Search Climate Insights Directory

The document provides data on investments and financing from French GFANZ members in fossil fuel expanders. Amundi Asset Management held the highest total investments at US$ 17,006 million, while BNP Paribas provided the highest total financing at US$ 7,096 million.

The Papua LNG project, led by TotalEnergies, faces delays and rising costs, with estimates increasing from US$10 billion to US$18 billion. While some banks have declined direct financing due to climate policies, others continue to fund the project's developers. The project is projected to emit over 220 million tonnes of CO2, increasing Papua New Guinea's industrial and energy sector emissions by 7%, and poses significant risks to biodiversity and local communities in the Gulf Province. Critics argue that investing in renewable energy would be more cost-effective and beneficial for the country's electricity needs.

The Green Swan Toolkit argues that current financial policy frameworks are insufficient to address the "radical uncertainty" of climate change. It advocates for a precautionary approach to risk, the adjustment of Pillar I capital requirements to account for fossil fuel asset stranding, the use of macroprudential systemic risk buffers, and the mandatory integration of 1.5°C-aligned climate criteria into bank financing decisions via Pillar II requirements.

The fact sheet argues that many climate scenarios used by financial actors act as 'greenwashing tools' by underestimating renewable energy, relying on unlikely negative emissions technologies, and omitting significant portions of global greenhouse gas emissions. It asserts that these scenarios often lead to warming exceeding 1.5°C and calls for a complete phase-out of fossil fuel financing by 2040 in Europe and 2050 globally.

The document argues that many climate scenarios used by financial actors and large companies serve as tools for greenwashing by underestimating renewable energy and relying on improbable negative emissions to justify continued fossil fuel investment.

The report details ADNOC's plans to increase oil production by 25% by 2030, identifying it as a major global expansionist whose activities are largely incompatible with IEA Net Zero scenarios. It highlights the involvement of international 'carbon majors' and banks in financing these projects, the use of carbon capture for enhanced oil recovery, and the threat posed to the Marawah Biosphere Reserve by the Ghasha Mega Project.

The document identifies 39 French financial institutions committed to phasing out coal by 2030 in OECD and European countries and by 2040 elsewhere. It further specifies that 25 of these actors require their clients to adopt exit plans, with 15 setting a deadline of late 2021 for such plans.

The document outlines a step-by-step process for responding to a consultation on the EU's sustainable finance strategy and provides model answers. It argues that the EU needs major additional policy actions to align finance with the Paris Agreement, specifically calling for a 'brown taxonomy' to identify harmful activities, a legal prohibition on financing new fossil fuel projects, and the establishment of a social taxonomy to identify socially abusive activities. It further suggests that the European Central Bank's monetary policy should exclude polluting sectors and that COVID-19 recovery funding should be tied to social and environmental conditions.

A coalition of 133 civil society organizations, financial institutions, academics, and experts calls for the exclusion of fossil fuel developers from all SFDR fund categories, specifically targeting the "ESG basics" category to prevent greenwashing and align EU finance with climate goals.

The document examines the role of the European Central Bank (ECB) in the climate transition, arguing that its monetary and prudential policies currently provide insufficient support for decarbonization. It highlights that the ECB's asset purchases and collateral frameworks continue to support high-carbon issuers and that its risk models minimize climate-related risks. The briefing proposes a 'green' ECB model featuring dual interest rates for green lending, the exclusion of fossil fuel developers from asset purchases, and increased capital requirements for banks lacking credible 1.5°C transition plans.

Two years after the Paris financial center committed to coal exit strategies, Reclaim Finance finds a mixed record. While 24 of 54 analyzed actors have robust policies, others lack them entirely or have significant gaps, such as failing to exclude coal developers or lacking clear exit dates. Major banks like BNP Paribas, Société Générale, Crédit Agricole, and Natixis remain under scrutiny for continuing to support coal companies without credible transition plans.

