We have strengthened the algorithm for discounting the impact older evidence on an organization's top-line metrics. Evidence from within the last two years is weighted the strongest and then gradually weighted out of the scoring calculations as it gets older. All evidence that is 5 years or older is completely removed from the scoring calculations. Users will still be able to view older evidence items that are archived the scoring matrix below, but these will not be impacting the organization's current scores.
We have expanded the list of climate policies we assess company engagement with to incorporate land-use related policy, referring to legislative or regulatory measures to enhance and protect ecosystems and land where carbon is being stored. Assessments under this category are currently underweighted in terms of their contribution to the overall company metrics. This weighting will be progressively increased over the next 6 months.
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.
Climate Policy Engagement Overview: Xcel Energy (Xcel) engages on US climate policy with a mix of positive and negative positions, with evidence of advocacy in several states including Colorado, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. Although the company has supported renewable energy tax credits, it appears to advocate for a prominent role for fossil gas. Xcel is a member of the Edison Electric Institute and serves on the board of directors for the American Gas Association, both of which promote the long-term role of fossil gas in the energy mix.
Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: Xcel has limited top-line messaging on climate policy. The company does not appear to have taken an explicit position on the Paris Agreement or the need to reduce GHG emissions in line with IPCC science. In a February 2021 Economist article, former CEO Ben Fowke stated that the company prefers legislation over climate-related regulations as it is “not as subject to change.” In a June 2021 op-ed in Utility Dive, however, Fowke appeared to support US federal policies to respond to climate change.
Engagement with Climate-Related Policy: Xcel appears to take a mix of positive and negative positions on US climate-related policy. The company has been supportive of federal legislation, signing a January 2022 joint letter organized by the American Clean Power Association that advocated to Congressional leadership to pass the Build Back Better Act’s clean energy tax credits. However, Xcel is actively unsupportive of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed methane emissions standards: in January 2022 comments to the EPA, it stated that “it is important to recognize that attaining zero emissions from the natural gas supply chain is likely not feasible, cost-effective, nor necessary to meet climate goals.” The company also signed the January 2022 comments by the Class of ’85 Regulatory Response Group (Class of ‘85) that appeared to oppose updates to the methane regulations.
Xcel demonstrates negative positions on state-level climate proposals. According to its lobbying reports, Xcel directly engaged with policymakers in March 2022 to oppose Colorado Senate Bill 22-138, which proposed 2028 and 2040 statewide GHG emissions reduction goals. In its 2019 Carbon Report, Xcel described 762270 distributed energy generation] policies as “hidden and unfair subsidies,” which reflects in its engagement on community solar policies: according to its Wisconsin lobbying report, in August 2021 subsidiary Northern States Power opposed Wisconsin Senate Bill 490, which aimed to establish community solar programs in the state. In a March 2022 hearing at the Minnesota House Climate and Energy Finance and Policy Committee, Xcel appeared to emphasize the cost of proposed energy storage legislation, stating that “subsidies have the potential to make this all the more regressive.”
Positioning on Energy Transition: Xcel takes a mix of positions on the transition of the energy mix, supporting transport electrification measures while promoting a long-term role for fossil gas. At the federal level, the company has pushed back on the EPA’s draft power plant rules: in August 2023, it submitted individual and two joint comments - one by the Class of ‘85 and one by the Midcontinent Power Sector Collaborative – that did not support the ambition of the proposed rules to address GHG emissions from coal and gas power plants. However, Xcel also submitted October 2022 joint comments with several utilities that supported the fuel-switching provisions in the Department of Energy’s gas furnace energy efficiency proposal.
Xcel actively engages on state-level policies related to the energy transition, especially in Colorado. According to its April 2022 lobbying reports, Xcel supported Senate Bill 22-193, which aimed to reduce emissions through a wide range of policies. In the same month, in comments on Colorado’s Draft 2022 Clean Truck Strategy, Xcel advocated for state policymakers to begin the rulemaking process to adopt California’s Advanced Clean Trucks rule. As reported by the Energy and Policy Institute in February 2022, Xcel co-launched the group Coloradans for Energy Access which advocates for the long-term role of fossil gas and opposes electrification in the state.
Industry Association Governance: Xcel has published a list of its industry association memberships, however the company fails to disclose details of each group’s engagement activities. The company has not published a formal review of its industry associations. Xcel CEO Frenzel serves on the 2023 Board of Directors for the American Gas Association, which strategically opposes US climate policy. Xcel is also a member of the Edison Electric Institute, which continues to advocate for a long-term role for fossil gas.
InfluenceMap collects and assesses evidence of corporate climate policy engagement on a weekly basis, depending on the availability of information from each specific data source (for more information see our methodology). While this analysis flows through to the company’s scores each week, the summary above is updated periodically. This summary was last updated in Q1 2024.