Duke Energy

InfluenceMap Score
D-
Performance Band
44%
Organisation Score
42%
Relationship Score
Modifications to InfluenceMap Scoring
Sector:
Utilities
Head​quarters:
Charlotte, United States
Brands and Associated Companies
Duke Energy Renewables, Duke Energy Retail, Duke Energy International
Wikipedia:

Climate Lobbying Overview: Duke Energy appears to have a largely negative influence on climate change policy in the US. In particular, Duke has lobbied against GHG emissions standards and the transition of the US energy mix.

Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: Duke stated it is focused on technological, rather than regulatory solutions to climate change in a 2019 investor call. However, the report notes that Duke's 2020 climate report states that the company prefers market-based approaches to incentivize decarbonization rather than "imposing a price or dictating a certain generation mix." In 2021, Duke CEO Lynn Good stated support for the Biden Administration to re-enter the Paris Climate Agreement.

Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: In 2018, Duke Energy supported repealing the Clean Power Plan to replace it with the weaker Affordable Clean Energy Rule. However, Duke supported energy efficiency standards for general service lightbulbs in 2019. Duke has also engaged widely and with mixed positions on renewable energy legislation. In 2019, the utility opposed net metering programs in various states and lobbied to increase the fixed monthly charges on electric bills, limiting incentives for certain forms of solar energy generation. Duke supported a Federal Solar Investment Tax Credit to increase solar incentives for households in 2020.

Positioning on Energy Transition: Duke lobbies largely negatively on energy transition policy and appears focused on preserving natural gas in the US energy mix. The company's 2020 Climate Report offers some transparency in climate policy priorities, including broad support for policies that promote technological advancement toward decarbonization. Duke highlighted the ongoing importance of coal in 2019. In 2020, Duke CEO Lynn Good repeatedly defended the role of natural gas in the energy mix. In her communications, Good continues to highlight the intermittency and costliness of renewables as a justification for increasing natural gas and nuclear power in the energy mix. However, in 2020 Duke supported the city of Charlotte’s carbon reduction goals through partnership in its renewable power agreement. In addition to advanced Carbon Capture and Storage technology, Duke’s 2020 climate report emphasizes policy advocacy on other advanced technologies such as seasonal battery storage and nuclear.

CEO Lynn Good stated support in 2021 for policies to facilitate the total electrification of transportation by 2030. Duke showed support for the electrification of transportation by supporting electric vehicle charging stations in Kentucky in 2019 and advocated in 2019 for policymakers to support EVs through its membership in the Zero Emission Transportation Association. In 2020, Duke actively supported legislation criminalizing protests against fossil fuel infrastructure.

Industry Association Governance: Duke Energy remains a member of several trade associations actively opposed to US climate change policy, including the US Chamber of Commerce and American Legislative Exchange Council. 2020 evidence shows that Duke is disclosing annual membership dues paid to the Chamber of Commerce and other trade associations. However, it does not disclose its membership with ALEC, which is evidenced in the list of attendees to ALEC's 2019 Annual Meeting. In addition, while Duke maintains that continued participation is important for driving internal discussions, the utility has not issued a clear or concise review of how these groups' lobbying activities align with or diverge from its own.

QUERIES
DATA SOURCES
Main Web Site Social Media CDP Responses Legislative Consultations Media Reports CEO Messaging Financial Disclosures EU Register
Communication of Climate Science
1 NS NS NS -1 1 -1 NA
Alignment with IPCC on Climate Action
0 -1 NA -1 0 0 -1 NA
Supporting the Need for Regulations
0 NS NA NS -2 0 NS NA
Support of UN Climate Process
NS NS NA NS NS 1 NS NA
Transparency on Legislation
0 NA -1 NA NA NA NS NA
Carbon Tax
NS NS NS NS 1 NS NS NA
Emissions Trading
NS NS 0 0 1 NS NS NA
Energy and Resource Efficiency
NS NS NS 0 -2 NS NS NA
Renewable Energy
NS 0 0 -2 0 0 NS NA
Energy Transition & Zero Carbon Technologies
0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 NA
GHG Emission Regulation
0 -1 -2 -1 -1 0 -1 NA
Disclosure on Relationships
0 NS -2 NA NA NA NS NA
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
51%
 
51%
 
36%
 
36%
 
23%
 
23%
 
45%
 
45%
 
11%
 
11%
 
93%
 
93%

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.