AES Corporation

InfluenceMap Score
B-
Performance Band
65%
Organisation Score
80%
Relationship Score
Sector:
Utilities
Head​quarters:
Arlington, United States
Official Web Site:
Wikipedia:

Climate Lobbying Overview: The AES Corporation (AES) appears to be engaging on climate policy with mixed positions in the U.S. and other countries in which it operates. Although the company demonstrates positive top-line messaging on high-level policies, including the U.S. reconciliation bill, it appears to be promoting the long-term role of fossil gas across several regions.

Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: AES demonstrates positive top-line messaging on climate policy. In April 2021, AES joined the We Mean Business Coalition in advocating for an ambitious U.S. Nationally Determined Contribution to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. In July 2020 with the Science-Based Targets Initiative, AES similarly called for governments to set ambitious policies in COVID-19 recovery packages toward achieving net-zero emissions “well before 2050.” The company has stated support for a price on carbon in its March 2021 Climate Scenario Report. In January 2022, AES signed the open letter organized by the American Clean Power Association advocating to Congressional leadership to finalize negotiations and pass the climate policies in the Build Back Better Act.

Engagement with Climate-Related Policy: AES has demonstrated mixed support for federal and state-level climate policies in the U.S. In its March 2021 climate report, the company suggests it would support a price in the form of a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade system. AES has also lobbied against the Federal Energy Regulation Commission’s Minimum Price Offer Rule (MOPR) in November 2018, a policy which would make it more difficult for renewable resources to enter the PJM market. In subsequent comments on MOPR in January 2020, AES appeared supportive of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. On the state level, the Cincinnati Enquirer reported in August 2021 on the company’s support for Ohio House Bill 389, which would incentivize utilities to develop energy efficiency programs. Previously, in April 2019, subsidiary Dayton Power & Light appeared to advocate against eliminating the energy efficiency programs as proposed in Ohio House Bill 6. Further, in January 2019, CEO Andrés Gluski appeared to support Hawaii’s renewable energy mandate. However, AES has previously taken more negative positions on U.S. federal GHG emissions standards, directly advocating to the EPA in April 2018 to oppose the Clean Power Plan.

Positioning on Energy Transition: AES appears to have inconsistent positions on the energy transition across the regions it operates, supporting ambitious decarbonization plans in some states, while pushing for a pro-longed role for fossil fuels including coal and fossil gas in other geographies. On its corporate website, AES appears to support Hawaii’s target to decarbonize its economy by 2045, California’s target to decarbonize its power sector by 2045, and New York’s target to achieve 70% clean energy resources by 2030. Additionally, AES appears to support economy-wide electrification and green hydrogen production in its 2021 climate report.

However, on its corporate website, the company promotes fossil gas in the Caribbean, Central America, and Southern America by stating support for transitioning from oil to liquified natural gas (LNG) on the basis that LNG is “cleaner-burning” without setting clear conditions on the deployment of CCS or methane abatement measures. Similarly, in its 2021 climate report, AES promotes a transition pathway from coal and oil to fossil gas in Vietnam and the Dominican Republic. On the U.S. state-level, AES has actively engaged to protect the role of coal. In October 2021 and June 2021 testimonies to oppose Ohio House Bill 351 and Senate Bill 117, respectively, subsidiary AES Ohio advocated to preserve the coal plant subsidies authorized by House Bill 6; AES had previously supported HB 6 in 2019 after lawmakers added subsidies to protect the company’s coal plants. In January 2019, subsidiary AES Hawaii directly advocated to policymakers to oppose Hawaii House Bill 563, which would prohibit the approval of a contract for coal-sourced electricity after 2022.

Industry Association Governance: AES published a trade associations review in December 2021 that includes some details on the company’s role within each organization, however it does not disclose the associations’ engagement on specific climate policies aside from alignment with the Paris Agreement. AES Corporation is a member of the Edison Electric Institute and Business Roundtable, both of which have offered mixed support for U.S. climate policy, including for the climate provisions in the federal reconciliation bill.

QUERIES
DATA SOURCES
12NANSNS1NS
22NSNSNS1NS
11NSNSNS1NS
11NSNSNSNSNS
-1NA-1NANANANA
10NSNSNSNSNS
1NSNS1NSNSNS
0NSNS21NSNS
NS01211NS
111-100NS
NS2NS-1NSNSNS
0NA-1NANANANA
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
92%
 
92%
 
84%
 
84%
 
52%
 
52%
 
93%
 
93%
 
58%
 
58%
 
95%
 
95%

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.