SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
fossil fuels
Report Reveals $2 Billion of New Financing by Big Banks for Oil and Gas in the Amazon
"These investments are complicit in genocide: They are killing our culture, our history, and destroying the biodiversity of the Amazon.”
Oct 21, 2025
A day after the Brazilian state-run oil firm Petrobras announced it would begin drilling for oil near the mouth of the Amazon River "immediately" after obtaining a license despite concerns over the impact on wildlife, an analysis on Tuesday revealed that banks have added $2 billion in direct financing for oil and gas in the biodiverse Amazon Rainforest since 2024.
The report from Stand.earth—and Petrobras' license—come weeks before officials in Belém, Brazil prepare to host the 2025 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30), where advocates are calling for an investment of $1.3 trillion per year for developing countries to mitigate and adapt to the climate emergency.
Examining 843 deals involving 330 banks, Stand.earth found that US banks JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, and Citi are among the worst-performing institutions, pouring between $283 million and $326 million into oil and gas in the Amazon.
The biggest spender on oil and gas in the past year has been Itaú Unibanco, the Brazilian bank, which has sent $378 million in financing to oil and gas firms for extractive activities in the Amazon.
"Oil and gas expansion in the Amazon endangers one of the world’s most vital ecosystems and Indigenous peoples who have protected it for millennia," said Stand.earth. "In addition to fossil fuels leading global greenhouse gas emissions, in the Amazon their extraction also accelerates deforestation, and pollutes rivers and communities."
The group's research found that banks have directly financed more than $15 billion to oil and gas companies in the Amazon region since the Paris Agreement, the legally binding climate accord, was adopted in 2016. Nearly 75% of the investment has come from just 10 firms, including Itaú, JPMorgan Chase, Citi, and Bank of America.
The analysis comes weeks after the UN-backed Net-Zero Banking Alliance said it was suspending its operations, following decisions by several large banks to leave the alliance that was established in 2021 to limit banks' environmental footprint, achieve net-zero emissions in the sector by 2050, and set five-year goals for reducing the institutions' financing of emissions.
"Around 1,700 Indigenous people live here, and our survival depends on the forest. We ask that banks such as Itaú, Santander, and Banco do Nordeste stop financing companies that exploit fossil fuels in Indigenous territories."
Devyani Singh, lead researcher for Stand.earth's new bank scorecard on fossil fuel financing, noted that European banks like BNP Paribas and HSBC have "applied more robust policies to protect the sensitive Amazon rainforest than their peers" and have "significantly dropped in financing ranks."
But, said Singh, "no bank has yet brought its financing to zero. Every one of these banks must close the existing loopholes and fully exit Amazon oil and gas without delay.”
More than 80% of the banks' Amazon fossil fuel financing since 2024 has gone to just six oil and gas companies: Petrobras, Canada's Gran Tierra, Brazil's Eneva, oil trader Gunvor, and two Peruvian companies: Hunt Oil Peru and Pluspetrol Camisea.
The companies have been associated with human rights violations and have long been resisted by Indigenous people in the Amazon region, who have suffered from health impacts of projects like the Camisea gas project, a decline in fish and game stocks, and a lack of clean water.
“It’s outrageous that Bank of America, Scotiabank, Credicorp, and Itaú are increasing their financing of oil and gas in the Amazon at a time when the forest itself is under grave threat," said Olivia Bisa, president of the Autonomous Territorial Government of the Chapra Nation in Peru. "For decades, Indigenous Peoples have suffered the heaviest impacts of this destruction. We are calling on banks to change course now: by ending support for extractive industries in the Amazon, they can help protect the forest that sustains our lives and the future of the planet.”
Stand.earth's report warned that both the Amazon Rainforest—which provides a habitat for 10% of Earth's biodiversity, including many endangered species—and the people who live there are facing "escalating threats" from oil and gas companies and the firms that finance them, with centuries of exploitation driving the forest "toward an ecological tipping point with irreversible impacts that have global consequences."
Oil and gas exploration is opening roads into intact parts of the Amazon and other forests, while perpetuating the new fossil fuel emissions that scientists and energy experts have warned have no place on a pathway to limiting planetary heating.
