company has criticized renewable subsidy programs in Europe. ExxonMobil is on the board of directors for the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers, which appears to have played a significant role in pushing for a rollback of the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards in the United States in 2018. In Canada, ExxonMobil’s affiliate Imperial Oil appears to have successfully persuaded the government to delay a clean fuel standard. ExxonMobil has also opposed US renewable fuel standards. In 2018, CEO Darren Woods argued that oil and natural gas “will play a huge role in all scenarios”. ExxonMobil appears to make extensive use of social media advertising to communicate its position on the energy mix. In the run-up to the US mid-terms in 2018, ExxonMobil ran an extensive social media advertising campaign promoting increased oil and gas production and opposing a number of state-level policy initiatives that would have placed restrictions on such activities. Climate Policy Score: D Between 2015-2018, Shell has become more positive across different areas of climate policy while continuing to simultaneously lobby for policy to advance fossil fuel production and consumption. It also retains membership to various trade groups that directly contradict Shell’s own positions. In consultation with EU policymakers in 2017, Shell supported a transition to a net zero economy in Europe ‘before 2070’ based on its ‘2C aligned’ Sky Scenario. However, Shell CEO Ben Van Beurden has suggested that ambition beyond a 2C scenario should not be explored to avoid disappointment. In 2017, Shell supported EU emission standards for power facilities in EU capacity markets. Throughout 2018 the company has also advocated for carbon pricing policy including international carbon markets, further reforms to raise the ambition of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, and appears to support a US federal-level carbon tax. Despite this, in 2018, US subsidiary Shell Oil lobbied against measures to strengthen the ambition of the Cap and Trade scheme in California. Furthermore, despite choosing not to fund a joint industry effort to block a carbon tax policy in Washington state in 2018, Shell’s CEO publicly criticized the policy prior to a public vote. In 2019, Shell has called on the US EPA to tighten rather than weaken methane regulations. However, the company previously attended meetings with Trump Administration officials along with the American Petroleum Institute in 2017-2018 to discuss methane, disclosing in 2018 that it supported “fixing” the EPA’s Obama-era methane rule to make it “workable”. In 2018, Shell opposed the rollback of US Fuel Economy Standards despite being on the board of the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, which appears to have played a significant role in pushing for their weakening in 2018. In 2017 Shell advocated to EU policymakers for “well-targeted regulation” to support particular low-carbon technological innovation investments the company is making. However, Shell also communicates that they see oil and gas “playing a major role throughout the decades of transition and beyond.” In 2018, the company lobbied the EU commission to embed natural gas in the EU’s future energy mix. In the US, Shell Oil also lobbied the EPA for regulatory approaches that avoid “significantly encumbering” natural gas-fired generation, despite recognizing that CCS “may be too costly to constitute the best system of emission reduction”. Between 2017-18, the company also lobbied US policymakers in support of opening new areas of US federal land for oil and gas exploration and production. Whilst Shell has used advertising to promote its EV business and the electrification of transport, the company is a member of the API, the AFPM and FuelsEurope, all of which lobbied against progressive policy to promote electric vehicles in the US and EU in 2017-2018. 24 InfluenceMap March 2019