Total

InfluenceMap Score
D+
Performance Band
51%
Organisation Score
50%
Relationship Score
Modifications to InfluenceMap Scoring
Sector:
Energy
Head​quarters:
Paris, France
Brands and Associated Companies
Elf Aquitaine
Official Web Site:
Wikipedia:

Total has communicated more positive top-line positions on certain climate-motivated policies since 2015, although continues to advocate an energy policy agenda focused on advancing the role of fossil fuels, particularly natural gas, in the energy mix. The company retains membership to a number of powerful trade associations engaged in the active opposition of climate regulations.

In 2020, Total has confirmed its support for the Paris Agreement and limiting warming to well below 2C. Furthermore, Total has stated it supports for the EU’s net zero by 2050 emissions target. Total appears to be positively positioned on carbon pricing and has stated that it actively advocates for carbon pricing in its 2019 Climate Report. This appears to include the Climate Leadership Council’s carbon dividend in the U.S. and the EU ETS in Europe. In contrast to this, however, in 2020 in response to COVID-19, Total signed a joint letter spearheaded by the Business Council of Alberta in Canada, which called for freezing the federal carbon tax.

Total appears to have positive engagement with regulations regarding methane emission reductions. In the U.S., Total opposed the Trump Administration’s removal of methane emissions regulation in 2019 and in the EU, the company has advocated in favour of including methane emissions regulation in the EU Green Deal in 2020. This position on methane is tied to Total’s promotion of gas in the energy mix. Total has supported measures that will help substitute coal with new gas generation, such as limiting access to capacity mechanisms to plants emitting 550g CO2/kWH. Beyond this, however, the company does not support gas as a transition fuel, instead continuing to argue that gas is a long-term energy solution, including in its 2019 Climate Report.

This position aligns with the company’s broader position against urgent action to decarbonise the global energy mix: in 2018 CEO Patrick Pouyanne appeared unsupportive of the electrification of transport, describing EVs as ”silent and expensive”, and ultimately not a replacement or oil in the transportation sector. Similarly, in 2020, the company stated that the first challenge of the energy mix was to provide affordable energy and as such, hydrocarbons would still be an important energy source in 20-35 years. At the same time, Total’s position on renewable energy legislation appears to be mixed: In its 2019 CDP disclosure, Total appeared to opposed separate targets in the EU for renewable energy, however, in 2020 has offered some support to the role of wind energy in the energy mix.

In 2019, Total reviewed 30 of the company’s trade associations’ positions on climate and found only one – American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers – to be ‘Not Aligned’ from the company’s climate positions. Total did not renew its membership to AFPM in 2020, however retains membership of trade associations including Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), the American Petroleum Institute (API) - both of which Total found to be only partially aligned with the company’s climate positions - and the Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association (APPEA), all of which have actively lobbied against variety of climate change policies.

QUERIES
DATA SOURCES
Main Web Site Social Media CDP Responses Legislative Consultations Media Reports CEO Messaging Financial Disclosures EU Register
Climate Science Transparency
1 2 NS 1 NS 2 1 NA
Climate Science Stance
0 0 NA -2 NS 1 NS NA
Need for Climate Regulation
0 0 NS NS 1 1 NS NA
UN Treaty Support
0 1 NA -1 2 0 NS NA
Transparency on Legislation
-1 NA 0 NA NA NA NS NS
Carbon Tax
1 -1 1 NS 1 0 NS NA
Emissions Trading
0 NS 0 -1 1 0 NS NA
Energy Efficiency Standards
1 -2 -1 -2 NS NS NS NA
Renewable Energy Legislation
1 0 -1 0 -2 NS NS NA
Energy Policy and Mix
0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 NA
GHG Emission Standards
0 1 0 0 0 NS NS NA
Disclosure on Relationships
0 NS -1 NA NA NA NS NS
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
39%
 
39%
 
63%
 
63%
 
50%
 
50%
 
29%
 
29%
 
37%
 
37%
 
94%
 
94%
 
68%
 
68%
 
33%
 
33%
 
39%
 
39%

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.