Uniper
What do our scores mean?
The organizational score represents the degree to which the organization influencing climate policy and legislation. Corporations also have relationship scores reflecting their links with influencers like trade associations. Both are combined to place the corporation in a performance band. Full details can be found here.
Engagement Intensity
The engagement intensity (EI) is a metric of the extent to which the company is engaging on climate change policy matters, whether positively or negatively. It is a number from 0 (no engagement at all) to 100 (full engagement on all queries/data points). Clearly energy companies are more affected by climate regulations and will have a higher EI than, for example retailers. So an organization’s score should be looked at in conjunction with this metric to gauge the amount of evidence we are using in each case as a basis for scoring. On our scale, an EI of more than 35 indicates a relatively large amount of climate policy engagement.
Relationship Score, December 2020
A new batch of industry associations has been uploaded onto the InfluenceMap system and the relationship scores recalculated accordingly.
Updated terminology, February 2021
We adjusted the terminology used to describe the queries running down the left-hand side of our scoring matrix and added additional explanatory text to the info-boxes. This has no impact on the scores and methodology. It has been done following user feedback to improve clarity.
- Details of Organization Score
-
What do the 0,1,2 and NSs, NAs mean?
Each cell in the organization's matrix presents a chance for us to assess each data source against our column of climate change policy queries. We score from -2 to 2, with negative scores representing evidence of obstructive influence. "NA" means "not applicable" and "NS" means "not scored" - that is we did not find any evidence either way. In both cases, the cell's weighting is re-distributed over others. Red and blue cells represent highly interesting negative or positive influence respectively. Full details can be found here.
- Details of Relationship Score
-
What is the Relationship Score
A corporation, as well as its organizational score will have a relationship score. It is computed by aggregating the organizational scores of the Influencers (trade bodies etc.) it has relationships with, weighted by both the strength of these relationships and the relative importance of the Influencers towards climate change policy. Full details can be found here.
QUERIES
|
DATA SOURCES | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Main Web Site
The main organizational Web site of the company and its direct links to major affiliates and attached documents. |
Social Media
We search other media and sites funded or controlled by the organization, such as social media (Twitter, Facebook) and direct advertising campaigns of the organization. |
CDP Responses
We assess and score responses to two questions from CDP's climate change information request (12.3 a & 12.3c) related to political influence questions (currently these are not numerically scored by the CDP process). |
Legislative Consultations
Comments from the entity being scored on governmental regulatory consultation processes, including those obtained by InfluenceMap through Freedom of Information requests. |
Media Reports
Here we search in a consistent manner (the organization name and relevant query search terms) a set of web sites of representing reputable news or data aggregations. Supported by targeted searches of proprietary databases. |
CEO Messaging
Here we search in a consistent manner (the CEO/Chairman, organization name and relevant query search terms) a set of web sites of representing reputable news or data aggregations. Supported by targeted searches of proprietary databases. |
Financial Disclosures
We search 10-K and 20-F SEC filings where available, and non US equivalents where not. . |
EU Register
Information provided by to the voluntary EU Transparency Register. |
|
Communication of Climate Science
Is the organization transparent and clear about its position on climate change science? |
1
|
1
|
NA | NS | NS | NS | NS | NA |
Alignment with IPCC on Climate Action
Is the organization supporting the science-based response to climate change as set out by the IPCC? (the IPCC) |
1
|
2
|
NA | NS | NS |
0
|
NS | NA |
Supporting the Need for Regulations
To what extent does the organization express the need for regulatory intervention to resolve the climate crisis? |
0
|
1
|
NA |
0
|
1
|
1
|
NS | NA |
Support of UN Climate Process
Is the organization supporting the UN FCCC process on climate change? |
1
|
1
|
NA | NS |
1
|
NS | NS | NA |
Transparency on Legislation
Is the organisation transparent about its positions on climate change legislation/policy and its activities to influence it? |
0
|
NA |
0
|
NA | NA | NA | NS | NA |
Carbon Tax
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: carbon tax. |
NS | NS | NS |
-1
|
-2
|
NS | NS | NA |
Emissions Trading
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: emissions trading. |
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
NS | NA |
Energy and Resource Efficiency
Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: energy efficiency policy, standards, and targets |
NS | NS |
0
|
0
|
NS | NS | NS | NA |
Renewable Energy
Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: Renewable energy legislation, targets, subsidies, and other policy |
0
|
NS |
0
|
2
|
NS | NS | NS | NA |
Energy Transition & Zero Carbon Technologies
Is the organization supporting an IPCC-aligned transition of the economy away from carbon-emitting technologies, including supporting relevant policy and legislative measures to enable this transition? |
0
|
0
|
-2
|
0
|
-1
|
0
|
0
|
NA |
GHG Emission Regulation
Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: GHG emission standards and targets. Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: Standards, targets, and other regulatory measures directly targeting Greenhouse Gas emissions |
NS |
1
|
NS |
1
|
NS | NS | NS | NA |
Disclosure on Relationships
Is the organization transparent about its involvement with industry associations that are influencing climate policy, including the extent to which it is aligned with these groups on climate? |
0
|
NA |
0
|
NA | NA | NA | NS | NA |
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.
