The headline is a stretch. Nonetheless, the story is that of an industry in long-term decline:
> Data compiled by Bloomberg indicates that financing for oil, gas, and coal projects by Wall Street’s top six banks fell by 25% compared to the same period last year (although that loss didn’t offset a bigger increase from 2023 to 2024). Leading the retreat, Morgan Stanley reduced its fossil fuel financing by 54%. JPMorgan Chase, historically a major supporter of the oil and gas sector, trimmed its lending by approximately 7%.
>Analysts are noting that the first decline in global upstream oil and gas development spending since 2020 coincides with this reduction in lending. As BloombergNEF analyst Miquel Kishimoto Guardiola puts it, “the composition of banks’ lending books is a better measure of whether they’re having a ‘meaningful energy transition impact’ than their public net-zero commitments.”
I mean, even bankers won’t be able to live in a 50 degree Celsius world – maybe they’ve begun to love their grandchildren?
I’m treasurer of a society which had a bank account at ING, which was an old Postal bank. ING refused to lower their fossil investments.
We had that account for 85+years, but we moved everything last year to a green bank and haven’t looked back since. Sure the interest is lower, but I sleep better at night.
RIH fossil fuel companies.
I agree with Guardiola’s comment at the end – this kind of hard tacks reality matters way, way more than fluffy net zero pledges
I hear the *real* money is in renewables.
Trump Executive Order in 3… 2… 1…
I, for one, would love to put a cafe in a busy train station
8 comments
The headline is a stretch. Nonetheless, the story is that of an industry in long-term decline:
> Data compiled by Bloomberg indicates that financing for oil, gas, and coal projects by Wall Street’s top six banks fell by 25% compared to the same period last year (although that loss didn’t offset a bigger increase from 2023 to 2024). Leading the retreat, Morgan Stanley reduced its fossil fuel financing by 54%. JPMorgan Chase, historically a major supporter of the oil and gas sector, trimmed its lending by approximately 7%.
>Analysts are noting that the first decline in global upstream oil and gas development spending since 2020 coincides with this reduction in lending. As BloombergNEF analyst Miquel Kishimoto Guardiola puts it, “the composition of banks’ lending books is a better measure of whether they’re having a ‘meaningful energy transition impact’ than their public net-zero commitments.”
I mean, even bankers won’t be able to live in a 50 degree Celsius world – maybe they’ve begun to love their grandchildren?
I’m treasurer of a society which had a bank account at ING, which was an old Postal bank. ING refused to lower their fossil investments.
We had that account for 85+years, but we moved everything last year to a green bank and haven’t looked back since. Sure the interest is lower, but I sleep better at night.
RIH fossil fuel companies.
I agree with Guardiola’s comment at the end – this kind of hard tacks reality matters way, way more than fluffy net zero pledges
I hear the *real* money is in renewables.
Trump Executive Order in 3… 2… 1…
I, for one, would love to put a cafe in a busy train station
Comments are closed.