Search Climate Insights Directory

The Bank of England's proposed strategy to decarbonize its Corporate Bond Purchase Scheme (CBPS) is based on three principles: incentivizing net zero action through engagement, leading by example, and ratcheting up requirements over time. Reclaim Finance argues that this approach is flawed due to an over-reliance on engagement over divestment, a lack of clear timelines and resources for monitoring company progress, and insufficient exclusions of oil and gas companies. The author recommends that the Bank exclude companies involved in new fossil fuel projects or those deriving majority revenues from fossil fuels, and calls for the immediate integration of scope 3 emissions for carbon-intensive and finance sectors.

Reclaim Finance argues that Japan's three megabanks (Mizuho, MUFG, and SMBC) maintain policies that allow continued support for the coal industry. While the banks have updated policies to restrict direct project financing for new coal plants 'in principle', these policies contain exceptions and do not apply to general corporate financing. Between October 2018 and October 2020, these banks provided $39bn, $36bn, and $32bn respectively to companies on the Global Coal Exit List. The document contrasts this with European peers like Crédit Agricole and notes increasing shareholder and activist pressure on the Japanese institutions to align with the Paris Agreement.

The document critiques proposals by conservative European Central Bank (ECB) members, including Bundesbank President Jens Weidmann, to limit climate integration to TCFD-compliant disclosures and climate-risk ratings. It argues that these measures do not directly reduce support for polluters, ignore EU climate objectives, and fail as risk management tools because financial markets do not efficiently integrate such information. The author contends that the ECB must actively reduce its support for polluting activities, specifically by excluding fossil fuel companies not aligned with the Paris Agreement, to fulfill its mandates of price stability and support for general economic policies.

The document challenges the Bundesbank's reliance on 'market neutrality' and climate risk disclosure, asserting that the ECB's current asset purchase strategies create a 'carbon bias' that undermines EU climate goals and threatens price stability. The authors advocate for a 'precautionary approach' to climate risk, calling for the immediate decarbonization of ECB operations, specifically targeting fossil fuel assets.

A joint statement by Reclaim Finance, Urgewald, and BlackRock’s Big Problem criticizing BlackRock for voting in support of weak climate plans at Total and Shell during the 2021 European shareholder season, despite the firm's public rhetoric on climate risk.

Reclaim Finance defends its report 'Actifs fossiles : les nouveaux subprimes?', arguing that French banks hold over 530 billion euros in fossil fuel assets, representing 95% of their equity. The author rejects the FBF's claims that the data is incorrect, asserting that the figures are based on banks' own annual reports and that the financial risk of 'stranded assets' is significant, contrary to the more optimistic 'pilot exercise' conducted by the ACPR and AMF.

The author contends that Total's climate strategy is incompatible with the IEA's net-zero scenario, as the company continues to expand oil and gas production while allocating only a small fraction of investment to renewables. The text highlights a contradiction among major investors—including AXA, BNP Paribas, and Amundi—who claim climate commitments but voted in favor of Total's plan to protect short-term dividends.

Reclaim Finance criticizes Total's climate plan and the shareholders who supported it, arguing that the plan ignores IEA guidelines by continuing investment in new oil and gas projects. The author highlights a contradiction where investors, including AXA and BNP Paribas, support the plan despite their own carbon neutrality commitments, suggesting that short-term dividends are prioritized over the energy transition.

Reclaim Finance criticizes UniCredit for participating in a billion euro loan to EPH, a company that continues to acquire coal assets and generate significant revenue from coal. This action is presented as a contradiction of UniCredit's September 2020 coal policy, which committed to a coal phase-out by 2028 and the exclusion of coal expansionists. The document highlights EPH's acquisition of the Schkopau lignite coal plant as a critical test of the bank's policy adherence and warns against the use of 'green financing' loopholes for coal companies.

The report alleges that BlackRock has created an "echo chamber" of influence in Brussels to weaken the EU's climate finance regulations. By operating through 23 trade associations and securing direct consultancy contracts with the European Commission, BlackRock is accused of pushing for "soft" regulation and voluntary standards, such as the EU Green Bond Standard, to avoid binding restrictions on its investment choices. The document argues that this strategy serves to protect BlackRock's significant holdings in fossil fuel companies and its business model based on financial risk management rather than climate impact.