Climate Lobbying Overview: Uniper appears actively engaged on European climate policy. While the company has strongly supported the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, it has opposed other policies including carbon taxes and mandates to phase out coal power. The company also advocates strongly in favour of a long-term role for natural gas in the energy mix.
Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: Uniper appears supportive of climate action in its top-line messaging. In 2019, Uniper clearly acknowledged the contribution of carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels to climate change. In its 2019 Annual Report, released in May 2020, Uniper also supported the European Green Deal’s ambition to achieve climate neutrality in Europe by 2050. In 2019, the company stated its support for the implementation of the Paris Agreement and “urgent and concerted action” worldwide to limit global warming to 1.5°C. Although Uniper has not explicitly stated support for climate-related regulation in its corporate reporting, the company signed a joint letter to the leading EU institutions in October 2020 calling for “ambitious and pragmatic” policy tools to achieve climate neutrality by 2050.
Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: Uniper appears actively engaged on market-based climate regulation, supporting EU and UK emissions trading schemes while strongly opposing the introduction of a carbon tax.
Uniper has consistently supported the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) as “the most cost-effective mechanism” to meet Europe’s emission reduction targets in 2017-20, and advocated the transposition of Phase IV into UK law in response to a BEIS consultation on carbon pricing in July 2019. Uniper’s 2020 CDP response also supported the strengthening of the EU ETS via the implementation of Backloading and the Market Stability Reserve. In November 2020, Uniper signed a joint letter to Boris Johnson urging the UK Government to implement a UK emissions trading system.
In 2017-2020, Uniper has opposed the implementation of a carbon tax in the UK. In response to a BEIS consultation in July 2019, the company advocated a phase out of the UK Carbon Price Support (CPS) tax in favor of an emissions trading scheme. The CPS was introduced by the UK Government to supplement the EU ETS by setting a minimum carbon price for power generators referred to as the Carbon Price Floor. In May 2019, Uniper also reportedly opposed a carbon price floor in Germany.
Uniper appears to have broadly positive, albeit limited, engagement with other forms of climate legislation. In response to a UK consultation in May 2020, the company appeared to support the UK’s Contracts for Difference (CfD) mechanism, advocating for the inclusion of offshore wind extension projects within the scheme. In a submission to the European Commission in January 2021, Uniper supported the EU’s legal framework to reduce methane emissions in the energy sector.
Positioning on Energy Transition: Uniper’s positive top-line positioning on the energy mix appears to be misaligned from its engagement with policy mandating the phase-out of carbon-intensive energy sources such as coal. In 2019-21, Uniper has expressed top-line support for an “orderly and responsible” transition away from coal in its corporate reporting. In May 2019, however, the company stated that a transition away from coal should only take place if the EU is unable to meet its climate targets via carbon pricing, emphasizing the potential risk to energy security. Uniper has reportedly opposed coal phase-out plans in Germany in 2019 and the Netherlands in 2020, threatening legal action in the latter. Uniper stated in its 2020 CDP response that it opposed the 2030 coal phaseout in the Netherlands unless the company receives financial compensation.
In 2019-21, Uniper has consistently supported the long-term role of natural gas in the energy mix. In its 2019 Annual Report, the company supported gas as “the ideal fuel to support the energy transition” on the basis that it has the lowest emissions of any fossil fuel. In 2020, Uniper also supported the development of new gas infrastructure such as the Nord Stream 2 pipeline which will lock in natural gas. Uniper signed a joint letter to the leading EU institutions in October 2020 lobbying for the inclusion of natural gas as an enabling or transitional activity under the EU Sustainable Financing Technology.
Uniper has actively supported the increased role of hydrogen in the energy mix, including renewable (“green”) hydrogen and hydrogen production via fossil fuels (“blue” or “turquoise”). In response to a UK consultation in May 2020, the company lobbied in favour of incentives for green hydrogen production and battery storage under the UK Contracts for Difference (CfD) mechanism. In its 2019 Sustainability Report, Uniper appeared to support a ‘technology-neutral’ regulatory environment in Europe to develop both green and blue hydrogen to decarbonize hard-to-abate sectors such as chemicals and transport. In feedback to the EU Hydrogen Strategy in June 2020, Uniper also advocated for policymakers to support green, blue and ‘turquoise’ hydrogen production “on a level playing field”. This technology-neutral approach represents a less ambitious approach than the original mandate of the EU initiative, which aimed to support the deployment of green hydrogen production as a priority.
Industry Association Governance: Uniper has disclosed its membership to some industry associations on its corporate website. However, this disclosure provides limited information on these memberships and excludes key associations listed in its 2020 CDP response such as the Federation of German Industries (BDI), International Emissions Trading Association and Eurogas which have mixed engagement on climate change policy. Uniper does not disclose a review of its industry association alignment on climate change.