Prototype company example

ExxonMobil

ExxonMobil projects fewer emissions per unit of output, but more emissions overall.

Read the findings ↓

Higher value = more gaps detected Lower value = greater alignment

Illumination Index

11/22


Findings ↓

Research detail ↓

Sources ↓

ExxonMobil’s climate messages, projected emissions, what its targets include and the rules used to calculate the figures


What was reviewed:

What this means for you:

Efficiency and total emissions are different measures. A company can emit less for each unit it produces while emitting more overall if production grows.



Details behind the findings

About +6%

Projected change in total life-cycle emissions by 2030, compared with 2016

About -8%

Projected change in emissions per unit of output over the same comparison


What The Illumination Index Found

The study records a projected fall of about 8% in emissions per unit of output, alongside a rise of about 6% in total emissions, by 2030 compared with 2016. These figures cover the full life cycle, including activities beyond the company’s own operations.

1


The two emissions measures point in different directions.

Findings

What this means:

These are forecasts, not measured 2030 results. A headline about improved efficiency does not, by itself, show that the total amount of emissions is falling.


The study compared an earlier plan covering company emissions with a later forecast covering emissions across the full life cycle. The figures include different activities.

2

Earlier and later plans counted different emissions.

What this means:

The figures cannot establish a direct reversal without first accounting for those differences. Check what is included before comparing percentages.


Different calculation rules can produce different comparisons.

The study examined ExxonMobil’s proposed Carbon Emissions Accounting approach alongside the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, a widely used set of reporting rules.

3

What this means:

Figures calculated under different rules cannot be assumed to mean the same thing. The methods need to be checked before comparing companies.


How to read the research detail

These are the original names used in the research. Each indicator is a question applied to the same selected messages and records. The explanation below each name tells you what was checked. The number records what the researcher found in those materials.

Some labels need their explanation. “Third-party verification” checks whether outside support is missing or described inaccurately; a higher value does not mean more outside review.

0 - Not detected

1 - Partially detected

2 - Clearly detected

Vagueness
Checks whether the message explains what the claim means.
1
Lack of quantification
Checks for numbers, units and a starting year that help readers measure progress.
1
Selective disclosure
Checks whether information in the reports is left out of the public messages selected for this study.
1
Future deflection
Checks whether future promises are explained alongside what is happening now.
1
Third-party verification
Checks whether claims of outside support are accurate and backed by evidence.
1
Cross-platform inconsistency
Checks whether the company gives consistent information across the materials reviewed.
1
Emissions trajectory vs. reduction claims
Checks whether reported emissions follow the direction and timing of the company's reduction goals.
1
Carbon neutrality and net zero claim integrity
Checks which emissions a promise covers, what reductions are planned and how remaining emissions are addressed.
1
Omission of material controversies
Checks whether relevant public legal or regulatory issues are discussed in the messages reviewed.
1
ESG ratings volatility
Checks changes in outside environmental assessments against the company's public messages.
1
TCFD completeness
Checks whether reporting covers four areas: oversight, strategy, risk management, and measures and targets.
1

ESG means environmental, social and governance. TCFD means Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures, a framework for reporting climate related business risks and opportunities. Indicator values describe the original coding behind the overall result.


What is the TCFD?

TCFD stands for Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures. It is a framework that helps companies explain how climate-related risks and opportunities could affect their business, strategy and financial planning. TCFD helps make climate reporting easier to evaluate and compare.

References

Environmental Resources Management (ERM CVS). Independent limited assurance statement: ExxonMobil greenhouse gas emissions and energy use data. ERM.

ExxonMobil. (2024). 2024 advancing climate solutions progress report. https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/sustainability-and-society/climate-solutions

ExxonMobil. (2024). 2024 sustainability report. https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/sustainability-and-society/sustainability-report

ExxonMobil. (2024). Annual report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Form 10-K). U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. https://investors.exxonmobil.com/financial-information/annual-reports-and-proxy

ExxonMobil. (n.d.). Real world progress . https://lowcarbon.exxonmobil.com/about-us/real-world-progress

InfluenceMap. (2025). ExxonMobil: Climate policy engagement . https://lobbymap.org/company/ExxonMobil

International Energy Agency. (2023). Net zero by 2050: A roadmap for the global energy sector. IEA. https://www.iea.org/reports/net-zero-by-2050

Ipieca & IOGP. (2023). Ipieca–IOGP petroleum industry guidelines for reporting greenhouse gas emissions (3rd ed.). Ipieca. https://www.ipieca.org/resources/good-practice/ipieca-iogp-petroleum-industry-guidelines-for-reporting-greenhouse-gas-emissions/

Net Zero Tracker. (n.d.). ExxonMobil . Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit, Oxford Net Zero, NewClimate Institute, & Data-Driven EnviroLab. https://zerotracker.net

Science Based Targets initiative. (n.d.). SBTi target dashboard . https://sciencebasedtargets.org/companies-taking-action

World Resources Institute & World Business Council for Sustainable Development. (2004). The greenhouse gas protocol: A corporate accounting and reporting standard (Rev. ed.). WRI/WBCSD. https://ghgprotocol.org/corporate-standard

Previous
Previous

Apple · 12/22

Next
Next

Johnson&Johnson · 12/22