Search Climate Insights Directory

The 2022 Scorecard finds that while insurance for new coal power plants outside China has largely dried up, the industry is only beginning to shift away from oil and gas. Most of the 30 assessed insurers scored poorly on oil and gas policies (1.1/10) compared to coal (3.3/10). The report identifies Allianz as a leader in underwriting policies and SCOR as a leader in divestment, while naming Berkshire Hathaway, Everest Re, PICC, Sinosure, and Starr as laggards. It also criticizes the Net-Zero Insurance Alliance (NZIA) for failing to comply with UN Race to Zero requirements to phase out unabated fossil fuels.

Reclaim Finance argues that the proposed updates to the French ISR label are 'minimalist' and designed to ensure existing funds retain their label rather than drive a real energy transition. While the label may introduce exclusions for coal and unconventional energy, the organization warns that revenue-based thresholds could allow major oil and gas companies like TotalEnergies, BP, Shell, and ExxonMobil to remain eligible. Reclaim Finance specifically calls for the exclusion of companies developing new oil and gas fields to align with a 1.5°C trajectory and carbon neutrality by 2050.

The EU is facing an implementation gap where high renewable energy targets are not translating into on-the-ground deployment. By 2026, combined annual wind and solar additions are forecast to be only 38 GW, half of the 76 GW required for 1.5C alignment. Only four EU countries—Finland, Croatia, Lithuania, and Sweden—are on track for required wind capacity. A primary barrier is the permitting process; onshore wind permitting times in 18 analysed countries all exceeded the EU's two-year limit, with some taking up to 120 months. The report argues for enforcing the Renewable Energy Directive's permitting limits and streamlining administrative processes to enhance energy security and meet climate goals.

Reclaim Finance has submitted comments to the Glasgow Financial Alliance on Net Zero (GFANZ) regarding its draft recommendations for net-zero transition plans. The organization argues that the current draft lacks sufficient emphasis on critical requirements, such as an immediate end to financing fossil fuel expansion and a commitment to a "fair share" of the 50% global emissions reduction needed by 2030. Reclaim Finance further suggests that GFANZ should implement stricter accountability measures, including the delisting of members who fail to adopt credible plans and ensuring that engagement with clients prevents the sale of high-emitting assets to other operators.

Reclaim Finance calls for the strengthening of French sustainable finance labels to combat greenwashing. The organization proposes that the ISR label introduce minimum exclusions for companies developing new fossil fuel projects or those significantly involved in coal and unconventional hydrocarbons. Simultaneously, it argues that the Greenfin label must remain a strict reference for green activities by continuing to exclude fossil fuels, nuclear energy, and biomass, regardless of political shifts in the EU taxonomy.

The report analyzes the progress of 39 governments and public finance institutions that signed the Glasgow Statement to end international public finance for fossil fuels. It finds that while USD 28 billion per year could be redirected toward a clean energy transition, most signatories have not yet published aligned policies. The document highlights best practices from countries like Denmark and the UK, and examines the impact on low- and middle-income countries through case studies on Ethiopia and Sri Lanka.

The briefing reports that 2030 climate target updates have stalled since COP26, leaving the world on track for 2.4°C of warming based on current targets and 2.7°C based on current policies. Despite the Glasgow Climate Pact's request for governments to strengthen their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) by the end of 2022, no major emitter has updated its target. The report highlights a significant emissions gap, noting that global emissions in 2030 would be twice as high as the 1.5°C limit allows without increased action. It suggests four pathways for governments to update targets: full NDC updates, expanding NDC coverage (specifically for China regarding non-CO2 gases), participating in new sectoral initiatives, or implementing policies to overachieve existing targets.

Reclaim Finance reports a decline in shareholder support for ambitious climate resolutions and a contradictory tendency for investors to approve 'pseudo-climate plans' that are incompatible with a 1.5°C warming limit. The organization highlights specific voting trends at European oil and gas majors and calls for a shift toward voting against companies continuing fossil fuel development.

Reclaim Finance criticizes BNP Paribas for being the top European supporter of the 100 largest fossil fuel developers, providing $55.6 billion since the Paris Agreement. The organization argues that the bank's current policies still allow for the financing of new oil and gas fields incompatible with a 1.5°C scenario and calls for the bank to vote against the flawed climate plans of major energy companies like TotalEnergies and Shell.

