Search Climate Insights Directory

Reclaim Finance argues that current investor engagement strategies, including the Climate Action 100+ initiative, have failed to produce meaningful climate action from the oil and gas sector. The organization highlights that most companies continue fossil fuel expansion and maintain minimal investment in clean energy despite high profits. Consequently, Reclaim Finance calls on asset managers to escalate their tactics by suspending new investments, voting against strategic routine resolutions, and issuing public statements to sanction companies that refuse to stop developing new upstream and midstream projects.

Reclaim Finance argues that neither passive engagement nor complete divestment is sufficient to force oil and gas companies to align with the Paris Agreement. Instead, it advocates for a 'third way' where investors stop purchasing new bonds but retain shareholdings to vote against directors, manager remuneration, and dividends at 2024 annual general meetings. The organization highlights that 96% of oil and gas producing companies continue to open new fields and that record profits are being prioritized for shareholder remuneration over the energy transition.

Reclaim Finance condemns TotalEnergies for distributing US$16.6 billion to shareholders in 2023 while continuing to prioritize oil and gas expansion. The organization calls on shareholders to vote against the reelection of directors, including Patrick Pouyanné, and against dividend allocations to push for a transition toward sustainable energy and emission reductions.

The document advocates for a radical shift in banking practices to support the energy transition, specifically calling for a 6:1 investment ratio in favor of sustainable power supply over fossil fuels. Based on IEA Net Zero Emissions (NZE) projections, the author argues that total annual energy sector investments must rise to US$4.7 trillion by 2030, with energy transition investments exceeding US$4.2 trillion. Reclaim Finance emphasizes that this ratio should specifically target sustainable technologies—solar PV, wind, grids, and storage—while excluding biomass, nuclear energy, and Carbon Capture Use and Storage (CCUS), which it deems too risky or damaging. The document concludes that banks should set specific targets for sustainable power, end all support for fossil fuel expansion, and incorporate the 6:1 ratio into credible climate transition plans.

The document argues that limiting global warming to 1.5°C requires a radical shift in financial flows, moving away from fossil fuel expansion toward sustainable energy. Based on IEA data, it proposes a 6:1 ratio for banks: investing six times more in sustainable electricity supply than in fossil fuels by 2030. It specifies that 'sustainable' energy should focus on mature technologies like solar, wind, grids, and storage, while excluding nuclear, biomass, and carbon capture (CCUS).

Reclaim Finance argues that TotalEnergies' climate strategy is insufficient for a 1.5°C target, citing continued fossil fuel expansion and inadequate low-carbon investment. The document details the financial networks supporting the company, critiques the 'laxity' of French asset managers like Amundi, and proposes a comprehensive suite of regulatory and monetary reforms to redirect financial flows away from fossil fuels.

Reclaim Finance argues that Crédit Agricole's public commitment to renewable energy is insufficient without a clear plan to reduce fossil fuel financing. The organization highlights that the bank remains a top financier of TotalEnergies and continues to support fossil fuel developers, such as Eni. Reclaim Finance specifically calls for the bank to adopt a 6:1 financing ratio of sustainable to fossil energies by 2030 and to cease its advisory role in the Papua LNG project, which involves opening new gas fields.

Reclaim Finance asserts that the top 60 banks provided $122.2 billion to major LNG firms between 2016 and 2022, with most lacking policies to prevent further support. The report highlights that current LNG terminal developments could lead to a 235% capacity increase and 1.9 GtCO₂ of overshoot relative to IEA net zero goals. It criticizes European banks for continuing to finance import terminals despite exceeding current demand, risking long-term gas lock-in.

A coalition of civil society organizations is urging 50 financial institutions to pressure TotalEnergies, ExxonMobil, Santos, and ENEOS to cancel the Papua LNG project. The letter argues the project is incompatible with the 1.5-degree goal of the Paris Agreement, lacks the Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) of Indigenous Peoples, and employs insufficient biodiversity offsetting measures. The authors call for shareholders to vote against director re-elections, stop purchasing new bonds, and establish a time-bound divestment strategy if fossil fuel expansion continues.

Reclaim Finance asserts that EPH's commitment to exit coal by 2030 is a 'sleight of hand' because the company is transferring its coal assets to a new entity, EP Energy Transition, which is not bound by the phase-out date. The document further highlights EPH's role as the second-largest gas power developer in Europe, with over 4.7 GW in development, contradicting European decarbonization goals. It specifically urges Société Générale and its subsidiary Komercni Banka to cease financing EPH unless the company commits to a genuine coal exit by 2030 and halts new gas projects.

