Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Earth

Major Banks Pledging Net Zero Are Pouring Money Into the Dirtiest Fossil Fuel (cnn.com) 48

Posted by msmash from the closer-look dept.
Financial institutions channeled more than $1.5 trillion into the coal industry in loans and underwriting from January 2019 to November 2021, even though many have made net-zero pledges, a report by a group of 28 non-government organizations showed. From a report: Reducing coal use is a key part of global efforts to slash climate-warming greenhouse gases and bring emissions down to "net zero" by the middle of the century, and governments, firms and financial institutions across the world have pledged to take action. But banks continue to fund 1,032 firms involved in the mining, trading, transportation and utilization of coal, the research showed.

"Banks like to argue that they want to help their coal clients transition, but the reality is that almost none of these companies are transitioning," said Katrin Ganswind, head of financial research at German environmental group Urgewald, which led the research. "And they have little incentive to do so as long as bankers continue writing them blank checks." The study said banks from six countries - China, the United States, Japan, India, Britain and Canada - were responsible for 86% of global coal financing over the period. Direct loans amounted to $373 billion, with Japanese banks Mizuho Financial, Mitsubishi UFJ Financial -- both members of the Net Zero Banking Alliance -- identified as the two biggest lenders. Neither firm responded immediately to requests for comment.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Major Banks Pledging Net Zero Are Pouring Money Into the Dirtiest Fossil Fuel More

Major Banks Pledging Net Zero Are Pouring Money Into the Dirtiest Fossil Fuel

Comments Filter:
  • I have $50,000 and owe $50,000 so my net is $0. Ads we ask firms to take climate change into consideration, net zero is the best we can do right now calculating that net zero is a challenge. But it is progress.

  • Financial institutions channeled more than $1.5 trillion into the coal industry in loans and underwriting from January 2019 to November 2021, ...

    Gotta reward WV Senator Joe Manchin for his continuing efforts ...

  • It's almost as if (Score:3)

    by Rosco P. Coltrane ( 209368 ) on Tuesday February 15, 2022 @03:53PM (#62270509)

    companies lied to us constantly.

    If this proved to be true, it would shatter the confidence everyone has in the free market, that was built over decades of impeccable corporate probity. It would be terrible.

    • Re:It's almost as if (Score:4, Insightful)

      by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Tuesday February 15, 2022 @04:02PM (#62270547)
      Well it certainly raises a question about what it means for a bank to be "net zero." I would have assumed it meant for their own operations, such as the power they directly consume.

      If banks being net zero means they don't finance anything unless it is net zero, it means banks cannot be net zero until the entire global economy is net zero. Which is great, but a big goal.

      Same for a retailer like amazon or walmart. If they are net zero in their own operations (heating and lighting their buildings, and even their in-house distribution networks) - that is great. But to be 'net zero' in the sense of not selling anything unless it's net zero - well then they cannot be until the whole global economy is, which is a different ballgame.

      • what it means for a bank to be "net zero."

        Well that's easy: whatever banks say or do, at the end of the day, people have zero confidence in them - not to mention, zero love for them too.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by NFN_NLN ( 633283 )

        Net zero, haha.

        Instead of planting net new trees or sequestering carbon some asshole can pay money to a third world country for a section of rainforest that has already existed for thousands of years pulling carbon. Then they can ride around in a private jet that is unnecessary or a meeting that could have been online and call themselves champions of the green initiative to collect more money from rubes.

        By the way that meeting was for a think tank to convince people nuclear power using already dug up fuel

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        How about instead of worrying about the fidelity of the term, we think about what would actually help matters improve?

        Say banks decide they won't deal with businesses that don't make substantial progress towards net zero. Would that have an impact on the climate change crisis? Is that a worthwhile thing to do, even if it doesn't meet some high standard of true net zero for the entire world?

    • The thing is there are regulations and accounting for companies. You are right they are corrupt to a level, however the free market is proven to be so much better than communism (which is the alternative.) As politicians lying means their lips are moving. People who speak out against the free market can also go and create an alternative, people who speak against the government get cancelled (see Mike Lindel just canceled by his own bank for example, or Truckers in Canada getting their own accounts cancelled

    • If this proved to be true, it would shatter the confidence everyone has in the free market, that was built....

      Really a very nice troll, Sheriff. Citation is needed on your allegation that there has ever been anything remotely resembling a free market. Sure, there's the black market system but... you have a black market because your legal markets have been constrained and price-adjusted for the benefit of those who can bribe politicians sufficiently. This is not what a "free market" looks like. It looks like one that's severely constrained according to the benefits it affords the ruling class, without disturbing les

  • If they mean coal mining companies, or companies involved in the extraction of coal at some level . . . they're not going to transition. How or why would they? It's not like they're going to start producing solar panels overnight, or even ever. They're mining companies.

    Get used to the idea that some old companies - particularly those in the coal industry - are just going to go out of business sooner or later.

  • If you could delay the "net zero" deadline by one year, and I put $10,000 in your bank account, would you accept it?

    The vast majority of people would accept the $10,000.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Indeed. And then they would do it again and again. And when everything goes to shit they will cry "How could we have known?" and blame somebody else for their greed and stupidity.