"With warming temperatures, the delicate ecological balance of the Amazon could be upset, flipping it from being a carbon-absorbing rainforest into a carbon-emitting savannah," reads the group's report.
Jonas Mura, chief of the Gavião Real Indigenous Territory in Brazil, said "the noise, the constant truck traffic, and the explosions" from Eneva's projects "have driven away the animals and affected our hunting."
"Even worse: they are entering without our consent," said Mura. "Our territory feels threatened, and our families are being directly harmed. Around 1,700 Indigenous people live here, and our survival depends on the forest. We ask that banks such as Itaú, Santander, and Banco do Nordeste stop financing companies that exploit fossil fuels in Indigenous territories."
"These companies have no commitment to the environment, to Indigenous and traditional peoples, or to the future of the planet," he added. "These investments are complicit in genocide: They are killing our culture, our history, and destroying the biodiversity of the Amazon.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Dispatches From the Winter of Our Discontent Against Woodside Energy's Carbon Bomb
It's been a winter in which our elected representatives still give primacy to commercial interests and the economy over the environment and cultural heritage of Western Australia.
Oct 19, 2025
“This year was a year of change, a year when secret fears come into the open, when discontent stops being dormant and changes gradually to anger. It wasn’t only in me… And it wasn’t only in the nation; the whole world stirred with restlessness and uneasiness as discontent moved to anger and anger tried to find an outlet in action, …” (John Steinbeck, The Winter of Our Discontent, 1961)
1 June
Winter 2025 begins with a still, sunny 23°C day in Perth, Western Australia (WA). It’s a reprieve from disgruntlement, discontent, and alarm about the state of the world, especially the genocide in Gaza and long war in Ukraine and, closer to home, the Australian environment minister’s "carbon bomb."
Four days earlier, and only two weeks after being sworn in as Australia’s new Environment Minister, Murray Watt announced his snap decision in favour of Woodside Energy’s bid to keep burning gas until 2070 at its North West Shelf (NWS) plant on the Burrup Peninsula in WA.
I’m still hoarse from chanting “Dis-rupt Bur-rup Hub!” to the rhythmic beat of Drummers for Climate Action at the dusk snap rally outside Parliament House the night before Watt gives conditional approval to Woodside’s "carbon bomb"—a fossil fuel project that will emit more than 1 billion tonnes of carbon pollution.
At home, it’s been a winter in which we witness the wanton destruction wrought upon WA’s native jarrah forests, endangered black cockatoos, fragile coral reefs, and ancient Indigenous rock art by rapacious mining companies.
Never mind the 500,000+ signatories to Greenpeace Australia’s petition to stop Woodside’s Burrup Hub expansion, the hundreds who called Watt’s office, and the thousands who emailed him to voice their objections in the week before his decision. Elections and environment ministers come and go, but none will stop the Woodside Energy juggernaut—Australia and WA’s second worst fossil fuels polluter, headed by American “Methane Meg” O’Neill, formerly of ExxonMobil.
3 June
Federal Cabinet meets in Perth, for the first time since the government was reelected in a landslide and since the March State election returned a Labor Government. Prime Minister (PM) Anthony Albanese responds to journalists’ questions about the NWS extension by emphasising the Government has a target for net-zero emissions (as if approving one of the top 10 fossil fuel polluting projects in the world will help us reach net zero by 2050). The PM sidesteps a question on community anxiety about the environmental impacts by saying he and the people of Karratha “support jobs and economic activities.” The NWS employs 900 people; 280 live locally in Karratha.
4 June
Conservation Council of WA holds another snap rally to protest Watt’s decision, coinciding with Cabinet’s visit. The invitation stipulates BYO “pots and pans and something to hit them with” (the pots and pans, that is, not the Cabinet ministers).
6 June
Three climate activists are fined $10,000 each for trying to take a “stink bomb” into Woodside’s 2023 AGM.
8 June
Premier Roger Cook defends WA’s rising greenhouse gas emissions since 2005, and the NWS extension, with the dubious claim that gas exports from the NWS help other countries decarbonise; spinning Woodside’s line.
