Search Climate Insights Directory

The report evaluates fossil fuel companies using a scoring guide that measures corporate political disclosure, engagement with Congress, and support for climate policies. It finds a wide disparity in performance, with some companies like ConocoPhillips and ExxonMobil receiving 'Good' scores for their policy frameworks, while others like CONSOL Energy and Arch Coal are rated 'Egregious' or 'Poor' due to their opposition to the Paris Agreement or lack of political transparency.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) developed a methodology to assess eight major investor-owned oil, gas, and coal companies on their climate responsibility. The assessment uses 28 metrics across four broad areas: renouncing disinformation, planning for a carbon-free world, supporting effective climate policies, and disclosing climate risks. Companies are scored on a five-point scale from 'advanced' to 'egregious' based on publicly available data from July 1, 2016, to June 30, 2018.

The report provides a scoring framework and detailed evaluations for eight fossil fuel companies—Arch Coal, BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, CONSOL Energy, ExxonMobil, Peabody Energy, and Royal Dutch Shell—regarding their public statements on climate science, trade association affiliations, governance policies, and responses to shareholder resolutions. It identifies a systemic failure among these companies to implement policies preventing the spread of climate disinformation, with most receiving 'Poor' or 'Egregious' scores. The document also catalogues historical and recent disinformation activities by trade associations such as the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) found that while Chevron improved its emissions and political spending disclosures, it continues to misrepresent climate science, maintain leadership roles in trade groups that spread disinformation, and lacks a plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from its operations or products.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) found that while ExxonMobil improved its scores in some areas—such as leaving the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and supporting a federal carbon tax—it continues to misrepresent climate science and maintain leadership roles in trade groups that spread disinformation. The company lacks a company-wide net-zero emissions target and has actively blocked climate-related shareholder resolutions.

The Union of Concerned Scientists evaluated Peabody Energy's climate actions from July 2016 to June 2018, finding that while the company follows best practices in political spending disclosure, it remains 'egregious' in its lack of emissions reduction targets and its support for the US withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement. The company is criticized for downplaying climate science in public statements and maintaining leadership roles in trade associations that spread climate disinformation.

The 2018 Climate Accountability Scorecard evaluates eight major oil, gas, and coal companies, finding that while some have made minor improvements due to shareholder and legal pressure, their overall actions remain insufficient to align with the Paris climate agreement. The report highlights continued reliance on trade associations that spread disinformation and a systemic failure to set company-wide net-zero emissions targets.

The 2018 Climate Accountability Scorecard evaluates Royal Dutch Shell's response to climate change, noting that while the company acknowledges climate science and supports the Paris Agreement in principle, it lacks a concrete net-zero action plan and maintains ties to industry groups that spread climate disinformation.

The document argues that while 97% of climate scientists agree that humans are causing global warming, a significant 'consensus gap' exists in public perception, largely driven by decades of deliberate misinformation campaigns. It identifies perceived consensus as a 'gateway belief' that influences support for climate policy and provides evidence-based communication strategies, such as 'weight-of-evidence' reporting and 'inoculation' against misinformation, to close this gap.

The Visegrad Four countries lack a coordinated policy on fake news, often treating it as an external security threat while ignoring misinformation spread by their own ruling elites. While the Czech Republic has a dedicated government body for hybrid threats and Poland participates in international counter-hybrid warfare centers, Slovakia relies more on civil society and commercial initiatives to filter dubious content. Hungary is noted for a lack of active government opposition to fake news, with the ruling party itself accused of spreading conspiracy theories. The document warns that this fragmented landscape increases vulnerability to pro-Kremlin influence and populist rhetoric, potentially impacting the 2019 EU parliamentary elections.

The Union of Concerned Scientists evaluated ConocoPhillips across four metrics from July 2016 to June 2018. While the company showed improvements in climate risk disclosure and planning for carbon pollution, it received an 'Egregious' score for renouncing disinformation due to its continued leadership roles in trade associations that spread climate disinformation and its use of language that misrepresents climate science.

The document details a campaign by scientists and lawmakers to pressure the American Geophysical Union (AGU) to end its sponsorship relationship with ExxonMobil, which provided over $620,000 between 2001 and 2015. While AGU initially refused to cut ties in April 2016, citing an inability to unequivocally determine current misinformation, ExxonMobil was absent from the 2016 fall meeting sponsor list. The text notes that AGU continues to accept funding from other fossil fuel companies, such as Chevron.

The Union of Concerned Scientists evaluated BP on 30 metrics, finding that while the company acknowledges climate science and supports a carbon price, it fails to distance itself from trade associations that spread disinformation and lacks a company-wide emissions reduction plan.

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.

The report evaluates several major fossil fuel companies—including BP, Shell, ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Peabody Energy, Arch Coal, and CONSOL Energy—on their accountability regarding climate change. It uses a scoring system to measure the accuracy of their public statements, their governance policies to prevent disinformation, and their responses to shareholder resolutions. The findings indicate a wide disparity in corporate behavior, with some companies like Shell and BP acknowledging the need for emissions reductions, while others like ExxonMobil and Chevron are flagged for misrepresenting science or actively blocking shareholder efforts to address climate risks.

The Union of Concerned Scientists evaluated eight major fossil fuel companies—Chevron, ExxonMobil, BP, Royal Dutch Shell, ConocoPhillips, Peabody Energy, CONSOL Energy, and Arch Coal—across four key areas of climate responsibility. The analysis found that all eight companies maintain memberships in trade associations that spread climate disinformation and none have developed a company-wide plan to align their business models with the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement. While BP and Shell were noted for affirming climate science in direct communications, and BP and ConocoPhillips scored 'good' on general political spending oversight, the report concludes that the industry as a whole fails to take appropriate responsibility for the climate impacts of its products.

The Union of Concerned Scientists developed a scorecard to assess eight major fossil fuel companies—including Chevron, ExxonMobil, BP, Royal Dutch Shell, ConocoPhillips, Peabody Energy, CONSOL Energy, and Arch Coal—on their climate responsibility. The methodology employs 30 metrics across four areas: renouncing disinformation, planning for a carbon-free world, supporting effective climate policies, and disclosing climate risks. The assessment focuses on the period from January 2015 to May 2016, utilizing public filings, corporate reports, and third-party data. Notably, the document states that no assessed companies met the standard required to be scored on the execution of their carbon-reduction plans.

The report presents seven 'deception dossiers' containing approximately 85 internal documents that reveal how fossil fuel companies and trade associations intentionally spread climate misinformation. It details tactics such as the secret funding of contrarian scientists, the creation of 'astroturf' grassroots groups, and the use of forged letters to Congress to undermine climate science and delay the transition to clean energy.

The document contrasts a 1995 ALEC claim that global warming predictions were theoretical and lacked scientific consensus with the 1995 IPCC Assessment Report, which identified a "discernible human influence on global climate." It details ALEC's role in distributing "model" legislation to state legislators to oppose EPA carbon standards and repeal renewable energy standards, noting that ALEC's Energy, Environment, and Agriculture Task Force has included members such as BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil, Peabody Energy, and Shell.

The document contrasts scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change with the activities of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). It asserts that ALEC, funded by fossil fuel interests, promotes misinformation to state legislators to block EPA regulations and repeal renewable energy standards.