Climate Branding Tactics Three significant trends in climate branding tactics are increasingly evident from the oil majors. ◼ Draw attention to low carbon (and away from fossil fuels): This is the most commonly used and best recognized advertising theme. For example, ExxonMobil’s promotion of its biofuels from algae technology in its ‘Tiny Organism’ campaign. ◼ Position the company as a climate expert: Framing the company as an authority on climate change and integral to a solution. Themes include emphasizing the companies’ knowledge monopoly on the global energy system or know-how on clean technologies. Shell’s promotion of its “energy ideas” through its Make the Future campaign is a key example, so too is BP’s extensive promotion of its Statistical Review, Technology Review and Energy Outlook. ◼ Acknowledge climate concern while ignoring key parts of the solution: Enhanced efforts to assimilate the messaging tone and style of the global climate movement and convince stakeholders of the company’s concern for climate change. In general, the campaigns largely ignore the need for binding policy, which is increasingly counter to what the IPCC’s recommendations imply to meet climate targets. Misalignment Issues The research demonstrates how the companies have used branding to counter increasing societal pressure on climate rather than decisive efforts to change their business and lobbying practices. Two core disconnects are emerging. ◼ Gap between spin and reality in low carbon investment: Despite efforts to draw attention to low carbon activities, the overwhelming business focus remains on oil and gas related business, ($110Bn vs $3Bn among for the five oil majors for 2019 projections). Exxon’s high-profile advertising of its biofuels from algae research contrasts with the relatively tiny role it currently plays or will play in its overall business. Exxon’s goal of reaching 10,000 barrels of biofuel a day by 2025 would still equate to just 0.2% of its current refinery capacity – in other words, a rounding error relative its global business. ◼ Gap between top line climate statements and actual lobbying: The oil major’s lobbying practices remain clearly misaligned from the positivity of their top-level communications. For example, at the same time as making high-profile commitments on the importance of reducing methane from oil and gas facilities through the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative (OGCI), Chevron and BP have actively lobbied US policymakers to roll back US efforts to regulate such methane emissions. 13 InfluenceMap March 2019