Reclaim Finance identifies BNP Paribas as a leading European supporter of fossil fuel expansion and calls for the bank to cease funding new oil and gas fields and infrastructures to align with a 1.5°C scenario.

Reclaim Finance argues that Shell's climate plan is insufficient to meet a 1.5°C trajectory, predicting the company will exceed its carbon budget by 40.9% by 2050 and consume 80.2% of it by 2030.

Reclaim Finance argues that BP's 'Net Zero ambition' plan is insufficient, as the company is projected to exceed its carbon budget by 50.9% by 2050 and consume 83.9% of that budget by 2030. The organization calls for shareholders to vote against the plan and the directors responsible for the company's continued focus on oil and gas expansion.

Reclaim Finance argues that Equinor's energy transition plan, submitted for a 'Say on Climate' vote on May 11, 2022, fails to align with the 1.5°C warming limit. The organization claims the company will exceed its carbon budget by 25.6% by 2050 and will have consumed 69.1% of its remaining carbon budget by 2030 due to a continued reliance on oil field production and development.

Reclaim Finance asserts that Repsol's climate targets are inadequate, noting the company will overshoot its carbon budget by 78.7% by 2050. The statement highlights that Repsol plans to maintain oil and gas production at approximately 650 kboe/day through 2025 and allocate over 65% of CAPEX to fossil fuels, including high-risk projects in the Arctic and fracking. Despite goals for 20 GW of renewable capacity by 2030, the author argues this does not offset the lack of absolute emission reductions. Consequently, the document recommends shareholders vote against the 'Say on Climate' advisory vote and the reappointment of four directors responsible for fossil expansion.

Reclaim Finance asserts that Equinor's climate plan is insufficient to meet 1.5°C targets, noting that the company will exceed its carbon budget by 2037. The statement criticizes Equinor for continuing to develop new fossil fuel resources, including unconventional and Arctic projects, and for relying on unproven CCUS scalability. It recommends that shareholders reject the company's transition plan and support resolutions calling for absolute GHG reduction targets and a cessation of exploration.

A coalition of NGOs argues that TotalEnergies' climate strategy is incompatible with the 1.5°C goal, citing insufficient decarbonization targets and continued fossil fuel expansion. They call on investors to vote against the company's climate strategy and the reappointment of specific directors at the May 2022 Annual General Meeting, and to suspend new financial services to the company.

Reclaim Finance has submitted a series of critical questions to BNP Paribas ahead of its May 2022 General Meeting. The document argues that the bank's current sectoral policies are insufficient to meet a 1.5°C warming trajectory, citing continued support for major oil and gas developers like Shell, BP, and TotalEnergies. It specifically highlights the bank's indirect support for the EACOP project in Uganda and Tanzania, its failure to exclude parent companies of coal miners like Glencore and RWE, and its financial ties to companies linked to tropical deforestation. The organization calls for a total stop to new fossil fuel infrastructure financing and more stringent exclusion criteria for non-conventional hydrocarbons and coal.

Reclaim Finance critiques Mark Carney's claims that financing for carbon-intensive industries is necessary and consistent with a 1.5°C transition. The organization argues that GFANZ acts as a 'greenwashing operation' due to its lack of enforcement and transparency, and asserts that new fossil fuel infrastructure is neither a viable solution to the energy crisis caused by Russia's invasion of Ukraine nor compatible with IEA pathways. It calls for a managed decline of fossil fuel production and the adoption of strict enforcement mechanisms for financial institutions committing to net zero.

Reclaim Finance criticizes AXA and AXA IM for maintaining financial support for new fossil fuel projects despite their public commitment to a 1.5°C trajectory. The statement highlights that AXA continues to provide insurance for new oil and gas projects and that AXA IM has historically voted in favor of insufficient climate plans from oil majors like TotalEnergies, Shell, and BP.

The letter asserts that GFANZ is acting as a "smokescreen" for the financial sector's lack of progress on decarbonization. It highlights a gap between GFANZ's goal of halving emissions by 2030 and the reality that many members continue to fund new coal, oil, and gas projects. The authors demand that GFANZ implement interim milestones, absolute emission targets, mandatory Scope 3 targets for fossil fuel companies, and a ban on using offsets to meet 2030 targets.