The document critiques the European Central Bank's (ECB) planned update to the Eurosystem Collateral Framework, arguing that simply addressing risks is insufficient. It advocates for a precautionary approach that includes excluding developers of new fossil fuel projects and applying haircuts to eligible assets based on a company's carbon intensity.

The Carlyle Group, a major private equity firm with US$382 billion in assets under management, is accused of maintaining a fossil fuel-heavy portfolio that contradicts its net-zero 2050 commitment. Research indicates Carlyle invests sixteen dollars in fossil fuels for every one dollar invested in renewable energy. A key example is Neptune Energy, a company co-founded by Carlyle that continues upstream oil and gas expansion, including in the Barents Sea. The document highlights that Carlyle's shareholders, including major asset managers like BlackRock and Amundi, overwhelmingly supported the re-election of board members at the most recent Annual General Meeting, thereby endorsing a strategy that lacks a public fossil fuel policy and fails to align with a 1.5°C pathway.

The document criticizes the current Eurosystem Collateral Framework (ESCF) for its 'carbon bias,' which allows assets from high-carbon companies to be disproportionately eligible and benefit from lower haircuts. It argues that the ECB's risk-focused approach is insufficient for addressing long-term climate risks and advocates for a precautionary approach. Specifically, it calls for the exclusion of assets from fossil fuel developers and the use of climate metrics and activity-based assessments to determine haircuts, asserting that these measures would not impair the ECB's ability to provide credit to banks.

The document advocates for the European Central Bank (ECB) to create a 'green' versus 'brown' interest rate differential to incentivize sustainable energy and building renovations. It argues that while national subsidies and capital requirements for banks are possible, a targeted ECB mechanism—similar to the TLTROs used during the Covid-19 crisis—would be more effective and consistent with the ECB's mandate to maintain price stability by reducing fossil fuel dependency.

The factsheet examines the potential and risks of hydropower, including reservoir-based, run-of-river, and pumped-storage hydropower (PSH). While acknowledging PSH's role in grid stability, it highlights that hydropower is becoming less competitive than wind and solar due to higher costs and long construction timelines. The document details severe negative impacts on biodiversity, human rights, and the climate, specifically noting methane emissions from reservoirs. It concludes that new hydropower projects should be strictly conditioned on robust standards, with a preference for upgrading existing infrastructure over building new dams, particularly in Europe.

Reclaim Finance establishes a comprehensive framework to identify insufficient or greenwashed corporate climate transition plans. The report outlines five essential steps for a robust plan: setting science-based absolute emission targets, developing a detailed decarbonization strategy (including financial alignment and fossil fuel phase-outs), implementing a value-chain engagement strategy, integrating reporting and governance, and addressing just transition and biodiversity. It further maps these criteria to the EU's European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) and the European Central Bank's (ECB) supervisory expectations to help companies and financial institutions meet regulatory obligations.

The policy brief argues that achieving the EU's climate goals requires a rapid reorientation of private finance, as the current 'clean energy:fossil fuel' finance ratio for major EU banks is only 1.6:1. Reclaim Finance proposes four key measures: mandating a 6:1 investment ratio in clean energy versus fossil fuels by 2030, requiring robust and binding climate transition plans aligned with a 1.5°C trajectory, prohibiting financial services for new fossil fuel production projects based on the 'do no significant harm' (DNSH) principle, and urging the European Central Bank to offer preferential refinancing rates for sustainable activities, such as energy-efficient building renovations.

The statement critiques the current state of financial sector decarbonization targets, noting that data gaps and flawed methodologies allow institutions to manipulate metrics. It calls for better-designed goals and stricter exclusion policies to ensure alignment with the 1.5 °C target and a halt to fossil fuel expansion.

The document critiques the current state of financial sector decarbonization targets, arguing that reliance on 'financed emissions' metrics—specifically those using Enterprise Value Including Cash (EVIC)—allows banks to report emissions reductions based on stock market volatility rather than actual decarbonization. It highlights how banks like Deutsche Bank and Crédit Agricole met targets early due to soaring energy stock prices in 2022. The author warns against 'gaming' metrics through concepts like 'energy mix' targets or 'Expected Emission Reduction' (EER) and calls for a comprehensive dashboard of absolute targets, facilitated emissions tracking, and strict exclusion policies for fossil fuel expansion.

Reclaim Finance challenges the credibility of Crédit Agricole's December 2023 energy transition commitments, citing a lack of precise definitions for terms like "low-carbon energies" and "clean technologies." The organization argues that the bank's targets—including tripling annual renewable energy funding in France by 2030 to reach 3 billion euros—are insufficient compared to the International Energy Agency's (IEA) Net Zero Emission by 2050 scenario, which requires a 6:1 ratio of sustainable to fossil fuel energy financing by 2030.