What they’re saying: IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol told Axios in an interview that the group, a Paris-based intergovernmental research organization, is creating a “verifiable process” to assess what companies are doing to reduce emissions and invest in areas outside of oil and gas.

• Such a process is necessary, he said, to assure critics and "to get companies a social license to operate so that they are part of the solution.”
• It wasn’t immediately clear which specific companies IEA would review and how the process would work, but this report includes all international oil and gas companies and most big state-owned ones.

The big picture: Some of the world's biggest oil and gas companies are slowly beginning to invest in renewable energy and other technologies to addressing climate change. The industry is facing increasing pressure from investors, politicians and activists to be more transparent about the problem and diversify their business models.

“We believe that the oil and gas industry in general faces the critical challenge of matching their short-term profits with their long-term license to operate. We see that no oil and gas company will be unaffected by the clean energy transition: from demand side, from supply side, whatever it is.”

What’s next: Birol says companies should push for policies in governments that would help provide certainty around the transition to cleaner energy sources, which he and most other experts describe as inevitable. The uncertainty is around how long and how fast it’ll be.

• “I think they should not wait for only the government signals because sooner or later I believe the imperatives of climate change will push them to reduce their emissions,” Birol said.
• In the U.S., oil companies are slowly beginning to actively lobby for a price on carbon emissions, but it’s so far not moving the needle. Lawmakers and companies don’t seem to be making it a top priority among a crowded domestic agenda of issues, including ongoing trade concerns.

Go deeper: Big oil teeters between ally and enemy in climate fight

Why it matters: These two developments reflect a common split-screen dynamic playing out across America. Many corporate leaders are promising aggressive action on climate change within their own firms while taking far more conciliatory tones when it comes to what, if anything, they want lawmakers on Capitol Hill to do.

The intrigue: House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) hosted a meeting Thursday during which more than a hundred Republican members discussed policies the party could present as a way to address climate change.

• This focus, which marks a shift away from denying or ignoring the problem over the last decade, comes as voters — especially younger ones — are more concerned about the matter.
• Policies Republicans are discussing include expediting small modular nuclear power and expanding tax credits for carbon capture technology — but no comprehensive proposals, such as a price on carbon dioxide emissions.
• McCarthy said he shared some of the ideas with Smith in a phone call earlier this week.
• A Microsoft spokeswoman confirmed the call and the overall sentiment of it.

What they're saying: “[Microsoft] said, ‘We want to help you with that. We want to be a part of that,’" McCarthy told Axios Thursday in an interview. “The basis was, they said, ‘We like your approach because you’re basing it on science, technology and it’s really looking at the problem and solving it.’"

Between the lines: Microsoft has been vocal about its support for aggressive action on climate change. This includes recently doubling its internal price on CO2 and joining a group that supports a carbon price in Congress.

• However, it is not funding a related campaign, American for Carbon Dividends, which is directly lobbying Congress on the policy.
• McCarthy reiterated his long-standing opposition to a carbon tax in the interview Thursday.

What’s next: House Republicans are looking to unveil a package of related legislation in the spring.

Go deeper: Microsoft vows to become "carbon negative" by 2030

Yes, but: This data represents capacity, not actual electricity generated. Because it’s not always windy or sunny, wind and solar have a lower capacity compared to, say, natural gas or nuclear power, which can be turned on and off on demand. 

Go deeper:

• As wind and solar grows, so do their challenges
• Despite Trump, Congress boosts clean energy funding