Equinor ASA | Identify and manage climate-related risks and possibilities at Equinor ASA

Status
Filed
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Proposal number
17
Resolution details
Company ticker
EQNR (previously Statoil)
Lead filer
Resolution ask
Set targets or plans
ESG theme
  • Environment
ESG sub-theme
  • Climate change
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Energy
Company HQ country
Norway
Resolved clause
Shareholder WWF has proposed the following resolution:
“Equinor identifies and manages risks and possibilities regarding climate and integrates these in the company’s strategy.
The company sets targets and implements measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions over a short- and long-term
period in line with the target to limit global warming to 1.5 °C, and reports to shareholders on progress against these
targets. Targets and measures include the entire supply chain (scope 1, 2 and 3) and entail an absolute reduction in
greenhouse gas emissions.”
Supporting statement
This spring, Equinor presented an updated Energy Transition Plan for the company. Several shareholders have previously
stated that the current energy transition plan does not include targets, milestones and ambitions that are sufficient for the
company to be considered to have a strategy that is aligned with the 1.5-degree target in the Paris Agreement. Rather
than increasing its ambitions in line with this feedback, Equinor has now lowered its targets for emissions reductions and
ambitions for investment in, and production of, renewable energy. Simultaneously, Equinor has increased its estimates for
future oil and gas production.
The company communicates in its Annual Report for 2024 that they are now “adjusting their ambitions to reality”. This
statement is not a reference to the reality that climate change seriously begins to have heavy consequences for countries,
people and assets around the world. It is not a reference to the International Energy Agency (IEA)'s analyses showing that
there will be a record surplus of oil in 2030. It is not a reference to the expected reduction in European gas consumption,
and thus gas demand, in the coming decades.
Equinor has received criticism on multiple occasions for its energy transition plan and investment plans not being aligned
with the Paris Agreement. Not just from environmental NGOs, but also from large financial institutions. Most recently in
March, Sarasin & Partners explained its divestment from Equinor with the fact that the company, in their view, has not
adjusted its plans in line with the Paris Agreement's 1.5-degree target.
The greatest weakness of Equinor's current Energy Transition Plan is that it is based on a carbon intensity target, rather
than a target for absolute emission reduction for the entire value chain. A carbon intensity target does not guarantee
lower emissions, as it includes a number of parameters in addition to greenhouse gas emissions. This is well illustrated in
Equinor's Annual Report for 2024. Here, Equinor highlights that the company's carbon intensity clearly decreased from
2023 to 2024. The same development is not observed for absolute emissions from Scope-3, which increased by 0.7
percent in the same time period. This tendency is also present in the company's projections, where it is estimated that
absolute emissions from Scope-3 will remain at the current level until 2030, while carbon intensity will be reduced by 15-20
percent.
In Autumn 2022 the Minister for Trade and Industry Jan Christian Vestre presented the Norwegian government’s
ownership-report to the Parliament (white paper): A Greener and more active state ownership - The State’s direct
ownership of companies. In this white paper, the consideration of sustainability in the State’s goal as an owner has been
clarified and strengthened. For companies that primarily operate in competition with others, which includes Equinor, the
State’s goal has been altered to the “highest possible return over time in a sustainable manner”.
This has been further defined in the following way (ch.12.2): By expressing clear expectations of the companies, the State
wants to contribute to attaining the State’s goal as an owner in a sustainable manner. This requires the companies to
balance financial, social and environmental factors without reducing the ability of future generations to meet their own
needs.

The report (box 11.4) refers to the Science Based Targets Initiative (SBTi) for the definition of science-based emission
paths: A company will first be climate neutral when its total greenhouse gas emissions are reduced in line with the 1.5
degree target, and thereafter that the remaining emissions are neutralized by the permanent removal of equivalent
volumes from the atmosphere.
In a an addendum to a shareholder proposal to Equinor's AGM in 2023 (Item 9 to Equinor ASA's AGM on 10th May 2023),
the Norwegian state, through the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries, stated that “The state expects the board and
administration to work actively with the state's expectations and consider whether and how they should be taken into
account in the company's energy transition plan and related reporting”.
The undersigned shareholder’s view is that Equinor’s updated energy transition plan has not taken into account the
expectations of the state, and that the company’s investment plans are clearly not aligned with the State’s goal of ensuring
the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. This forms the basis for our resolution in which we ask Equinor to
align its plans with the expectations in the white paper on state ownership and ensure that the company reduces its
absolute emissions associated with both production and the wider supply chain in line with the target to limit global
warming to 1.5 °C.

How other organisations have declared their voting intentions

Organisation nameDeclared voting intentionsRationale
VidaCaixaFor

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.