Under revision

A review on 3 November 2026 found errors in this report, including statements about EU law. A corrected version will replace it, with a log of what changed. Read the notice.

Assessment2026-07-03

Ørsted A/S

7 claims assessed · Prasine Index · trace 8b33a7bd

Supported by records18 / 100

Aggregate across 7 claims · range 10–33

ScoreFindingClaim assessed
16 / 100Supported by records“We met our target of reducing the intensity of our scope 1 and 2 emissions by 98% from 2006 to 2025 – and are now tackli”
14 / 100Supported by records“our 2040 net-zero target, which has been validated by the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi)”
18 / 100Supported by records“we achieved a 98 % reduction in scope 1 and 2 emissions intensity by the end of 2025” (detailed below)
14 / 100Supported by records“By 2025, we had already reduced the emissions intensity of the energy we generate and our operations (scopes 1 and 2) by”
18 / 100Supported by records“This green finance framework (the 'framework') is developed in alignment with the 2021 Green Bond Principles and 2025 Gr”
18 / 100Supported by records“we were the world's first energy company to achieve this validation”
17 / 100Supported by records“a renewable energy share of 99 %, also by the end of 2025”

Detailed assessment of highest-scoring claim (18 / 100) follows.

Supported by records18 / 100

Range 10–34 · Confidence 70%

Evidence

1

EU ETS verified installation data

shows a sustained, sharp decline in absolute emissions across Ørsted's mapped Danish installations, consistent with a large-scale coal-to-renewables transition: - DK_71: 2,227,935 tCO2e (2005) → 88,486 (2024) → 15,560 (2025) — down 99% from 2013 baseline [4] - DK_80: 1,502,942 (2005) → 437,350 (2024) → 0 (2025) — down 100% [9] - DK_72: down 94% [5]; DK_53: down 89% [3]; DK_76: down 99% [8]; DK_73: down 73% [6]; DK_75: down 68% [7]

Context

2

E-PRTR regulated emissions

(CO2, GHGs, NOX, NMVOC combined) fell 36% from 2007 (6,441,947.2 t) to 2024 (4,145,029.3 t), despite a notable single-year uptick in 2024. Source: E-PRTR, 2024,

Context

3

Global Coal Plant Tracker

confirms all 10 of Ørsted's coal units are retiring or retired, with no active or planned coal expansion.

Context

4

Europe Gas Tracker

shows minimal gas asset holdings (3 pipelines), with retirement activity and no material buildout.

Context

5

SBTi

confirms Ørsted has validated targets, classified 1.5°C-aligned, with a net-zero target set. Source: SBTi,

Context

6

LobbyMap

rates Ørsted's climate policy engagement B (supportive), indicating no contradiction between lobbying conduct and stated decarbonisation position. Source: LobbyMap,

Context

Assessment

This is a specific, quantified, past-tense reduction claim — not an aspirational pledge — and the evidence base overwhelmingly supports its directional accuracy. The EU ETS installation data, the highest-quality independently verified emissions ground truth available, shows Ørsted's core generation assets falling by 68–100% in absolute terms since 2013, with the two largest installations (DK_71, DK_80) falling to near-zero or zero by 2025. While ETS data cannot directly confirm the specific "98% intensity" figure (intensity is a per-unit-of-output metric, not directly reported to EUTL), the scale and consistency of the absolute decline make a 98% intensity reduction highly plausible.

Five of five queried supporting sources — LobbyMap, SBTi, GCPT, EGT and E-PRTR — corroborate the reduction narrative, and none of the fifteen evidence records contradict the claim. GCPT confirms coal is fully retiring, meaning the reduction is structural (asset divestment) rather than an accounting artifact. LobbyMap's "B" rating rules out the most common contradiction pattern in Prasine assessments: supportive public claims paired with obstructive lobbying. This claim is not a repeat of a prior assessment (0 of 9 prior Ørsted claims were repeats; company score trend is STABLE).

The residual uncertainty driving the score toward the top of the SUBSTANTIATED band, rather than the bottom, is twofold: (1) the source document returned HTTP 403, preventing direct verification of the stated baseline year and intensity-calculation methodology; and (2) intensity metrics can diverge from absolute figures if output volumes have grown faster than emissions have fallen — a scenario not contradicted by available data but also not fully ruled out.

Key finding

Ørsted's 98% intensity reduction claim is strongly corroborated by EU ETS verified data showing near-total absolute emissions elimination at its largest installations (DK_71, DK_80), full coal retirement (GCPT), and supportive lobbying conduct (LobbyMap B) — with zero contradicting evidence identified across fifteen independent source checks.

Data gaps

SourceDetail
SOURCE_DOCUMENT (orsted.com/en/about-us/sustainability/decarbonisation): HTTP 403.The claim's full methodology page could not be fetched, meaning the stated baseline year, output/denominator basis for the intensity calculation, and third-party assurance details could not be directly verified. This is the primary driver of the 70% (rather than higher) confidence level and widens the plausible score range to 10–34.
Intensity vs. absolute metric:No source directly reports Ørsted's scope 1+2 emissions intensity; the 98% figure is corroborated only indirectly via absolute ETS/E-PRTR trends, not confirmed at the precise reported value.

Sources

  1. E-PRTR regulated emissions: https://industry.eea.europa.eu/
  2. Global Coal Plant Tracker: https://globalenergymonitor.org/projects/global-coal-plant-tracker/
  3. Europe Gas Tracker: https://globalenergymonitor.org/projects/europe-gas-tracker/
  4. SBTi: https://sciencebasedtargets.org/companies-taking-action
  5. LobbyMap: https://lobbymap.org/

This assessment was produced by an automated pipeline from the sources listed above. The score describes how the evidence relates to the claim and is not a legal finding. Corrections and replies: cm.blomqvist@gmail.com. The about page sets out the corrections policy and the right of reply.