TC Energy
Performance Band
Performance Band (A+ to F) is a full measure of a company’s climate policy engagement, combing the assessment of both its direct engagement (Organisation Score) and that of its industry associations (Relationship Score). Grades from A+ to B indicate broad support for Paris-aligned climate policy, with grades from D to F indicating increasingly obstructive climate policy engagement. Where InfluenceMap's analysis detects both limited direct and indirect engagement with climate policy, a Performance Band is not computed and, in this case, it is indicated as N/A. Further details can be found here.
Organisation Score
The Organisation Score (expressed as a percentage from 0 to 100) is a measure of how supportive or obstructive the company’s direct policy engagement is towards Paris-Agreement aligned climate policy, with 0 being fully opposed and 100 being fully supportive. If the company's Engagement Intensity is below 5% (that is, limited direct policy engagement from the entity being scored) InfluenceMap does not compute an Organisational Score and, in this case, it is indicated as N/A. Further details can be found here.
Relationship Score
The Relationship Score (expressed as a percentage score from 0 to 100) is a measure of how supportive or obstructive the company’s industry associations are towards climate policy aligned with the Paris Agreement, with 0 being fully opposed and 100 being fully supportive. If there is limited evidence of a company's links to industry associations engaging on climate policy, InfluenceMap does not compute a Relationship Score and, in this case, it is indicated as N/A. Further 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). EI scores over 13 indicate some active engagement on climate policy streams, EI scores over 25 indicate increasingly strategic 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. . |
|
|
Communication of Climate Science
Is the organization transparent and clear about its position on climate change science? |
-2
|
NS | NS | NS |
-2
|
NS | NS |
|
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
|
1
|
NA | NS | NS | NS |
-1
|
|
Supporting the Need for Regulations
To what extent does the organization express the need for regulatory intervention to resolve the climate crisis? |
0
|
NS | NA | NS |
-2
|
1
|
0
|
|
Support of UN Climate Process
Is the organization supporting the UN FCCC process on climate change? |
1
|
NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS |
|
Transparency on Legislation
Is the organisation transparent about its positions on climate change legislation/policy and its activities to influence it? |
-1
|
NA |
0
|
NA | NA | NA |
2
|
|
Carbon Tax
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: carbon tax. |
NS | NS |
0
|
NS |
1
|
NS | NS |
|
Emissions Trading
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: emissions trading. |
1
|
NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS |
|
Energy and Resource Efficiency
Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: energy efficiency policy, standards, and targets |
NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS |
|
Renewable Energy
Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: Renewable energy legislation, targets, subsidies, and other policy |
NS | NS |
0
|
NS | NS | NS |
0
|
|
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? |
-1
|
-1
|
-1
|
-2
|
-2
|
0
|
-2
|
|
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 |
0
|
0
|
0
|
NS | NS | NS | NS |
|
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
|
NS |
1
|
NA | NA | NA | NS |
Open PDF file of Data Source
Open PDF file of Data Source
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: TC Energy (formerly TransCanada) appears to have a negative stance toward policy action on climate change, though its positions have modestly improved since 2015. In its inaugural 2019 Sustainability and Climate change report, TC Energy stated support for national and industry commitments leading to global emissions reductions in line with the Paris Agreement.
Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: In its 2020 sustainability report, TC Energy state that it supports the Paris Agreement, but do not state support for any specific temperature goals.
Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: TC Energy appears to support several key strands of climate policies while noting some exceptions to each. In 2019, it emphasized the need for “sensible and cohesive" carbon pricing policies, though its specific stance on carbon tax and cap-and-trade legislation is unclear. Through its 2020 CDP disclosure, TC Energy stated support with exceptions for the Clean Fuel Standard, highlighting the need for 'Canadian competitiveness' to be considered in its design. TC Energy also highlighted 'discrepancies' between federal and state methane regulation and supports a standardized approach.
Positioning on Energy Transition: TC Energy appears to support an energy transition with an increasing role for natural gas over coal. It sees natural gas as a complement to renewable power well into the future. In 2018, a spokesperson said the company believes oil and gas will maintain a key role in the energy mix long term. In 2020, TC Energy submitted comments on proposed changes to the National Environmental Policy Act. Two of its three requests would omit GHG emissions from consideration as consequences of a project. The third cites Keystone XL delays as justification for limiting NEPA overreach. Similarly, in 2019, TC Energy opposed Canada’s Bill C-69, which would have made the development of oil and gas infrastructure more difficult by requiring impact assessments to consider the “cumulative effects” of existing or future activities. Evidence also suggests support for the criminalization of protest against fossil fuel infrastructure: TC Energy reportedly advised the South Dakota governor on legislation mirroring ALEC's Critical Infrastructure Act and actively supported a similar bill in Ohio. In a ruling against the Keystone XL pipeline, in June 2020 TC Energy requested that the US supreme court halt the implementation of the ruling, citing concern that it could be extended to a nationwide injunction on new pipelines. Evidence from the Canadian lobbyist register obtained in February 2021 seems to suggest that TC Energy is actively lobbying for government support for energy infrastructure development, including pipelines, gas storage and energy.
Industry Association Governance: TC Energy discloses a list of memberships it holds with industry associations as part of its 2020 'Lobbying, political contributions and corporate memberships' disclosure, however this list does not disclose if TC Energy is aligned or the policy stances held by each industry association. TC Energy remains a member of several trade associations with negative views on climate policy. Through its 2020 CDP disclosure, TC Energy describes its climate positions as consistent with those of the American Petroleum Institute, which has lobbied against a number of climate policy measures including the regulation of methane.