Back Resolutions
Back Current Initiatives
Back Donate
Default image for pages

Resolution Details

Company:

EOG Resources, Inc.

Year:

2023

Issue Area:

Lobbying & Political Contributions

Focus Area:

Climate Lobbying, Paris-Aligned Climate Lobbying

Status:

Withdrawn for Agreement

Resolution Text

WHEREAS: The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change asserts that greenhouse gas emissions must decline by 45 percent from 2010 levels by 2030 to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. If that goal is not met, even more rapid reductions, at greater cost, will be required to compensate for the slow start on the path to global net zero emissions.1 

EOG Resources has set a net zero goal by 2040 for Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions. However, for the Company to achieve its climate goals, supportive public policy is essential. Therefore, the Company should ensure that all public policy advocacy activities and spending are aligned and coordinated, including support for third party organizations that engage in lobbying. 

Even with the recent passage of the Inflation Reduction Act, critical gaps remain between Nationally Determined Contributions set by the US government and the actions required to prevent the worst effects of climate change. Domestically and internationally, companies have an important and constructive role to play in enabling policymakers to close these gaps. 

Corporate lobbying that is inconsistent with the Paris Agreement and companies’ own net zero targets presents increasingly material risks to companies and their shareholders, as delays in emissions reductions undermine political stability, damage infrastructure, impair access to finance and insurance, and exacerbate health risks and costs. Further, companies face increasing reputational risks from consumers, investors, and other stakeholders if they appear to delay or block effective climate policy. 

Of particular concern are trade associations and other politically active organizations that say they speak for business but too often present forceful obstacles to addressing the climate crisis. 

RESOLVED: Shareholders of EOG Resources, Inc. (“EOG”) request that the Board of Directors annually analyze and report to shareholders (at reasonable cost, omitting confidential and proprietary information) on whether and how EOG is aligning its lobbying and policy influence activities and positions, both direct and indirect (through trade associations, coalitions, alliances, and other organizations), with its commitment to achieve net zero emissions by 2040, including the activities and positions analyzed, the criteria used to assess alignment, and involvement of stakeholders, if any, in the analytical process. 

SUPPORTING STATEMENT: In evaluating the degree of alignment between EOG’s emissions goals and its lobbying, the proponents recommend that the Company include in its analysis EOG’s direct and indirect policy positions and lobbying actions, such as comment submissions, with regard to climate provisions of key international, federal and state legislation and regulation. 

The proponents believe this request is generally consistent with the investor expectations described in the Global Standard on Responsible Climate Lobbying, and that this Standard is a useful resource for implementation.2  

1. https://unfccc.int/news/updated-ndc-synthesis-report-worrying-trends-confirmed

2. https://climate-lobbying.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/2022_global-standard-responsible-climate-lobbying_APPENDIX.pdf

  

​ 

Resolution Details

Company:

EOG Resources, Inc.

Year:

2023

Issue Area:

Climate Change

Focus Area:

GHG Reduction and Targets

Status:

Withdrawn for Agreement

Resolution Text

Whereas, methane is at least 80 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide over a 20-year period. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reports that 32% of U.S. methane emissions from human activities comes from natural gas and petroleum systems.[1] According to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), cutting methane is the strongest lever we have to slow climate change over the next 25 years.[2]

The EPA methodology used to estimate methane emissions underestimates and fails to capture many major leaks, which waste a valuable product worth over $2 billion per year. Studies have found actual emissions to be 50 to 100% higher than reported emissions.[3] In certain basins, emissions are more than 10 times industry-disclosed figures.2 Therefore, oil and gas industry Scope 1 emissions may be significantly higher than currently reported. Methane emissions estimates improve when direct measurement methodologies are used, when emissions are identified by source type and at a site or facility level, and then reconciled, as shown by the Oil and Gas Methane Partnership 2.0 (OGMP).[4]

The U.S. joined the Global Methane Pledge in 2021, committing to use best available inventory methodologies to quantify methane emissions. The same year, investors managing more than $6 trillion supported strong federal methane regulations. Companies responsible for approximately 30% of global natural gas production, including bp, Shell, TotalEnergies, Occidental, and ConocoPhillips, have joined the OGMP, a multi-stakeholder initiative launched by UNEP committed to improving methane data quality and consistency.[5] Companies that do not adequately manage methane emissions risk their reputation and license to operate.

According to EPA data, EOG Resources (“EOG”) ranks 74th in methane intensity among U.S. top 100 oil and gas producers, with an intensity of 0.07%.[6]  However, given the limitations of EPA’s methodology, this ranking lacks credibility. Investors would like to see our company take the critical step to reduce concerns by using direct methane emission measurements across all operations and reporting on it.

Resolved, shareholders request that EOG issue a report analyzing the reliability of its methane emission disclosures. The report should:

Be made public, omit proprietary information, and be prepared expeditiously at reasonable cost;
Summarize the outcome of efforts to directly measure methane emissions, using recognized frameworks such as OGMP;
Describe any material difference between the Company’s direct measurement results and Company’s reported methane emissions; and
Based on the results, assess whether to alter the Company’s actions to achieve its climate targets.

Supporting Statement:

At management’s discretion, we recommend that the report also:

Describe the types of source- and site-level measurements used;
Describe any material difference between third-party direct measurement results and Company’s reported methane emissions;
Describe plans to validate emissions estimates and disclosure through third-party audit or evaluation; and
Describe plans to improve emission estimates over time, consistent with frameworks such as OGMP.

[1] https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases

[2] https://www.ccacoalition.org/sites/default/files/press/GMA%20Press%20Release%20FINAL.pdf

[3] https://www.seas.harvard.edu/news/2021/03/oil-and-natural-gas-production-emit-more-methane-previously-thought, https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-25017-4

[4] https://business.edf.org/files/Investors-Guide-to-the-OGMP_09.17.21_FINAL.pdf

[5] http://ogmpartnership.com/partners

[6] https://www.ceres.org/resources/reports/benchmarking-methane-and-other-ghg-emissions-oil-natural-gas-production-united

  

​