We have demonstrated strong engagement with major trade organizations to advance climate policy positions that include support for a market-based approach to reduce GHG emissions. To this end, we have shown successful leadership that has yielded positive results and progress within the American Petroleum Institute (API), the Business Roundtable (BRT), the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and others. Our advocacy further addresses methane and flaring regulation, clean fuel or power standards, and sector-specific regulations based on carbon-intensity benchmarks. Publicly communicating our governance processes and the depth of our advocacy efforts is a crucial component of our outreach in addressing stakeholder concerns.

Within API’s Climate Committee, for example, we work with peers to address climate change issues affecting the U.S. oil and natural gas industry. The group oversees the development of API’s Climate Position, Climate Policy Principles and industry initiatives. The group developed the鈥疌limate Action Framework, a combination of policies, innovation and industry initiatives to reduce emissions from energy production, transportation and use by society. We are active in many API committees that can also involve or address climate-related issues, and we work to contribute our perspective in alignment with our positions and actions.

The鈥疉merican Exploration and Production Council鈥�(AXPC) Climate Change Task Force addresses climate change issues affecting the U.S. exploration and production sector of the oil and natural gas industry. The group has helped to develop AXPC’s climate policy and principles, its ESG Metrics Framework and Template, and its position on methane regulations.

Most trade organizations in which we participate have climate change positions that align with ours. Where they do not, we continue to offer our viewpoint and attempt to work with them to better align their position with ours. For example, we continue to work to influence API, BRT, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other organizations to support the direct federal regulation of methane. In addition to actively participating in trade organization position updates, we have also voted against or abstained from supporting specific actions requested by a trade organization if their positions were not aligned with ours. We have also decided not to renew some memberships because of misalignment on a number of policy topics, one of which is climate change. For more information about our governance and major trade associations please see Political Support Policies and Procedures.

As part of our routine review of trade association membership, the company evaluates how trade organization policy positions align with those expressed by ConocoPhillips, including:鈥�

Carbon Pricing:鈥疉 well-designed pricing regime on carbon emissions is the most effective tool to reduce greenhouse gas emissions across the global economy. Carbon pricing policy should support the implementation of currently economic emissions reduction projects and provide support for innovation to encourage the development of currently uneconomic projects. A revenue-neutral carbon tax that is transparent, predictable and cost-effective to administer would be an effective policy option. It should result in some relief via the elimination of other laws and regulations aimed at reducing or controlling carbon and other GHG emissions. In measuring alignment, we considered policies which support a market-based mechanism to reduce GHG emissions across the economy as aligned with our own.

Addressing Methane Emissions:鈥疶he most effective tool for emissions reductions across the economy would be a well-designed federal pricing regime on carbon emissions. In the absence of a carbon pricing policy, we support enactment of cost-effective federal methane regulations on new and existing sources that would preserve a state’s ability to adapt implementation to local conditions. In measuring alignment, we considered policies which support direct regulation of methane as aligned with our own.