The accuracy of the information reflected in our report is very important to us. ERM CVS provided independent limited assurance to ConocoPhillips for disclosures in selected sections of our 2021 Sustainability Report: Sustainable Development Governance, Valuing Our People and Managing Climate Related Risks. See our most recent Assurance Statement.

ERM CVS conducted limited assurance to assess whether selected data was fairly presented in accordance with the principles of completeness, comparability and accuracy, including requesting and reviewing evidence and interviewing content owners and subject matter experts as required in order to substantiate and corroborate disclosures. Assurance of performance metrics included conducting virtual site visits with selected operations in order to test the data at the operational level.

ERM CVS also assessed whether the 2021 data for the following metrics from ConocoPhillips global operations are fairly presented and that the data is complete, transparent and accurate in accordance with the reporting criteria:

Greenhouse Gases

• Total Scope 1 Direct GHG emissions (thousand tonnes CO₂e)
• Total Scope 2 (location based) Indirect GHG emissions (thousand tonnes CO₂e)
• Total Scope 3 Other Indirect GHG emissions comprised of the following categories (million tonnes CO₂e):
  • Category 4: Upstream transportation and distribution
  • Category 9: Downstream transportation and distribution
  • Category 10: Processing of sold products
  • Category 11: Use of sold products
• GHG intensity Scope 1 and Scope 2 (kg/BOE) gross basis
• Total Direct Methane emissions (thousand tonnes CO₂e)
• Methane emitted as percent of natural gas production (percent) gross basis
• Methane emitted as percent of total hydrocarbon production (percent) gross basis
• Flaring volume (million cubic feet, routine and non-routine/safety)
• Energy use (trillion BTUs)    

Water

• Fresh water withdrawn (million cubic meters)
• Fresh water consumed (million cubic meters)
• Fresh water withdrawn in regions with high baseline water stress (million cubic meters)
• Fresh water consumed in regions with high baseline water stress (million cubic meters)
• Non-fresh water withdrawn (million cubic meters)
• Total Produced water recycled or reused (million cubic meters)
• Hydrocarbons in Overboard Discharges (tonnes)
• Water Intensity (barrels per BOE)
  • Unconventional Fresh Water Consumption
  • Conventional Fresh Water Consumption  

Biodiversity

• Operated area overlapping with IUCN Protected Areas (%)
• Number of IUCN Protected Areas near operated assets (#)
• Habitat areas protected or restored by ConocoPhillips (acres)
• Habitat areas protected by Supported Partnerships (acres)
• Number of operated assets with IUCN Red List Species  

Human Capital Management

• Global Workforce Demographics
• U.S. Workforce Demographics
• Board metrics
• Hiring (non-U.S.)
• U.S. Hiring
• Attrition rate
• Training, Development and Promotions  

Environmental Metrics

We have several practices in place to provide the best available data at the time of publication including:

• Guidelines, calculation tools and training. We maintain reporting procedures for our business units around the world to calculate and report environmental metrics. Business units are accountable for data completeness and accuracy, and for consistency with our accepted reporting practices.
• Internal reviews. A business-level data submission, review and approval process is practiced annually to promote accountability for the results and to ensure the best possible data quality.
• Assurance. We conduct reasonable and limited assurance in countries having a regulatory requirement to verify reported emissions, including Australia, Canada and Norway.
• Internal corporate audits.

The corporate HSE review data for completeness and accuracy.   Our internal quality assurance process begins at the business unit level. This process includes:

• Ensuring that business units understand the corporate reporting obligations associated with metrics.
• Establishing standardized methods of data collection and expected reporting procedures.
• Verifying that the data provided by business units is accurate and complete.
• Reviewing and questioning the results.
• Assessing results to identify trends and better understand the drivers of year-over-year changes.

There are three phases of data verification at this level — during submission, review and approval.   Before the data is sent from the business unit to the corporate level, it undergoes vetting by technical peers and leaders who challenge any findings that they find questionable. When the final business unit data is submitted to the corporate level, it contains an explanation for all variances greater than 10% from the prior year. Reasons for significant variances may include startups or dispositions. At the corporate level, data submitted for each asset is further reviewed and validated by a team of subject matter experts.

Once all business unit data is compiled at our corporate level, it undergoes further validation by subject matter experts. During this effort, an intensity analysis is conducted to measure total volumes and production throughput and year-over-year data changes to help identify any inconsistencies. The data is also compared to similar operations during this process. The information is then analyzed in aggregate by metric to understand the significant drivers behind any year-over-year change in company values. After this process, the data is presented to company leaders who have an opportunity to review and challenge the information, possibly spurring additional verification. Final data undergoes executive-level approval prior to publishing.

To honor our commitment to continuously improve the quality of our environmental metrics data, we work with business units to review our reporting processes and facilitate consistent and accurate reporting. To provide the most current and accurate data available, we have updated previously reported data for prior years as needed. See more of our data metrics.

Human Capital Metrics

The corporate Human Resources (HR) team utilizes a centralized data management system known as the HR data warehouse to manage human capital metrics.

Our human capital metrics are reviewed and validated at each stage of our process:

• Data collection. At the beginning of each month, the previous month’s data is compiled and reviewed for trends and outliers to ensure quality, completeness and accuracy. Working closely with business units and subject-matter experts, data inconsistencies and gaps are corrected and completed.
• Quality assurance. Human capital metrics are then validated by two systems and two groups, the Employee Data and the HR analytics teams. The corporate HR leadership team reviews and approves the data and metrics on a quarterly basis.
• Annual quality control assessment. At the beginning of each year, we review the collective year-end data of the previous year for completeness and accuracy. Retroactive data corrections are not accepted after Jan. 15 as data is then locked-down for all external reports and disclosures.