TotalEnergies SE | Targets for indirect scope 3 emissions at TotalEnergies SE
How other organisations have declared their voting intentions
| Organisation name | Declared voting intentions | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Rathbones Group Plc | For | |
| MN | For | |
| Meeschaert Asset Management (Delisted) | For | |
| LBPAM La Banque Postale Asset Management | For | A global integrated energy company like TotalEnergies can decrease emissions without ultimately shrinking business. It is in the company's best interest to pursue the opportunities the energy transition presents; this will also pre-empt risks of abrupt policy interventions, litigation, liability for the costs of climate change, disruptive innovation, and stranded assets. According to Carbon Tracker, two-thirds of fossil fuel reserves must remain in the ground to stay within 1.5°C(14). Therefore, it’s in the best interest of investors to support TotalEnergies to align its 2030 scope 3 targets with the goals of the Paris Agreement. Advancing this target will allow TotalEnergies to invest accordingly to drive down emissions, thereby safeguarding the long-term future of the company and the global economy. |
| BANQUE HOTTINGUER | For | Through an advisory vote, this resolution will provide to the board the support of shareholders to align its scope 3 GhG emissions 2030 reduction targets to the Paris agreement (containing the rise in global average temperature significantly below 2°C compared to pre industrial levels and to continue the action taken to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C) |
| Degroof Petercam Asset Management (DPAM) | For | |
| La Financiere de l'Echiquier | For | |
| PGGM Investments | For | According to a report by Accela Research (https://www.accelaresearch.com/our-work), which PGGM co-sponsored, TotalEnergies plans to increase its hydrocarbon production by 12% between 2022 and 2030. This is not in line with the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement, which requires a decrease in oil and gas production. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence that the company’s current strategy is aligned with a 1.5°C warming pathway. No independent, third-party source shows that TotalEnergies is Paris aligned in 2030. TotalEnergies claims that its lifecycle carbon intensity targets are aligned with the IEA’s Announced Pledges Scenario alignment (Strategy, Sustainability, & Climate, p. 21). However, the company has not provided disclosure on its calculation method and the method is not replicable. Moreover, the APS scenario results in a temperature increase of 1.7°C by 2100, which is not aligned with the Paris Agreement’s ambition of limiting global warming to 1.5°C. Overall, it is unclear to what extent TotalEnergies’ strategy will contribute to a global reduction in absolute emissions in line with 1.5°C. |
| VidaCaixa | For | |
| Anima Sgr | For | Setting Scope 3 emission targets would provide the company a clear roadmap on how to reduce its emissions across its full value chain. Adoption of the proposal would aid to strengthen the company's efforts to reduce its carbon footprint and align its Scope 3 emission targets with Paris Agreement goals. It would also allow investors to better understand how the company is managing its transition to a low carbon economy as well as its climate change-related risks. |
| EFG Asset Management | For | A vote FOR this proposal is warranted, as its adoption would help to strengthen the company's efforts to reduce its carbon footprint and align its Scope 3 emission targets with Paris Agreement goals and would allow investors to better understand how the company is managing both its transition to a low carbon economy and its climate change-related risks. |
| CoreCommodity Management, LLC | For | |
| Rothschild & co Asset Management | For | |
| KBI Global Investors | For | |
| Dorval Asset Management | Against |
DISCLAIMER: By including a shareholder resolution or management proposal in this database, neither the PRI nor the sponsor of the resolution or proposal is seeking authority to act as proxy for any shareholder; shareholders should vote their proxies in accordance with their own policies and requirements.
Any voting recommendations set forth in the descriptions of the resolutions and management proposals included in this database are made by the sponsors of those resolutions and proposals, and do not represent the views of the PRI.
Information on the shareholder resolutions, management proposals and votes in this database have been obtained from sources that are believed to be reliable, but the PRI does not represent that it is accurate, complete, or up-to-date, including information relating to resolutions and management proposals, other signatories’ vote pre-declarations (including voting rationales), or the current status of a resolution or proposal. You should consult companies’ proxy statements for complete information on all matters to be voted on at a meeting.