Search Climate Insights Directory

Civil society organisations have called on the Agence des participations de l'Etat (APE), the primary shareholder of ENGIE, to force the company to stop expanding its gas infrastructure. The signatories argue that ENGIE's current climate strategy is incompatible with a 1.5°C warming limit and highlight risks associated with long-term LNG import contracts and new gas plant projects. They specifically demand a public commitment to exit gas for electricity production by 2035 in Europe and OECD countries, and by 2040 globally, while halting new gas infrastructure and long-term LNG contracts.

Reclaim Finance and other climate organizations are urging the French Government Shareholding Agency, as ENGIE's main shareholder, to demand a commitment from the company to end gas expansion prior to a 'Say on Climate' vote on April 24th.

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 report finds that Eni's strategy prioritizes oil and gas expansion and shareholder returns over renewable energy investments. Eni's projected 2030 production levels and LNG capacity expansions significantly overshoot NZE requirements, while its diversification into renewables remains marginal, representing only 5.8% of its projected 2030 energy mix.

The report finds that Equinor is prioritizing oil and gas expansion and shareholder returns over renewable energy investments, backtracking on previous low-carbon capital expenditure and production targets. Its projected 2030 production levels and planned LNG and gas power capacities are identified as inconsistent with the IEA's Net Zero Emissions by 2050 Scenario.

The report argues that Repsol's climate strategy is insufficient, as the company continues to prioritize oil and gas expansion and shareholder returns over sustainable energy investments. It finds that Repsol's 2030 production targets exceed NZE requirements by 38%, and its diversification into renewables and green hydrogen remains a small fraction of its overall energy mix. Additionally, the report notes that Repsol has weakened its 2030 emissions targets, specifically regarding scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions.

The report finds that Shell's investment strategy prioritizes oil and gas expansion and shareholder returns over renewable energy, with 2030 production targets and LNG capacities significantly overshooting IEA Net Zero Emissions (NZE) levels. Shell's diversification into sustainable energy remains marginal, and the company has recently reduced its decarbonization targets for product carbon intensity.

The report argues that TotalEnergies' investment and production strategies prioritize oil and gas expansion and shareholder returns over climate solutions, leading to a significant overshoot of the IEA's Net Zero Emissions by 2050 Scenario.

The report finds that ExxonMobil's strategy prioritizes oil and gas expansion and shareholder returns over sustainable energy, with 2030 production targets significantly exceeding NZE levels and a lack of investment in renewable power.

The report finds that none of the 20 largest European and UK banks have developed a robust climate transition plan, with an average score of 41/100. While banks have improved reporting and governance to meet regulatory requirements, they lack concrete decarbonization and engagement strategies, often continuing to finance fossil fuel development. The analysis highlights a significant gap between public net-zero commitments and actual business model shifts, warning that current disclosures are more 'ESG marketing material' than actionable transition plans.

The report finds that BP's 2025 strategy shift prioritizes oil and gas expansion and shareholder returns over low-carbon energy. BP has retired its scope 3 net zero production target and increased its 2030 oil and gas production target to 2.3-2.5 mmboe per day, which is 57% above the IEA Net Zero Emissions (NZE) scenario. Investment in low-carbon energy has been sharply reduced from a planned US$4 billion per year to US$0.8 billion per year for 2025-2027. Additionally, BP is expanding its LNG capacity and gas power plants, while abandoning previous targets for installed renewable power capacities by 2030.

Between July 2024 and March 2025, the European Central Bank (ECB) added assets from nine fossil fuel companies, totaling 12.96 billion euros, to its list of eligible collateral. This action is presented as a reversal of the ECB's 2021 climate roadmap and a failure to implement measures to limit assets from major polluters. The document calls for the ECB to exclude assets from companies involved in oil and gas exploration or those without credible coal exit plans during its strategic review ending in July 2025.

The report finds that 'responsible' employee savings funds offered by France's top account keepers are marginal and often contradictory to climate goals. It highlights that over 30% of responsible funds from Crédit Agricole and Société Générale invest in fossil fuel expansion, attributing this to partnerships with asset managers like Amundi. The study also accuses these institutions of greenwashing through misleading marketing, while noting that BNP Paribas E&RE and Natixis Interépargne offer more aligned options via managers like Mirova.

The Caisse des Dépôts et Consignations (CDC), a major French public investor managing 323 billion euros, is criticized for a lack of transparency regarding its portfolio composition and voting records. Despite claiming alignment with a 1.5°C trajectory, the CDC holds 9.2 billion euros in fossil fuel-related investments and lacks a strict ban on companies developing new oil and gas projects. Furthermore, the CDC delegates approximately 10 billion euros to external asset managers without applying robust climate selection criteria, potentially exposing public savings to climate-harmful strategies.

Since January 2025, one-third of funds previously holding the French ISR label have abandoned it rather than comply with new criteria excluding companies developing new coal, oil, or gas projects. Reclaim Finance argues this highlights the failure of voluntary labels and the persistence of greenwashing, noting that over 4,000 ESG-promoting funds are sold in France compared to only 967 ISR-labeled funds. The organization urges regulators to implement binding exclusions of fossil fuel development in the upcoming 2025 revision of the European Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) to protect investors and accelerate the financial transition.

The document analyzes the 'responsible' employee savings fund offerings of major French account holders, finding that these funds often include investments in companies developing new fossil fuel projects incompatible with a 1.5°C warming limit. It highlights a gap between marketing claims and actual investment practices, specifically citing Crédit Agricole and Société Générale.

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.

Reclaim Finance asserts that new gas power plants are incompatible with climate goals due to methane emissions and declining demand. It argues that future conversions to hydrogen or CCUS are unrealistic and that existing fossil plant capacity is sufficient for seasonal flexibility. The document criticizes the top 60 global banks for lacking specific electricity sector policies and calls for a 6:1 financing ratio in favor of sustainable power by 2030.

The document argues that financing new gas-fired power plants is incompatible with climate goals because gas is not a viable transition fuel, demand is peaking, and future conversions to hydrogen or CCUS are unrealistic. It calls on global banks to adopt specific power sector policies that exclude new gas financing and establish a 6:1 energy supply financing ratio in favor of sustainable alternatives by 2030.