LyondellBasell Industries

InfluenceMap Score
D-
Performance Band
46%
Organisation Score
39%
Relationship Score
Modifications to InfluenceMap Scoring
Sector:
Chemicals
Head​quarters:
Houston, United States

Climate‌ ‌Lobbying‌ ‌Overview‌: LyondellBasell appears mostly to be positioned negatively on climate change policy, although with some indications of improvement in 2020. The company retains memberships to several industry associations in Europe and the US lobbying in opposition to climate regulations.

Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: In 2020 the CEO of LyondellBasell communicated support for action on climate change on the condition that this “must make economic sense”, and appeared to question whether the Paris climate change targets are “realistic from an industry perspective”. In 2018, in consultation with the EU, the company appeared to question the technological feasibility and economic viability of GHG emissions reductions to net-zero. However, in 2021, in an article in Euractiv, a senior executive, Ronald van Klaveren, stated support for climate neutrality in the EU by 2050 and advocated for “the right framework and conditions” to achieve this goal. In a ‘Principles for public policy for sustainability’ flyer from 2020, LyondellBasell stated support for a market-based response to climate change over government regulation to preserve the competitiveness of energy-intensive industry.

Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: In 2018, LyondellBasell appeared to not support the EU ETS in consultation with EU policymakers suggesting that it is an “inappropriate administrative burden”, stressing concerns regarding costs, and arguing strongly in favour of the chemicals sector remaining on the 'carbon leakage list' to continue receiving free emission allowances. In its 2019 Form 10-K, the company highlighted the financial cost and potential impediment on growth resulting from both US GHG emissions regulations, as well as upcoming EU ETS reforms. In 2020, in a disclosure on public policy, LyondellBasell stated support both for energy efficiency policy efforts and renewable energy incentives. However, in response to the 2020 CDP climate change questionnaire, LyondellBasell disclosed support for energy efficiency targets on the condition that they don’t overlap with other regulations or impose caps on growth or production. In the same questionnaire, LyondellBasell communicated concerns regarding the cost impact of certain forms of renewable legislation, stating that such policy should be time-limited and focus on innovations, while also communicating a preference for a “technology-neutral approach.”

Positioning on Energy Transition: In response to CDP’s 2018 Climate Change Questionnaire, LyondellBasell, while communicating on the need for 'sensible' state-level rather than 'overreaching' federal methane regulations in the US, the company also appears to have communicated support for the continual development of oil and gas reserves. However, LyondellBasell's 2020 principles for public policy disclosure states support for policy to “partially offset the need for fossil fuels”, also pointing to the need for a "level playing field" for low-carbon liquid fuels.

Industry Association Governance: LyondellBasell disclosed a list of its US industry associations on its website in 2019. The company is a member of organisations that are lobbying negatively on climate change regulation, such as the National Association of Manufacturers and senior executives from the company hold positions on the boards of groups such as the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM). In its 2020 CDP response, LyondellBasell disclosed memberships of the American Chemistry Council (ACC), European Chemistry Industry Council (CEFIC) and AFPM, disclosing alignment with ACC and CEFIC, but 'mixed' alignment with AFPM. The company has not published a dedicated review of potential misalignments with its industry associations on climate policy.

QUERIES
DATA SOURCES
Main Web Site Social Media CDP Responses Legislative Consultations Media Reports CEO Messaging Financial Disclosures EU Register
Communication of Climate Science
NS 1 NA NS NS NS NS NA
Alignment with IPCC on Climate Action
NS 0 NA 0 2 0 NS NA
Supporting the Need for Regulations
-1 NS NA NS 1 0 -1 NA
Support of UN Climate Process
1 NS NA NS NS NS NS NA
Transparency on Legislation
-2 NA 0 NA NA NA NS NA
Carbon Tax
NS NS 0 NS NS NS NS NA
Emissions Trading
0 -1 -1 -2 NS NS NS NA
Energy and Resource Efficiency
1 -1 0 NS NS NS NS NA
Renewable Energy
1 -1 -1 NS NS NS NS NA
Energy Transition & Zero Carbon Technologies
0 -1 -1 NS 0 0 NS NA
GHG Emission Regulation
0 -1 -1 -2 1 NS NS NA
Disclosure on Relationships
0 NS 1 NA NA NA NS NA
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
47%
 
47%
 
25%
 
25%
 
47%
 
47%
 
47%
 
47%
 
39%
 
39%
 
51%
 
51%
 
23%
 
23%
 
44%
 
44%

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.