The methodology focuses on five key indicators to evaluate the climate credibility of European oil and gas majors: alignment of decarbonization targets with a 1.5°C carbon budget, reliance on offset mechanisms, asset expansion plans, trends in oil and gas production growth, and the forecasted energy mix for 2030. The analysis employs conservative hypotheses, assuming companies will meet their pledged targets and maintain current market shares in line with the IEA Net Zero scenario to establish a 'low-estimate' of cumulative emissions.

The policy brief identifies a gap between the climate commitments of institutional investors and their actual impact on corporate behavior, citing limited transparency and high barriers to shareholder action. It proposes four primary reforms to the Shareholder Rights Directive (SRD) II: introducing a mandatory 'Say on Climate' vote every three years, ensuring legal security for submitting environmental resolutions, increasing transparency requirements for asset owners, managers, and proxy advisors, and lowering the shareholding threshold for submitting resolutions to a maximum of 2% (and 0.2% for large companies).

Reclaim Finance critiques the updated NZAOA Target Setting Protocol for failing to align with the IEA net zero scenario, specifically regarding fossil fuel phase-out dates and the lack of rigorous engagement standards. The organization argues that the Protocol contains loopholes for coal plants under construction and lacks clear requirements for absolute emission targets and Scope 3 inclusion. Reclaim Finance recommends a full coal exit by 2030 in OECD countries and 2040 globally, an immediate end to oil and gas supply project support, and the implementation of transparent, time-bound engagement escalation policies leading to divestment.

The document details fossil fuel expansion financing from BNP Paribas, Crédit Agricole, Groupe BPCE, and Société Générale across three subsectors: oil and gas production, transport infrastructure (LNG and pipelines), and gas-fired electricity production.

The report highlights a significant gap in financial sector policies where coking coal, which accounts for approximately 14% of global coal production, is often excluded from coal phase-out restrictions. Despite the steel sector contributing 7% of global greenhouse gas emissions and 11% of CO2 emissions, financial institutions continue to fund coking coal projects due to the outdated belief that no alternative technologies exist. The document notes that since 2016, banks have provided over 557 billion USD to companies involved in coking coal projects. It calls for an immediate end to financial services for new coking coal projects and the adoption of strict policies requiring companies to provide detailed closure schedules and just transition plans.

The document details the reactions of eleven major European banks to a report on fossil fuel asset exposure. It provides specific 2019 data on fossil assets and equity for each bank, calculating a risk ratio. While some banks like BNP Paribas, Société Générale, and BPCE provided detailed rebuttals or highlighted their transition policies and green financing, others, such as Deutsche Bank and Santander, declined to respond. The banks generally contest the report's methodology, arguing that it ignores portfolio selectivity, client transition strategies, and the broader solvency of banking groups.

Reclaim Finance responds to the Bank of England's consultation on the Corporate Bond Purchase Scheme (CBPS), urging the Bank to prioritize the exclusion and divestment of fossil fuel assets to mitigate climate-related financial risks. The organization argues that engagement is often ineffective for high-carbon companies and recommends that the Bank set ambitious, short-term portfolio targets, integrate scope 3 emissions, and implement a heavy negative tilt strategy. Reclaim Finance further suggests that the Bank should lead the market in climate risk management by increasing capital requirements for fossil fuel exposures and expanding its environmental focus to include nature-related financial risks.

The document outlines the environmental and economic dangers of expanding liquefied natural gas (LNG) infrastructure. It highlights that the LNG process is energy-intensive and prone to methane leaks, with US-sourced LNG potentially having a carbon footprint 28% higher than coal. Financially, the report warns of severe overcapacity in Europe, where import capacity may reach 400 billion m3 by 2030 despite a projected demand of only 150-190 billion m3, leading to a high risk of stranded assets in countries such as France, Germany, and Italy. It concludes that conversion to hydrogen or biomethane is largely technically and economically unfeasible, urging financial actors to cease all support for gas expansion.

The Russian Fossil Fuel Exclusion List identifies Russian-headquartered companies from the Global Coal Exit List and Global Oil & Gas Exit List, as well as major non-Russian coal and oil and gas companies active in Russia, for the purpose of financial divestment.