Ørsted's transition plan outlines the company's overall pathway to achieving net-zero emissions by 2040, aligned with the 1.5 °C goal of the Paris Agreement. The plan is substantiated by science-based targets, includes key decarbonisation levers, and identifies strategic actions that have driven the transformation of our business model towards renewable energy and will continue to shape our ongoing transition.

As a global leader in renewable energy, we employ a comprehensive approach to assessing and managing climate-related transition and physical risks, ensuring not only alignment with evolving regulatory requirements but also the resilience of our business model and strategy. Thus, identifying and addressing climate-related impacts, risks, and opportunities are at the core of our vision to create a world that runs entirely on green energy.

Our approach to resilience analysis consists of two main components:

1. Assessing and managing transition risks and opportunities, which include macroeconomic, political, technological, and market developments associated with the global shift to a low-carbon economy.

2. Conducting physical climate risk assessments to evaluate how climate-related hazards (chronic and acute), including extreme weather events and long-term climate changes, may impact our operations.

Transition risks stem from a shift to a low-carbon economy and encompass factors such as new regulations, technological innovation, changing market dynamics, and shifting consumer preferences. Over the past decades, we have effectively mitigated these risks by transforming our business model from fossil fuels to renewable energy, aligning our operations with a 1.5 °C climate trajectory. This proactive shift has positioned us well to capitalise on the increasing demand for renewable energy deployment. Nevertheless, we recognise that a key challenge to the overall industry is the possibility of insufficient political support for a continued renewable energy build-out, which is critical to the global energy transition.

Insufficient political or regulatory support for renewable energy deployment has also been assessed as part of the financial part of our double materiality assessment. Transition risks are particularly relevant to our operations in the US, where changes in investment conditions, reductions in subsidies, or shifting policy priorities could increase uncertainty for future projects. This is why monitoring changes to political and regulatory stability is critical for our long-term planning and investment.