20 June
I walk along the grassy banks of the Derbarl Yerrigan-Swan River between the new Boorloo (Perth) Bridge at the causeway and Matagarup (one-leg or knee deep) Bridge at the Optus Stadium, two kilometres upriver. The Whadjuk Noongar people know this place as Joorolup, from the time when there were jarrah forests here.
The Indigenous names for these new bridges co-exist with the naming rights of on-the-nose corporate giants that predominate our public infrastructure in this mining State. The Optus (Yes!) Stadium precinct includes the Chevron Parkland and BHP Boardwalk and Amphitheatre; Chevron and BHP are ranked, respectively, first and fifth of Australia’s "Dirty Dozen" carbon polluting companies.
29 June
For one week of winter, my husband and I go "down south." We’re 400 kilometres away in Walpole walking on the Bibbulmun Track through the tall Karri and Tingle forest—wilderness preserved by the WA Labor government’s decision 25 years ago to cease logging in old-growth forests.
1 July
Flinders Bay, Augusta: There’s a newborn Southern right whale calf with its mother. The marine biologist on the boat says it is unusual to see a calf so early in the whale migration season and a calf born in these cold waters is unlikely to survive to adulthood. It’s a bittersweet reminder of the fragility of our endangered species.
2 July
Driving home from the southwest to Perth on the Wilma Wadandi highway, we cross the Preston River and see the billowing smokestack of Alcoa’s 40 years old Wagerup Alumina Refinery to the east.
WA’s third largest greenhouse gas emitter, Alcoa, like Woodside, has a voracious appetite for expansion. It wants to clear another 7,500 hectares of endemic jarrah-marri forest for bauxite mining—3,500 times the size of the 60,000-seat Optus Stadium.
Alcoa’s expansion would destroy up to 144,500 potential nesting trees for endangered black cockatoos—trees that can take up to 150 years to grow suitable hollows for cockatoos’ breeding, according to Birdlife Australia. Cockatoos’ foraging habitat will be lost for up to 11 years, at a time when starving Carnaby’s cockatoos are already being admitted to Perth Zoo for treatment.
The State’s Environmental Protection Authority received a record 59,000 public submissions on Alcoa’s proposal. So, will WA’s new environment minister halt the destruction of our native forests and endangered cockatoos’ habitat and food sources or will he enable their extinction, accelerated by an American-owned aluminium company?
10 July
A Disrupt Burrup Hub activist is fined for blocking access to Woodside’s NWS gas plant; the judge rejects her “climate emergency” defence.
12 July
News from Paris: Last night UNESCO approved Murujuga for World Heritage listing in recognition of its cultural value. Emissions are already damaging the ancient Indigenous rock engravings at Murujuga, adjacent to the NWS, according to eyewitness and measured evidence by local and eminent archaeologists. Minister Watt says he’s put the onus on Woodside to protect the one million Murujuga engravings, but how?
World Heritage listing should force the Government to protect the rock art to a higher standard, but will it?
12 August
World Heritage listed Ningaloo Reef and other reefs along the WA coastline are casualties of the worst marine heatwave ever recorded. It’s sad to see the extensive coral bleaching, caused by heat stress, and a “raging fever” in the case of Ningaloo which experienced temperatures up to 4°C warmer than usual. The Australian Institute of Marine Science attributes the damage to carbon-emissions induced climate change.
Obviously, World Heritage listing does not protect reefs (or rock art) from fossil fuels. That requires governments to stop recklessly approving new coal and gas developments. Will feverish and bleached corals on a possibly terminally-ill Ningaloo Reef give our governments pause for thought about Woodside’s plan to sink 50 gas wells near Scott Reef off the Kimberley coast?
17 August
Requiem for the Reefs held outside the Maritime Museum in Fremantle, which has an Open Day sponsored by Woodside the Reef-Wrecker! About 100 of us, including 3 of the 4 Greens members who now hold the balance of power in the WA Parliament, gather to mourn the bleaching of our once-colourful reefs. Voices for Climate sing; a violinist plays a lament at the edge of a mock reef; we hold up placards and chant, “Save Ningaloo. Save Scott Reef.”
