Sample selection

The 47 coal companies included in the Coal Companies Watchlist are neither representative of the entire global coal sector, nor of the global financial exposure to it. Instead, the sample is primarily based on the coal exposure of a selected subset of financial institutions that specifically required a coal phase-out plan by the end of 2021 or earlier (Société Générale, BNP Paribas, Natixis, Crédit Agricole, and Unicredit for banks and Société Générale, BNP Paribas, Natixis, Crédit Agricole, and Axa for investors).

The sample contains the biggest coal companies in terms of coal power capacity, or of coal production capacity, among the coal companies to which the subset of financial institutions is the most exposed, as per the financial data of the Global Coal Exit List 2020. First, two lists were established, one for investors, and one for creditors. Second, these two lists were merged in one unique intermediary list. To account for coal companies that have already been excluded, an additional filter was finally used to keep only coal companies for which at least one transaction involving the top five banks and tope five investors has been recorded in 2021 (based on Bloomberg data).

This intermediary list includes 43coal companies and represents about 80% of the aggregated coal exposure of the top five banks and top five investors that asked for the publication of coal phase-out plans in their coal policy Finally, 4 additional companies were included for illustrative purposes, as they epitomize what should or should not be done in a coal transition plan: Engie, Albioma, Endesa (subsidiary of Enel), and Iberdrola.

The sample includes 5 mining companies, 34 power utilities and 8 hybrid power and mining companies – some hybrid power and mining companies with unsignificant mining capacities have been categorized as power companies only. 17 companies are from North America, 14 from Europe, and 13 from the Asia and Pacific region. Companies included in the sample accounts for 5% of total annual coal production and 17.5% of total coal-based power capacity as per the Global Coal Exit List 2021.

Methodology for assessing the coal phase-out plans

The 10 criteria laid out in Urgewald and Reclaim Finance’s previous report are grouped in four broader categories, allowing to rank coal phase-out plans according to their overall level of credibility:

  • Red code: Companies that are still expanding their coal capacity (criterion n°1) are not even recognizing the imperative to exit coal. Therefore, we consider that such companies do not have any form of credible phase-out commitment, let alone a proper phase-out plan. On this specific criterion:
    • Companies without expansion plans are assessed with a Yes
    • Companies with expansion plans are assessed with a No
  • Orange code: Companies that are not expanding anymore but provide a phase-out calendar that is not consistent with the 2030 and 2040 timelines, and/or do not present asset by-asset closures dates (criteria n°2 and n°3) are categorized as having a rough first draft of a phase-out plan that is structurally flawed and cannot be considered credible. On this specific criterion:
    • Companies with a consistent coal exit date and asset-by-asset timeline are assessed with a Yes
    • Companies with a consistent coal exit date but without asset-by-asset timeline are assessed with a Partial
    • Companies that do not meet any of the two criteria are assessed with a No
  • Yellow code: Companies are not engaged in coal expansion and have precise commitment to phase-out by 2030 and 2040 but do not guarantee asset closures instead of sales, conversion of retrofitting (criteria n°4 to 6) are categorized as having a partially credible phase-out plan, with major weaknesses on their exit strategy. On this specific criterion:
    • Companies with a confirmed plan or ambition to sell/convert/retrofit a coal plantare assessed with a No
    • Companies not providing enough information about the future or retired assets are assessed with a Unclear
    • Companies making clear they are closing their coal assets are assessed with a Yes
  • Green code: The remaining companies are categorized as having credible phase-out plans. As they heavily depend on a subjective and evolving analysis, issues related to the just transition, lobbying and investor-state disputes (criteria n°7 to 9) does not influence the final credibility assessment. However, this does not mean they are not important, and investors should absolutely hold every company accountable on these matters.

All data points have been sourced from publicly available documents (annual and corporate sustainability reports, cross-checked with press articles and third-party analyses and data) during the month of November 2021. Third party analyses and data includes Regulator data when available, Europe Beyond Coal coal plant database, Global Energy Monitor coal plant and coal mine databases.