In a world increasingly focused on renewable energy, the global banking sector finds itself at a crossroads. While investments in clean technologies are set to double those of fossil fuels by 2025, major banks continue to pour billions into oil, gas, and coal industries. This paradoxical trend highlights the ongoing tension between short-term profits and long-term sustainability commitments.
Why Banks Must Rethink Their Role in Climate Action
The financial sector stands at a pivotal moment, where its choices could either accelerate or hinder humanity's transition to a sustainable future.The Reversal of Fortune: A Shift Back to Fossil Fuels
In recent years, fossil fuel financing had shown a promising decline, dropping from $922 billion in 2021 to $707 billion in 2023. However, this downward trajectory reversed sharply in 2024, with funding surging back up to $869 billion. Factors contributing to this resurgence include lower fossil fuel prices necessitating greater external financing, coupled with more attractive interest rates that encouraged borrowing. For instance, Jessye Waxman, a senior advisor for sustainable finance at the Sierra Club, explained during a press briefing that the fossil fuel industry is aggressively seeking expansion through external funding, aiming to outcompete burgeoning renewable energy sources.This increase in financing comes despite the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) prediction that investment in clean technologies will reach $2.2 trillion by 2025, nearly doubling the $1.1 trillion allocated to fossil fuels. The disparity underscores a significant shift in market dynamics over the past decade, as clean energy has gained both economic and environmental advantages.A Regional Breakdown: Where Is the Money Flowing?
Among the 65 largest global banks analyzed in the "Banking on Climate Chaos" report, 45 increased their fossil fuel financing in 2024. North America emerged as the primary region driving this trend, with the United States accounting for 33% of global fossil financing and Canada following closely at 15%. These figures reflect the substantial influence of the North American oil and gas industry and its close-knit relationship with regional banking institutions.For example, JPMorgan Chase led the pack as the top financier of fossil fuels worldwide, increasing its commitments by 39% to $53.4 billion in 2024. Similarly, Bank of America boosted its support by 38%, reaching $46 billion, while Citigroup saw an even more dramatic rise of nearly 50%, totaling $44.7 billion. Canadian banks also played a significant role, with Royal Bank of Canada raising its fossil fuel financing by 16% to $34.3 billion and Toronto-Dominion Bank increasing it by 45% to $29 billion.These numbers reveal not only the scale of financial backing but also the specific entities benefiting most from these funds. Major players such as Diamondback Energy, Enbridge, State Grid Corporation of China, Saudi Aramco, and BP collectively represent some of the largest recipients of bank financing within the fossil fuel sector.Green Financing vs. Fossil Investments: Striking a Balance
While the report focuses exclusively on fossil fuel lending and underwriting, it does acknowledge the concurrent growth in low-carbon financing. Notably, JPMorgan Chase claims to have provided more funding to clean energy than to fossil fuels in 2023, achieving a ratio of $1.29 in green energy for every dollar invested in oil, gas, and coal. However, whether this trend persisted into 2024 remains uncertain due to the substantial uptick in fossil financing observed last year.Even if clean energy finance improves incrementally, JPMorgan Chase's current energy supply ratio falls far short of BloombergNEF's recommended 4:1 clean-to-fossil benchmark required to limit global warming to 1.5°C. Achieving this balance would necessitate a drastic reevaluation of priorities across the entire financial sector.Policymaking and Political Influence: Navigating Uncertain Waters
As political landscapes evolve, so too do the pressures influencing bank decision-making. Recent developments indicate a growing divergence between public climate pledges and private sector actions. All major U.S. and Canadian banks have withdrawn from the Net-Zero Banking Alliance, citing various reasons ranging from regulatory concerns to shifting governmental priorities.Under President Donald Trump's administration, calls for aggressive fossil fuel exploitation—"drill, baby, drill"—have resurfaced, further complicating efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Meanwhile, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney advocates for positioning Canada as a dual leader in both clean and conventional energy markets. Such conflicting agendas create an environment ripe for renewed fossil fuel expansion, with companies engaged in such activities receiving approximately $429 billion in 2024—nearly half of all fossil financing that year.Risk Mitigation and Regulatory Oversight: A Call to Action
Given these circumstances, experts warn that continued reliance on fossil fuels poses considerable risks to both the climate and financial stability. Allison Fajans-Turner, head of bank policy for the Rainforest Action Network, emphasizes that the financial sector's priorities remain misaligned with global climate commitments. To address this discrepancy, regulators are urged to mandate comprehensive climate strategies that explicitly limit oil, gas, and coal financing.Failure to implement such measures could leave banks exposed to stranded assets as demand for fossil fuels wanes and stricter emission standards take effect. Conversely, embracing sustainable practices offers opportunities for innovation, resilience, and leadership in shaping a greener tomorrow.READ MORE