Carbon Footprint — Operations: How does Freeport-McMoRan score?

FCX reports full Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions verified by third party to ISO 14064 (Specifications 1 and 3) with multi-year tracking and granular site-level breakdowns across all operating sites. Scope 1 emissions are approximately 5.5 million tonnes CO2e and Scope 2 (market-based) approximately 2.1 million tonnes. The GHG Protocol methodology is followed with operational control boundary. However, absolute emissions remain very large, which is reflected in the scale penalty rather than this qu

Carbon Footprint — Supply Chain: How does Freeport-McMoRan score?

FCX quantifies Scope 3 emissions across material categories (approximately 3.5 million tonnes CO2e for FY2023), with third-party verification to ISO 14064 Specification 3. The 2023 Climate Report disclosed Scope 3 at a site level for the first time, identifying Grasberg, Cerro Verde, Morenci and Atlantic Copper as contributing 71% of Scope 3. However, the World Benchmark Alliance noted no evidence of Scope 3 reduction, no time-bound Scope 3 targets, and no 1.5°C alignment for Scope 3.

Emissions Trajectory: How does Freeport-McMoRan score?

FCX's 2030 targets are intensity-based (15% reduction per tonne copper in Americas, 30% in PT-FI), not absolute. The Net Zero Tracker states there is no absolute emission reduction recorded. While PT-FI achieved a 26% intensity reduction, total absolute emissions remain in the multi-million-tonne range with no demonstrable absolute decline. The transition from coal to LNG at Grasberg adds new fossil fuel infrastructure. Intensity targets only — capped at 4 per rubric, and given no absolute reduc

Energy Source: How does Freeport-McMoRan score?

FCX uses a mix of energy sources. In the Americas, approximately 83% of purchased power in 2018 was from renewable and low-carbon sources (36% solely renewable). However, PT-FI's Grasberg operations are powered by a coal-fired power plant, with transition to LNG (not renewable) in progress. Cerro Verde signed a PPA for 100% renewable by 2026. Overall, the company remains heavily reliant on fossil fuels, particularly coal/LNG at its largest operation. Not an RE100 member. Some renewable PPAs but

Nature & Biodiversity Impact: How does Freeport-McMoRan score?

FCX has committed to TNFD-aligned reporting and has a nature strategy with No Net Loss ambition for new mines. It has WHC certifications and species conservation programs (bighorn sheep, bats, guanacos). However, the Grasberg mine has caused well-documented massive ecosystem destruction — riverine pollution of the Ajikwa River system, destruction of 30,000+ hectares of rainforest, and tailings disposal into river systems near unique equatorial ecosystems. The World Benchmark Alliance found no ev

Resource Use & Waste: How does Freeport-McMoRan score?

FCX has ISO 14001-certified environmental management systems across all operating sites with regular internal and external audits. The company has invested in tailings management, waste minimisation, and advanced grinding technology that reduces energy per tonne. Copper is inherently recyclable, and the company promotes this. However, as one of the world's largest waste generators from mining operations (the Grasberg mine alone produces enormous volumes of tailings), the fundamental linear extra

Water Impact: How does Freeport-McMoRan score?

FCX monitors water consumption through CDP Water responses and site-level tracking. It aims to maximise water-use efficiency and shift to recycled/reused water sources. Several operations are in water-stressed regions (Arizona desert, Peru). However, documented water pollution incidents are severe — groundwater contamination at the Cyprus Tohono mine (uranium/sulfate), acid mine drainage at Morenci that killed migratory birds ($6.8M settlement), and massive riverine pollution from tailings at Gr

Targets & Commitments: How does Freeport-McMoRan score?

FCX has four 2030 GHG emissions reduction targets covering ~100% of Scope 1 and 2. However, these are intensity-based targets (per tonne of copper), not absolute. The company claims commitment to SBTi validation but has not yet achieved validated targets — it is participating in sector-level development work but SBTi status remains unvalidated. The 2050 net-zero aspiration is an aspiration only, acknowledged to require offsets/removals. No Scope 3 targets exist. The company explicitly states it

Transparency & Accountability: How does Freeport-McMoRan score?

FCX has published annual sustainability reports for 23+ consecutive years, aligned with SASB, GRI, and TCFD. It has a dedicated VP/Chief Sustainability Officer, Board-level Corporate Responsibility Committee, and climate performance integrated into executive compensation (ESG metrics = 25% of Annual Incentive Program in 2022). GHG data is third-party verified to ISO 14064. The company reports through CDP and has committed to TNFD-aligned disclosure. It is an ICMM founding member and maintains Co

Controversies & Red Flags: How does Freeport-McMoRan score?

Starting at 8, significant deductions apply. Violation Tracker records $166.7 million in penalties since 2000 across 354 records. Major controversies include: the Grasberg mine's massive environmental destruction in Papua (OPIC cancelled $100M insurance in 1995 citing environmental damage), $6.8M settlement for toxic outflow at Morenci, $100M coastal damage settlement in Louisiana, $54M toxic waste cleanup settlement in Oklahoma, documented groundwater contamination on Tohono O'odham Nation land

Freeport-McMoRan Sustainability Score: 22/100

Recently scored: Dentsu, Omnicom, Publicis Groupe, WPP

507 companies scored·4 score updates this week

Freeport-McMoRan·Mining & Extraction·Phoenix, Arizona, US·Founded 1912·Last verified 21 April 2026

out of 100

Significant gapsPending Review

Freeport-McMoRan reports emissions comprehensively but targets only intensity reductions with no absolute decline. Grasberg's documented environmental devastation—rainforest destruction, riverine pollution, ecosystem collapse—persists alongside $166.7M in regulatory penalties since 2000. Governance is strong; outcomes are not.

No challenges currently filed

The calculation

Every score shows its working.

Same formula for every company. No curve. No private weighting.

SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × Scale

Industry base impact

Mining & Extraction sector ceiling.

15 / 100

Performance score

Sum of the 10 rubric questions, scored 0–10 each.

39 / 100

Raw score

Weighted average before scale penalty.

(0.3 × 15) + (0.7 × 39) = 31.8

Scale penalty

Multiplier based on absolute emissions volume — physics-first.

× 0.7

Final score

Rounded. Significant gaps.

22 / 100

The ten questions

Where Freeport-McMoRan is strong, and where it isn't.

Strongest on Carbon Footprint — Operations and Carbon Footprint — Supply Chain (7/10, 6/10). Weakest on Controversies & Red Flags and Emissions Trajectory (2/10, 2/10).

Where the evidence comes from

Every document used, listed.

17 sources used in this assessment. All publicly available. Each row shows which rubric questions it informed.

[1]Self-reported

2023 Climate Report

2023

Q1Q2

Every score shows its working.

Where Freeport-McMoRan is strong, and where it isn't.

Every document used, listed.

Where Freeport-McMoRan sits among mining & extraction peers.

Freeport-McMoRan's score over time.

This score is not currently being contested.

Related companies worth a look.

We'll let you know when the score moves.

Which companies moved this week, and why.