Search Climate Insights Directory

Reclaim Finance calls on investors to shift from ineffective shareholder engagement to voting against management-proposed resolutions at 2025 AGMs for oil and gas companies. The organization highlights that 95% of upstream oil and gas companies are developing new projects despite IPCC and IEA warnings that such expansion is incompatible with a 1.5°C world. It specifically notes that majors like BP, TotalEnergies, Eni, and Equinor are backtracking on climate commitments by planning production increases. The document asserts that current collaborative initiatives, such as Climate Action 100+, have failed to align corporate strategies with 1.5°C trajectories, making strategic voting a necessary lever to signal that climate must be an integral part of corporate strategy.

Reclaim Finance contends that ENGIE's strategy of signing long-term LNG import contracts facilitates the construction of new export terminals and the exploitation of new gas fields, specifically in the US Permian Basin. The document highlights that these contracts, some extending beyond 2040, contradict IEA Net Zero scenarios and European decarbonization goals, potentially creating stranded assets or shifting carbon risks to Asia. It specifically cites the Port Arthur LNG and Rio Grande LNG projects as examples of high-emission infrastructure supported by ENGIE, and calls for shareholders to vote against CEO Catherine MacGregor and the company's "Say on Climate" proposal.

Reclaim Finance claims that ENGIE's long-term LNG import contracts, particularly those from the United States, drive the development of new export terminals and gas fields, contradicting decarbonization scenarios. The document highlights that these contracts lock in carbon-intensive trajectories for decades and risk creating stranded assets as European gas demand declines. It specifically cites contracts linked to the Port Arthur LNG terminal and the Rio Grande LNG project, the latter of which saw its carbon capture and sequestration project abandoned. Consequently, Reclaim Finance calls on shareholders to vote against the re-election of CEO Catherine MacGregor and the 'Say on Climate' proposal.

The International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) argues that the UK must go beyond ending new exploration licenses to truly align with 1.5°C pathways. Key recommendations include ending development consents for new fields, closing loopholes for license extensions and transfers, and replacing the North Sea Transition Authority's 'maximising economic recovery' objective with one focused on a managed decline of production. IISD also urges the UK to join the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance (BOGA) to solidify its global leadership.

Reclaim Finance criticizes ENGIE for planning a 500 MW fossil gas power plant in Nijmegen, Netherlands, arguing the project is unnecessary given the Netherlands' goal of decarbonized electricity by 2035. The organization claims that ENGIE's promise of 'hydrogen compatibility' is an illusion and warns that the project risks becoming a stranded asset, potentially requiring taxpayer-funded compensation for early closure, similar to previous coal plant exits in the region. Reclaim Finance calls on shareholders, including the French government and private investors like Amundi, BNP Paribas AM, and AXA Investment Managers, to vote against ENGIE's climate plan and management resolutions.

The document analyzes the financial burden on Wisconsin Electric Power Company (WEPCO) ratepayers resulting from the early retirement of the coal-fired Oak Creek Power Plant and warns against repeating these mistakes by investing in new natural gas plants. It argues that clean energy alternatives and better regulatory scrutiny of load forecasts can prevent future stranded assets.

Reclaim Finance argues that Europe is developing excessive LNG import capacity despite falling gas consumption, leading to a high risk of stranded assets. The document specifically criticizes energy companies like ENGIE, Enel, and RWE for expanding infrastructure and signing long-term contracts that lock in fossil fuel dependency. It highlights that US-sourced LNG, which accounted for 46% of European imports in 2023, is particularly damaging due to hydraulic fracturing and methane leaks. The author calls on financial institutions, including Société Générale and BNP Paribas, to demand that these companies stop developing new terminals and cease signing long-term import contracts incompatible with a 1.5°C warming limit.

The document warns that Europe is creating substantial LNG import overcapacities despite declining gas consumption, risking the creation of stranded assets and locking the continent into a polluting energy system. It specifically calls out power utilities ENGIE, Enel, and RWE, and urges their financial backers to demand a halt to new terminal projects and long-term contracts.

The United States has the world's second-largest pipeline of gas-fired power plants in development, totaling over 85 GW, largely fueled by speculation regarding AI energy needs. However, most of these projects are in early stages, and there is a significant risk that they could become stranded assets if AI power demand does not materialize. The report highlights that renewables and storage are currently cheaper and faster to deploy than new gas power, while specific regions like Texas and the PJM Interconnection area are seeing the highest concentration of these developments.

Reclaim Finance outlines a comprehensive framework for asset managers to drive real-economy decarbonization. It advocates for the adoption of robust transition plans based on five steps: decarbonization targets, strategy, engagement, reporting/governance, and just transition/biodiversity. The report sets specific phase-out dates for fossil fuel assets—including coal by 2030 in OECD/European countries and 2040 globally—and demands that asset managers use specific databases like the Global Coal Exit List (GCEL) and Global Oil & Gas Exit List (GOGEL) to implement restrictions. It further details an escalation strategy for engagement and strict voting principles, recommending that asset managers vote against director re-elections and executive remuneration if companies fail to publish science-based transition plans or continue fossil fuel expansion.