The report warns that 11 major Eurozone banks hold over 530 billion euros in fossil fuel assets, representing 95% of their total equity. It argues that these assets are prone to becoming 'stranded assets' as the world transitions to meet the Paris Agreement, potentially triggering a financial crisis similar to the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis. The authors critique 'green finance' as largely greenwashing and call for the European Central Bank (ECB) to align its monetary policy with climate goals, increase capital requirements for fossil fuel exposure, and establish a public 'bad bank' to manage the phased extinction of these assets.

The report warns that the 11 largest banks in the eurozone hold over 530 billion euros in fossil fuel assets, which represent 95% of their total equity on average. This overexposure creates a significant risk of 'stranded assets' as the world transitions to meet Paris Agreement goals. The authors argue that current 'green finance' is largely a greenwashing tool and that voluntary bank commitments are insufficient. They propose a two-step solution: first, implementing strict regulations and reforming European Central Bank (ECB) monetary policy to stop new fossil fuel funding; second, establishing a public 'fossil bank' under the ECB to buy back and gradually phase out these risky assets to protect financial stability and enable the ecological transition.

Reclaim Finance condemns the outcome of Total's general assembly, where over 90% of voting shareholders approved a climate plan that prioritizes hydrocarbon expansion over renewable energy. The statement highlights the contradiction between the public climate commitments of major investors like AXA, BNP Paribas, and Amundi and their support for Total's strategy, which allocates 80% of capital expenditure to oil and gas by 2030.

Reclaim Finance criticizes Natixis for continuing to support oil and gas majors and shale energy infrastructure despite overall reductions in fossil fuel financing. The statement highlights gaps in the bank's exclusion policies, its role as a top French investor in high-production shale companies, and the lack of fossil fuel policies across several of its investment management subsidiaries.

Reclaim Finance criticizes Lloyd’s of London for maintaining a coal policy that allows new insurance cover for coal plants and thermal coal mines until January 2022, potentially enabling projects like the Whitehaven mine in England and Adani’s Carmichael project in Australia. The author highlights gaps in the policy, specifically the lack of exclusions for coal transport infrastructure and coal developers, and argues that the 30% revenue threshold for phasing out thermal coal by 2030 is too high and too slow compared to other European insurers.

Legal & General is identified as the top UK coal investor, holding $7.2 billion in the sector as of January 2021. The document criticizes the company's weak exclusion thresholds and the fact that its passive assets, totaling $1 trillion, are not subject to coal exclusion policies, allowing continued investment in high-emitting companies like BHP Group.

Reclaim Finance argues that Société Générale's pledge to cease financing new LNG export projects and shale gas extraction in North America is inadequate. The organization highlights that the bank remains involved in the Rio Grande LNG and Driftwood LNG projects and lacks a clear revenue threshold for excluding shale gas companies. The statement asserts that the bank's current strategy contradicts the IEA's net zero scenario and its own goal of carbon neutrality by 2050.

Reclaim Finance criticizes ENGIE's new climate targets, noting that while the company moved its net-zero goal to 2045, it lacks absolute emission reduction targets aligned with 1.5°C. The analysis highlights a continued reliance on LNG and the risks of converting coal plants to gas or biomass, particularly in Chile, while noting that ENGIE's renewable energy investments lag behind competitors like Enel.

Reclaim Finance argues that ENGIE's updated climate targets lack the transparency and ambition needed for a 1.5°C pathway. The analysis highlights a continued reliance on LNG, the use of biomass as a 'false solution' for coal conversion, and a lack of detailed asset-wise phase-out plans for coal plants.

Reclaim Finance criticizes BNP Paribas for continuing to finance the expansion of oil and gas despite a pledge to reduce its exposure by 10% between 2020 and 2025. The organization argues that this target is inadequate given the climate emergency and is undermined by the bank's previous funding surges and the exclusion of equity and bond issuances from the commitment. Furthermore, the document highlights that BNP Paribas remains a top financier for majors like Shell, BP, Eni, and Total, contributing to the growth of high-risk sectors such as oil sands, shale gas, and Arctic drilling.