The Climate Accountability Scorecard

The report evaluates the climate policy engagement of several major fossil fuel companies, including BP, Shell, ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Arch Coal, CONSOL Energy, and Peabody Energy. It uses a scoring system to measure their support for federal carbon reduction policies, their responses to the EPA Clean Power Plan and Methane Rule, and their participation in climate-supportive business alliances. Findings range from 'Good' scores for companies like BP, which supports carbon pricing and the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative, to 'Poor' or 'Egregious' scores for companies like Peabody Energy, which the report claims used climate science disinformation to oppose the Clean Power Plan.

• BP received a 'Good' score (+3) for supporting fair and effective climate policies, driven by its endorsement of a government carbon policy framework including a price on carbon and its membership in the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative.
• Peabody Energy was rated 'Egregious' (-2) for its opposition to US federal climate policies, specifically the Clean Power Plan, by claiming that no scientific evidence supports the causal links between greenhouse gas levels and climate change.
• Royal Dutch Shell received a 'Fair' score (+2), based on its consistent support for government-led carbon-pricing mechanisms and its membership in the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative and the Trillion Ton Communiqué.
• ExxonMobil received a 'Fair' score (0), noting its support for a revenue-neutral carbon tax, but penalizing it for funding the Pacific Legal Foundation, which sued the EPA over the Clean Power Plan.
• Arch Coal received a 'Poor' score (-8), as it did not publicly engage Congress on climate policies, opposed the EPA Clean Power Plan without offering a viable alternative, and did not join any supportive business alliances.
• Chevron and ConocoPhillips both received low scores for opposing the EPA methane rule through the endorsement of trade association comments, such as those from the American Petroleum Institute (API), without providing viable policy alternatives.
• CONSOL Energy received a 'Poor' score (-5) for opposing both the EPA Clean Power Plan and the EPA methane rule, describing the latter as an 'unnecessary burden on the oil and gas industry'.

APA

Union of Concerned Scientists (2016). The Climate Accountability Scorecard. https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/attach/2016/10/climate-accountability-scorecard-appendix-fair-effective-climate-policies.pdf

Chicago

Union of Concerned Scientists. The Climate Accountability Scorecard. 2016. https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/attach/2016/10/climate-accountability-scorecard-appendix-fair-effective-climate-policies.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Union of Concerned Scientists |title=The Climate Accountability Scorecard |date=October 2016 |url=https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/attach/2016/10/climate-accountability-scorecard-appendix-fair-effective-climate-policies.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{unionofconcernedscientists2016climate, author = {{Union of Concerned Scientists}}, title = {{The Climate Accountability Scorecard}}, institution = {Union of Concerned Scientists}, year = {2016}, month = oct, url = {https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/attach/2016/10/climate-accountability-scorecard-appendix-fair-effective-climate-policies.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }