PPL Corporation

InfluenceMap Score
D
Performance Band
49%
Organisation Score
42%
Relationship Score
Modifications to InfluenceMap Scoring
Sector:
Utilities
Head​quarters:
Allentown, United States
Brands and Associated Companies
Pennsylvania Power and Light
Official Web Site:

Climate Lobbying Overview: PPL Corporation (PPL) has disclosed high-level support for net-zero emissions by 2050 in the UK and for the electrification of transportation broadly. However, the company has also opposed various forms of climate-related regulation that impact its US operations, particularly via subsidiary Louisville Gas & Electric and Kentucky Utilities (LG&E and KU).

Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: PPL does not appear to take a clear position on the Paris Agreement but has communicated support for the UK’s net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 target. In PPL’s 2019 Sustainability Report, the company briefly emphasized support for market-based climate legislation but did not mention positions on other forms of climate policy. This same position emphasising market-based measures is also evident in PPL’s 2020 CDP response while discussing their position on US GHG policies.

Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: In its 2019 Sustainability Report and 2020 CDP response, PPL Corporation discloses support for “inside the fence” emissions reductions measures, which apply emissions standards to individual power plants rather than a power system as a whole. However, PPL Corporation has previously lobbied against stringent GHG emissions standards in the US. In February 2018 comments to the EPA, subsidiary Louisville Gas & Electric and Kentucky Utilities (LG&E and KU) supported the repeal of the Clean Power Plan and argued to weaken the scope of compliance to its emissions standards. The subsidiary further lobbied for weaker compliance structures while backing the Affordable Clean Energy rule in October 2018.

PPL Corporation appears not to support net metering policies that promote increased use and integration of renewables into the energy mix. Despite disclosing a mixed position on net-metering policies in its 2020 CDP response, PPL subsidiary LG&E and KU actively supported a Kentucky bill that eroded the state’s net metering laws in 2019. In 2020, PPL expressed mixed support for net metering policies in the company’s CDP response. Further, the company appears to have a negative stance on community solar programs, communicating opposition to proposals that it believes will increase administrative burden on utility companies.

Positioning on Energy Transition: PPL Corporation appears to have a mixed position on the transition of the energy mix. In 2017 comments to the Pennsylvania Public Utilities Commission, the company advocated for increased electric vehicle adoption and charging infrastructure in the state. PPL’s support for the electrification of transportation is further evident in the company’s 2020 CDP response, in which PPL advocated for increased utility ownership of EV infrastructure. In 2020, the corporation became a sponsor of the Low-Carbon Resources Initiative (LCRI), a program which aims to advance pathways to economy-wide decarbonization through research and development. However, a February 2020 response from subsidiary LG&E and KU to the Kentucky Public Service Commission emphasize costs of low-carbon technologies and consequently push for more moderated efforts to decarbonize the energy mix.

Industry Association Governance: PPL publicly discloses its memberships to industry associations on its corporate website, however it provides limited detail on the company’s alignment with the organizations’ climate policy positions. In its 2020 CDP response, the company provides some, though largely vague descriptions of alignment with industry association positions on climate legislation. PPL is a member of the American Gas Association and the Edison Electric Institute with CEO Vincent Sorgi on the executive board of the latter. Both have lobbied in opposition to strands of climate policy in the United States.

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 NS NS 1 NA
Alignment with IPCC on Climate Action
2 NS NA NS NS NS NS NA
Supporting the Need for Regulations
-1 NS NS -1 NS NS NS NA
Support of UN Climate Process
0 NS NS NS NS NS 0 NA
Transparency on Legislation
1 NA 1 NA NA NA NS NA
Carbon Tax
NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NA
Emissions Trading
NS NS 0 NS NS NS NS NA
Energy and Resource Efficiency
NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NA
Renewable Energy
0 NS 0 NS -2 NS NS NA
Energy Transition & Zero Carbon Technologies
0 0 1 0 1 NS NS NA
GHG Emission Regulation
0 -2 1 -1 0 NS 0 NA
Disclosure on Relationships
-1 NS 0 NA NA NA NS NA
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
47%
 
47%
 
35%
 
35%

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.