  • For a Japanese bank, saying It is a good thing to cut down fossil fuel use itself is a good start even they dont intend to do anything about it. They are still funding whaling ships that are on the hunt for the last remaining sperm whale, or fund fishermen to drive dolphins into a bay and slaughter them mercilessly, or the ones who catch great white shark, take its fin and drop it alive into the ocean to be eaten alive by other fishes ... They don't even agree in principle these are cruel inhumane practices ...

  • the supply wont go down (Score:3, Informative)

    by Dusanyu ( 675778 ) on Tuesday February 15, 2022 @04:13PM (#62270587)
    If these companies don't produce the coal someone else will the fact is this fuel source is not going away any time soon no matter how much we want it to so a few banks took advantage of a opportunity to make some money literally nothing new.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Tablizer ( 95088 )

      If mining co's have difficulty getting finance, they may cut back on operations, and just go for the "lowest hanging" coal.

      • If mining co's have difficulty getting finance, they may cut back on operations, and just go for the "lowest hanging" coal.

        If there is money to be made financing them, someone is going to do it. Every bank that chooses not to is just opening a business opportunity for someone else.

        • Re:the supply wont go down (Score:4)

          by ewibble ( 1655195 ) on Tuesday February 15, 2022 @07:12PM (#62271167)

          If I don't do it someone else will can be used to justify anything including murder, that doesn't mean that society shouldn't look down upon them, or pass laws to punish them.

          • Please tell us what will replace the fossil fuel that is making 60 percent of USA power if we stopped using it right now.

          • If I don't do it someone else will can be used to justify anything including murder, that doesn't mean that society shouldn't look down upon them, or pass laws to punish them.

            If you pass laws to make burning coal illegal then society may (eventually one day) look down on them. Unlike murder, as long as it is a legal business trying to shame them is all you got, and shame alone is really not that big an impediment to large profits.

    • If these companies don't produce the coal someone else will the fact is this fuel source is not going away any time soon no matter how much we want it to

      That, sir, is wrong. We demonstrate what we really want by spending our hard-earned money on it, and what we really want is to continue to cook the fucking planet.

      If the banks say they want AGW remediation and then continue to finance AGW then they are lying and they not only can but must be either brought into the fold or destroyed if humanity is to have a future. If you don't want humanity to have a future then by all means balk.

      I left the big mainstream banks and went to credit unions a long time ago, an

  • Lie, then lie, then lie about the lies, then when you get caught lying, lie some more.

  • "Money has no Fatherland; financiers are without patriotism, and without decency. Their sole object is gain." -- Napoleon Bonaparte

    --- and yet today we still have knuckle-draggers clinging to the belief and hope that the supposed "Free Market" will some how regulate itself in an equitable manner. The last 300 years of Western history has shown that it will not.

    • That's not what is happening here. Please tell us what will replace oil and coal that is producing 2/3 of the USA electricity if we stopped using it this instant.

  • Unless everyone is serious and accepts nation wide blackouts since coal and other non-wokey materials ran out, the snowflakes will be the first to overthrow our green deal overlords as it now hits their own bubble, which wasn't allowed to happen...? In crises, leaders are born. We now just have to wait a bit for those to emerge, as things are still going too well.

  • There will not be lower CO2 emissions until we invest in nuclear power. We tried investing in wind and solar to lower CO2 emissions but it has not kept up with growth in demand. We need "all the above" for solutions. What we have now is a "Meatloaf" power policy, we will do anything for global warming but we won't do "that".

    Well, you are going to have to choose between "that" or global warming because your "Meatloaf" policy isn't working. If you want banks to invest in lower CO2 energy instead of coal t

  • Got some news for ya, one of banks' core business is lending money to companies! Aren't you surprised?

    Yes, including companies "involved" in coal. Such a useful word, "involved", so they can count the companies that made the tires and screws used by coal trucks, too. I bet that banks also "poured" money into companies "involved" in environmental groups like Urgewald, why didn't the report include that too?

    Coal isn't illegal yet, unlike drugs. Why shouldn't banks lend money to perfectly legal companies?

    • Coal isn't illegal yet, unlike drugs. Why shouldn't banks lend money to perfectly legal companies?

      How do you feel about congress trading stocks?

      How do you feel about the holocaust?

      Why do you think legality is the end-all?

  • Why is this article even here ? Where is the technology reference ? Can the editors do their job and actually edit ?

    I'm old enough to remember when Slashdot was actually useful.

  • The headline would be better served as "Banks still have coal industry as customers".

    Yea, that is all it really is.

    And no, it should not be made illegal to deal with mining, drilling, dirty power, etc. companies. btw, coal is used in making metal, cement, and other uses from it's byproducts.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Corbets ( 169101 )

      The headline would be better served as "Banks still have coal industry as customers".

      Yea, that is all it really is.

      This. Banks claiming net zero is not the same thing as banks claiming they have no emissions producing clients. I know my employer, a bank, is working hard towards sustainability, but there is always more to do.

      Further, I think people are unfairly focusing on the banks . If tobacco is legal, holding a shopkeeper accountable for selling it is hardly right, and the same principle applies here. It is almost as if people have realize that they are unwilling to actually vote with their dollars and stop using the

  • "Your dad and I are for the jobs the [coal] will provide."

Slashdot Top Deals

The sooner all the animals are extinct, the sooner we'll find their money. - Ed Bluestone

Close