Ørsted has been named the world's most sustainable energy company three years in a row.
Mixed Partly true and partly false in roughly equal measure.
Factual: Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
The second judge would not resolve this claim; the verdict shown is the first judge's.
Said for an organisation they lead or work for; it counts on both records.
What would count as true or false
True if, by June 2021, Ørsted had been ranked the most sustainable energy company in the world in Corporate Knights' Global 100 index (or an equivalent recognised ranking) in three consecutive years, e.g. 2019, 2020 and 2021. Mostly true if it was named top in its sector for three consecutive years but under slightly different phrasing, e.g. 'most sustainable energy company' as distinct from top overall. Mixed if it was named only two years in a row. Mostly false if it was named once. False if it was never so named.
Set before the research began.
Evidence (3)
-
E1 2020 Global 100 ranking | Corporate Knights Corporate Knights · 21 January 2020
“| 1 | 4 | Orsted A/S | Wholesale Power | Denmark | 85.20% |”
-
E2 2021 Global 100 ranking | Corporate Knights Corporate Knights · 25 January 2021
“| 2 | 1 | Ørsted A/S | Denmark | 1.5°C, SBTi | 82.7% |”
-
E3 2019 Global 100 results | Corporate Knights Corporate Knights · 22 January 2019
“| 4 | Ørsted | Wholesale Power | Denmark | 80.13% |”
Reasoning
Corporate Knights ranked Ørsted 1st overall in the 2020 Global 100 [E1]. In 2021 it ranked 2nd behind Schneider Electric, which is not an energy company, so it plausibly remained the top energy company [E2]. In 2019 it ranked 4th overall behind Chr. Hansen [E3], and the evidence does not show whether the companies ranked 2nd and 3rd were energy companies. Only two consecutive years of top energy-company standing are supported, so the third year is unconfirmed.
Cite this claim
Ørsted, “Ørsted has been named the world's most sustainable energy company three years in a row.” (said 2 June 2021). Verdict: mixed. Reliability API, claim c_1b476e98ee71, method 0.1.0+7831dd9d, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_1b476e98ee71
This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.
Reply to this claim
More factual claims by Ørsted
-
Mostly true
“The increase was primarily driven by earnings from the construction agreement for Hornsea 3.”
-
Resolved true
“EBITDA excluding new partnerships and cancellation fees in our offshore business amounted to DKK 11.9 billion in the first half of 2026, compared with DKK 10.3 billion last year, primarily driven by…”
-
Resolved true
“Net profit for the period totalled DKK 2.6 billion. This was affected by non-cash tax effects and impairments due to the higher long-dated US interest rates.”
-
Resolved true
“At present, Ørsted operates 15.5 GW of renewable energy assets, while 4.9 GW are under construction across technologies.”
Ørsted currently operates 15.5 GW of renewable energy assets, with 4.9 GW under construction.
-
Resolved true
“was the first energy company in the world to have its science-based net-zero emissions target validated by the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi)”
Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.