Share the article
twitter-iconcopy-link-iconprint-icon
share-icon

Cover story: Why are banks still financing fossil fuels?

Is it better to engage with fossil fuel companies or to divest? Banks appear to have voted with their funds, as financing continues to be funnelled to fossil fuel companies that are in expansion mode. Is this what a just, orderly and responsible transition to net-zero emissions by 2050 looks like?
Share the article
twitter-iconcopy-link-iconprint-icon
share-icon
Cover story: Why are banks still financing fossil fuels?

It’s almost eight years since 2015′s historic Paris Agreement — a legally binding international treaty on climate change — was signed by 196 parties, who agreed to pursue efforts to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.

With fossil fuels such as coal, oil and gas being by far the largest contributors to global climate change, the International Energy Agency (IEA) was pretty explicit about what needs to happen to fossil fuel investments if the world is to achieve a net-zero carbon emissions energy system by 2050. “From today no investment in new fossil fuel supply projects, and no further final investment decisions for new unabated coal plants,” it stated in its 2021 Net Zero Emissions by 2050 Scenario (NZE).

To continue reading, join our community and benefit from

  • In-depth coverage across key markets
  • Comments from financial leaders and policymakers worldwide
  • Regional/country bank rankings and awards
Activate your free trial
Anita Hawser is the Europe editor at The Banker. For the past 20 years, Anita has worked as a freelance journalist for a range of banking, finance and tech titles covering topics such as cybersecurity, financial crime, cryptocurrencies, payments, trade and supply chain finance. Before joining The Banker, Anita was Europe editor at Global Finance.
Read more articles from this author