Chevron

InfluenceMap Score
E
Performance Band
30%
Organisation Score
35%
Relationship Score
Modifications to InfluenceMap Scoring
Sector:
Energy
Head​quarters:
San Ramon, United States
Brands and Associated Companies
Texaco, Caltex

Climate Lobbying Overview: Chevron appears to be opposing almost all forms of climate-motivated regulation, particularly US methane regulations and renewable fuel standards, whilst actively pushing a US energy policy agenda that accelerates oil and gas production. Chevron also retains memberships to several industry associations engaged in obstructive climate lobbying.

Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: In Chevron’s 2019 sustainability report, the company states it supports the Paris Agreement as a step forward but the company has not explicitly supported any specific temperature or emissions goals. In April 2020, however, it was reported that Chevron supported the City of Houston’s goal of carbon neutrality by 2050. Chevron’s 2019 climate policy position states support only for a “market-based” route to “lower-carbon outcomes”, whilst opposing a regulatory approach that establishes GHG emission targets on the use of its products. Between 2015-2018, successive Chevron CEOs questioned the desirability and feasibility of action on climate in line with the recommendations of the IPCC, for example by suggesting that the challenge of meeting growing energy demand in developing countries should be prioritized over urgent climate policy action.

Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: Chevron has actively lobbied against US climate policy including renewable fuel standards and methane regulations, although its position on market-based measures such as carbon taxes appears to have softened. In June 2019, Chevron signed a joint statement calling for governments to set “economically meaningful” carbon pricing policies, including carbon taxes and emissions trading, although with a caveat that said policies support economic growth. This marks a shift from previous opposition to carbon tax policies, including the donation of $500K to a successful campaign to defeat a carbon tax policy proposal in Washington State in 2018.

In 2019, supported the weakening of the US Renewable Fuel Standard Program in two submissions to the Environmental Protection Agency in August and November. Chevron has consistently opposed low-carbon and renewable fuel standards since 2014. In its 2017 CDP response, Chevron also disclosed that it supports the repeal or significant revision of US methane regulations and has directly lobbied the US EPA on the rollback of a number of methane emission measurement requirements in 2018 including, seemingly, through direct meetings with Trump Administration officials.

Positioning on Energy Transition: Chevron appears to consistently support the inclusion of oil and gas in a future energy mix. In its 2020 climate lobbying report, Vice President of Corporate Affairs Dave Walsh stated that Chevron recognizes the need for a low-carbon future, but oil and gas have a vital role in any global transition. CEO Michael Wirth echoes this, stating in 2020 that oil and gas will continue to be in the future energy-mix, while in a separate speech stating that natural gas ‘underpins our energy future’. Chevron has lobbied extensively on US energy policy. In 2017, CEO Michael Wirth called renewable and low carbon fuel policies in the US and Canada ‘failures’ and in 2015-2019, Chevron has repeatedly lobbied for the repeal of Renewable Fuel Standards at the federal level. Between 2016 and 2018, Chevron directly lobbied US policymakers to open US federal land to oil and gas exploration, demanding that all offshore areas from the lower 48 states and Alaska should be considered for their “hydrocarbon potential”.

Industry Association Governance: Chevron publicly discloses a list of memberships it holds to industry associations in a dedicated climate lobbying report, as well as the climate policy positions held by each industry association. However, the report does not disclose an assessment of alignment with its industry associations, nor how it tries to influence their climate policy. Nevertheless, Chevron is represented on the boards of various trade associations that are opposing climate policy. For example, CEO Michael Wirth is on the board of directors of the American Petroleum Institute which, like Chevron, has lobbied for the rollback on US methane regulation throughout 2017-2018. The company further appears to retain membership to ALEC, a US group renowned for disseminating climate misinformation and for using legal tactics to block a range of US state-level and federal climate policies. Chevron’s lobbying report also does not disclose the company’s membership to several key industry associations actively and negatively engaging on climate change including APPEA and Business Council of Australia.

QUERIES
DATA SOURCES
Main Web Site Social Media CDP Responses Legislative Consultations Media Reports CEO Messaging Financial Disclosures EU Register
Communication of Climate Science
1 NS NS NS 1 0 1 NA
Alignment with IPCC on Climate Action
0 -1 NA NS 1 0 -1 NA
Supporting the Need for Regulations
0 NS NA NS 0 0 NS NA
Support of UN Climate Process
0 1 NS NS 1 -1 -1 NA
Transparency on Legislation
0 NA -2 NA NA NA NA NA
Carbon Tax
NS NS NS NS 0 0 NS NA
Emissions Trading
NS -2 -1 NS 0 0 -1 NA
Energy and Resource Efficiency
0 NS -2 NS -1 NS NS NA
Renewable Energy
0 NS -2 -1 -2 -1 NS NA
Energy Transition & Zero Carbon Technologies
-1 -1 NS -1 -1 0 NS NA
GHG Emission Regulation
-1 0 -1 -1 -2 -1 NS NA
Disclosure on Relationships
0 NS -2 NA NA NA NA NA
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
22%
 
22%
 
22%
 
22%
 
22%
 
22%
 
43%
 
43%
 
36%
 
36%
 
29%
 
29%
 
67%
 
67%
 
46%
 
46%
 
36%
 
36%
 
28%
 
28%
 
50%
 
50%
 
23%
 
23%
 
23%
 
23%
 
23%
 
23%
 
45%
 
45%
 
11%
 
11%
 
38%
 
38%
 
32%
 
32%
 
41%
 
41%
 
31%
 
31%
 
31%
 
31%
 
46%
 
46%
 
60%
 
60%
 
37%
 
37%
 
47%
 
47%
 
44%
 
44%

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.