American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM)
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.
- 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.
|
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. |
|
|
Climate Science Transparency
Is the organisation being transparent about climate change science? |
NS |
-2
|
NA | NS |
-1
|
-2
|
NA | NA |
|
Climate Science Stance
Is the organization supporting the science of climate change and the response demanded (as per the IPCC) |
-1
|
-2
|
NA | NS | NS | NS | NA | NA |
|
Need for Climate Regulation
To what extent does the organization express the need for climate policy and regulations in general. |
-1
|
-1
|
NA |
-1
|
-2
|
-1
|
NA | NA |
|
UN Treaty Support
Is the organization supporting a global treaty on climate change and the UN FCCC process? |
NS |
-2
|
NA | NS |
-1
|
NS | NA | NA |
|
Transparency on Legislation
Is the organisation being transparent about their positions on climate change legislation and policy, including CEO statements. |
2
|
NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
|
Carbon Tax
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: carbon tax. |
NS |
-1
|
NA | NS |
-2
|
-2
|
NA | NA |
|
Emissions Trading
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: emissions trading. |
NS | NS | NA | NS | NS | NS | NA | NA |
|
Energy Efficiency Standards
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: Energy efficiency standards and targets |
NS |
1
|
NA |
-1
|
-1
|
-2
|
NA | NA |
|
Renewable Energy Legislation
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: Renewable energy targets, subsidies and legislation. |
-1
|
-1
|
NA |
-1
|
-1
|
-1
|
NA | NA |
|
Energy Policy and Mix
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: energy policy and the energy mix. We refer to IPCC thinking on renewables, coal, oil and gas. |
-1
|
-1
|
NA |
-2
|
-2
|
-1
|
NA | NA |
|
GHG Emission Standards
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: GHG emission standards and targets. |
-2
|
-2
|
NA |
-1
|
-2
|
NS | NA | NA |
|
Disclosure on Relationships
The Caring for Climate “inventory” of climate change policy influences: Are companies being transparent about their business associations which may impact climate debate and policy |
2
|
NS | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
The American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) is negatively lobbying on a wide range of US climate policies. In 2015 AFPM criticized the ‘heavy burden’ emission reductions the Paris Agreement had placed on the U.S. public, and called into question their financial value. In 2018 AFPM argued that removing regulations on gas and oil production could lead to over a million new jobs and contribute billions of dollars to the US economy. In 2019, AFPM President and CEO Chet Thompson has stated: “We currently do not support, as a trade association, a carbon tax.” In 2018 the group strongly supported the Scalise-McKinley anti-carbon tax resolution introduced in Congress and has funded campaigns to oppose carbon tax policies in Washington State in both 2016 and 2018. AFPM appears strongly opposed to regulations to decarbonize the mobility sector, and has repeatedly criticized the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), describing it as “unworkable”, and a “broken program”. In December 2018, CEO Chet Thompson stated the organization “adamantly opposes EV subsidies and mandates”. In June 2018, AFPM called on the governors of eight states to reject subsidies for electric vehicles and zero emission vehicles. Similarly, AFPM has supported the repeal of California’s Zero Emission Vehicle mandate, and made the case in October 2018 that other states should not be allowed to adopt similar mandates. AFPM also appears to have run an extensive public campaign in 2018 to support the rollback of Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, and CEO Chet Thompson previously applauded the US federal government’s October 2018 decision to freeze the standards at 2020 levels until 2026. In October 2020, in the run up to the 2020 US Presidential Election, CEO Chet Thompson strongly criticized Democrat candidate Joe Biden's ambition to transition the US away from oil and gas, claiming such a move would "devastate communities across the country, eliminate millions of high-paying jobs, raise energy prices, and undermine our economy".