India is pursuing a "build now, decarbonize later" strategy in its steel industry, focusing on expanding capacity through emissions-intensive blast furnace-basic oxygen furnace (BF-BOF) routes. This approach risks creating stranded assets valued between US$124187 billion and locking in high emissions due to a young fleet of blast furnaces. While the government has introduced roadmaps for green steel and energy efficiency, the document argues that deep decarbonization requires a fundamental shift away from coal toward green hydrogen-based direct reduced iron (DRI) and increased scrap-based secondary production.

Ember argues that the draft FNA methodology focuses too narrowly on "surplus" renewable power rather than the broader goal of decarbonising the electricity system. The organization advocates for renaming flexibility needs to "non-fossil flexibility network needs" to signal a shift away from fossil assets and avoid stranded investments. Ember also calls for greater data transparency, the inclusion of cost-efficiency metrics, and the integration of the FNA into the existing ERAA/NRAA modelling process to better optimize the dispatch between fossil and non-fossil assets.

The report exposes how 400 banks and 400 investors provided billions in support for LNG expansion between 2021 and 2024, despite IEA warnings that no new export facilities are necessary for a 1.5C pathway. It highlights a significant gap between the net-zero pledges of financial institutions and their actual lending and investment practices, noting that most top funders lack effective LNG-specific policies. The document details the climate risks of methane leakage and the social impacts of LNG projects, while calling for a complete end to financial services for new LNG export and import terminals.

The report finds that Canadian financial institutions are major global contributors to LNG expansion, with nine banks providing US$16.7 billion and 21 investors holding US$15.8 billion in LNG assets between 2021 and May 2024. Despite commitments to a 1.5°C pathway, major banks like RBC and Scotiabank have increased their financing for LNG export development. The document highlights the climate risks of this expansion, including methane leakage and the potential for stranded assets, particularly in Europe. It calls for an immediate end to financial services for new LNG projects and the adoption of transition plans aligned with the IEA's Net Zero Emissions by 2050 scenario.

The briefing reveals that German financial institutions continue to pour billions into LNG expansion despite climate pledges. Between 2021 and 2023, nine German banks provided US$7.6 billion in financing, with Deutsche Bank and LBBW accounting for 65% of this total. Additionally, eight German investors held US$5.8 billion in assets of top LNG developers as of May 2024, led by Allianz and Deutsche Bank/DWS. The report highlights a significant gap between these institutions' net-zero commitments and their actual financial activities, noting that Deutsche Bank's financing to LNG expansion rose by 35% between 2021 and 2023. Reclaim Finance argues that this infrastructure locks in long-term fossil fuel dependence and risks creating stranded assets, especially in Europe where gas consumption is declining.

The report examines the role of Italian financial institutions in funding the global expansion of liquefied natural gas (LNG). It finds that between 2021 and 2023, 12 Italian banks provided US$6 billion to the top 150 LNG developers, with Intesa Sanpaolo and UniCredit accounting for over 85% of this total. The document highlights a gap between these banks' net-zero pledges and their continued financing of LNG projects, including support for Eni and Enel. It warns that this support risks creating stranded assets and locking in long-term fossil fuel reliance, particularly in Europe where gas consumption is declining.

The report finds that Japanese financial institutions are among the world's largest supporters of LNG expansion, providing billions in financing despite public commitments to carbon neutrality. It highlights a significant gap between these climate pledges and actual financial flows, particularly from four major banks and the Government Pension Investment Fund (GPIF). The document argues that this support locks in long-term fossil fuel dependence and risks creating stranded assets, especially in Europe and South Korea where gas demand is declining.

The report details how 18 South Korean investment banking institutions provided US$7.4 billion to LNG expansion between 2021 and 2023. It specifically highlights DB Financial, Kyobo Life Insurance, and KDB Financial Group as the primary contributors, accounting for 44% of this total. The document argues that this support fuels a climate disaster by locking in long-term fossil fuel dependence and increasing the risk of stranded assets, particularly through the financing of the Korea Gas Corporation (KOGAS).

The report finds that US financial institutions are primary drivers of global LNG expansion, providing billions in financing and investments despite climate pledges. Between 2021 and 2023, 85 US banks provided US$51.2 billion to LNG expansion, with six major banks accounting for 80% of this total. US investors held US$179.6 billion in assets of top LNG developers as of May 2024. The document highlights a significant gap between these institutions' net-zero commitments and their actual policies, which lack restrictions on LNG. It warns that new LNG infrastructure risks creating stranded assets, particularly in Europe, and contributes to substantial greenhouse gas emissions, including high levels of methane leakage from US shale gas fields.

The report finds that French financial institutions are among the top global supporters of LNG expansion, with four banks providing nearly all of the US$14 billion in financing between 2021 and 2023. It highlights a significant gap between these institutions' net-zero pledges and their continued funding of LNG export and import terminals, including support for TotalEnergies. The document argues that current sector policies are insufficient due to loopholes regarding corporate financing and import terminals, and calls for a comprehensive end to financial services for new LNG projects.