Coverage in Politco, Times of India, ANP, ESG Investor, Financial Investigator, DeSmog.
■ New analysis shows that most corporate advocacy promoting carbon capture and storage (CCS) for addressing climate change is not aligned with pathways recommended by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for limiting global temperature rise to 1.5°C or well-below 2°C. This study draws from InfluenceMap's LobbyMap platform, which tracks the climate policy engagement of over 500 of the world’s largest companies and 250 industry associations. It examines corporate advocacy on CCS, i.e., attempts to influence CCS-related policy or to push for CCS inclusion in climate policies where it was not originally intended to have a significant role. (IPCC pathways for limiting global temperature rise to 1.5°C or well-below 2°C are hereafter referred to as "Science-Based Policy.")
■ Corporate advocacy in favor of CCS between 2021 and 2023 has been dominated by the oil and gas sector, which uses a wide range of influence tactics – from PR and advertising to regulatory lobbying – to promote the technology. Entities that appear most active on CCS-related policy include companies such as Occidental Petroleum, ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, Santos, and Cenovus, and industry associations such as the Australian Energy Producers (formerly APPEA), International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (IOGP), Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), and American Petroleum Institute (API). Corporate advocacy ranges from the promotion of high-level narratives by CEOs, as seen by Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) at a Climate Tech event in May 2023, to detailed regulatory engagement, as seen in formal comments to government in February 2023 by the Australian Energy Producers, which pushed to include CCS in a federal policy focused on expanding renewable energy.
■ Over 80% of all evidence of corporate engagement on CCS captured by the LobbyMap platform between 2021-2023 is not aligned with Science-Based Policy guidance. This evidence is characterized as either indiscriminate CCS promotion that fails to clarify how the technology should be best applied in line with IPCC guidance or as part of more explicit arguments to oppose a transition away from fossil fuel use. A common goal across CCS advocacy is to drive financial and regulatory support for CCS-focused pathways. In a letter to the Canadian government, for example, the Pathways Alliance advocated for “large” tax benefits to commercialize CCUS (Carbon Capture Utilisation and Storage) without specifying the intended application of the technology. In Korea, the Federation of Korean Industries (FKI) has emphasized the need for major financial support for CCS over other decarbonization pathways.
■ This research identifies three common claims that appear across corporate advocacy on CCS: that CCS allows for continued oil and gas expansion; that CCS is central to meeting global climate targets; and that CCS can support jobs and communities. These claims appear to misrepresent Science-Based Policy guidance to varying degrees. Together, they have been pushed by the fossil fuel sector at international and regional levels with the ultimate impact of capturing the global narrative on the role of CCS, misdirecting policy attention away from fossil fuel phase-out, and enabling policy and investment decisions based on "business-as-usual" assumptions for the oil and gas sector.
■ Evidence of a common messaging playbook suggests strong collaboration between global oil and gas companies in their CCS advocacy. Groups such as the International Gas Union appear to provide a forum for such collaboration; previous InfluenceMap analysis of the IGU’s playbook highlighted how the sector has coordinated to vary and target its messaging to suit local markets.
■ This report also assesses recent high-level communications from 21 national governments (the G20 and UAE) on CCS and fossil fuel phase-out, finding that the positions of 17 of the 21 countries reflect those of the oil and gas sector. The future role for fossil fuels, and the deployment of CCS to prolong fossil fuel use while addressing climate change, is set to be a key point of discussion during the United Nations’ upcoming 28th Conference of the Parties (COP) on Climate Change in Dubai in December 2023.
■ There appear to be parallels in corporate and government messaging on CCS in many of the countries assessed, suggesting that industry has been successful in many of its efforts to influence government positions. Countries such as Canada, Japan, the UK, and the US – where the oil and gas sector actively promotes CCS as the primary decarbonization technology – tend to see fossil fuels with CCS as a long-term climate strategy. Countries with large state-owned oil, gas, and coal companies also tend to support CCS alongside a significant, long-term role for fossil fuels.
Science-Based Policy: The policies and measures highlighted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to deliver the Paris Agreement's goals of limiting global temperature rise to well below 2°C, with efforts to limit to 1.5°C. This includes the specific technology and policy-level insights from the IPCC that make up InfluenceMap's Science-Based Policy Benchmarks (see here for full details).
