbon Tax
2 NS 2 -2 0 0 NS NA
Emissions Trading
0 NS NS NS NS 1 NS NA
Energy Efficiency Standards
NS NS 1 NS NS NS NS NA
Renewable Energy Legislation
NS -1 NS NS NS NS NS NA
Energy Policy and Mix
-1 -1 NS NS -2 -1 NS NA
GHG Emission Standards
0 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 NS NA
Disclosure on Relationships
0 NS 0 NA NA NA NS NA
Climate Lobbying Governance
NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
21%
 
21%
 
22%
 
22%
 
17%
 
17%
 
37%
 
37%
 
45%
 
45%
 
30%
 
30%
 
47%
 
47%
 
32%
 
32%
 
41%
 
41%

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.