22 August
In a fitting end to our Woodside winter of discontent, another court case goes Woodside’s way. Doctors for the Environment Australia loses its Federal Court case against the approval of Woodside’s Environment Plan for its Scarborough gas project—a floating platform from which to drill 21 wells 375 kilometres off the coast of the Pilbara with a pipeline to bring the gas onshore. Back in 2021, Woodside wanted to dump a 2,500-tonne mooring from a decommissioned floating oil rig next to Ningaloo.
31 August
Winter ends as it began with a deceptively sunny warm 22°C day in Perth.
A winter in which the world’s woes worsened. Israel continues bombing Gaza, and famine sets in. A winter in which Israel bombed Iran, Syria, and Lebanon. A winter in which America bombed Iran’s nuclear facilities, and Iran fired missiles at the US military base in Qatar. A winter in which Russia continues its military invasion of Ukraine and still refuses peace talks. A dark violent winter.
At home, it’s been a winter in which we witness the wanton destruction wrought upon WA’s native jarrah forests, endangered black cockatoos, fragile coral reefs, and ancient Indigenous rock art by rapacious mining companies. A winter in which our elected representatives still give primacy to commercial interests and the economy over the environment and cultural heritage.
12 September
Wildflowers bloom on the banks of the Derbarl Yerrigan, and cygnets bob on its choppy waters on this windy spring day.
Australia’s environment minister confirms approval of Woodside’s NWS extension.
Winter is over, but our discontent lingers and deepens into anger.
Keep ReadingShow Less
The Abundance Movement’s Deregulatory Deceit
How Green Amendments, not rollbacks, can help usher in an era of true abundance.
Oct 15, 2025
The nation’s halting and uneven clean energy rollout—exacerbated by President Donald Trump’s hostility to anything green—threatens our prosperity, our climate, and our communities. Left unchecked, rising temperatures—driven largely by fossil fuels and the industries that burn them—will destroy ecosystems, disrupt our economy, and destabilize our society.
Some opportunistic politicians think they have a solution in the latest media fad, the so-called “Abundance” movement. They argue that the rules and regulations put in place to protect the environment are in fact obstacles impeding our ability to build the clean energy our climate needs. Their logic is nonsensical: Cut environmental regulations to protect the environment and unleash energy abundance.
But we’ve been down this path, and it leads not to abundance, but impoverishment. We’ve seen the havoc that unrestricted exploitation of nature brings to our health, our communities, and our environment: Barren hillsides. Air too dangerous to breathe. Workers’ lives devastated, and too often lost. Toxic rivers and underground fires.
In 1971, damage like this led Pennsylvanians to rise up and demand the passage of the state’s Green Amendment. Led by visionary State Sen. Franklin Kury, Pennsylvania became the first state in the nation to enshrine in its constitution a revolutionary recognition of the People’s right to pure water, clean air, and healthy environments, and to create a constitutional obligation for leaders to protect these rights. Pennsylvania’s Green Amendment is now being used to ensure that industry—including a vibrant clean energy sector—is able to advance while also protecting Pennsylvanian’s inalienable right to a clean, safe, and healthy environment, and all the economic benefits that flow therefrom.
Rather than regulatory rollbacks, we need a reorientation—one that advances clean energy abundance without empowering fossil fuels.
But in pushing a stale deregulatory agenda, the Abundance movement threatens to undo the balance healthy environments provide and open the door to a fossil fuel industry more focused on profits than people—an industry that has always overpromised on job creation and economic benefits, while consistently downplaying the harm it causes to our environment and our health.
And make no mistake, the harms are significant. Pollution and environmental degradation can impose debilitating costs through higher rates of childhood cancer, heart disease, asthma, and Alzheimer’s, on top of a broader economic burden and loss of personal well-being.
Moreover, regulatory rollbacks proposed under the false promise of “abundance” will let industry off the hook for its failures while doing nothing to stop companies from attempting to increase profits by foisting the costs of environmental abuses on to the communities they harm. Indeed, far from pushing these companies to meaningfully address project shortcomings, a deregulatory agenda allows them to continue blaming regulation for their failures, however specious the case.
Take for example, the PennEast pipeline, a proposed natural gas pipeline cancelled in 2021. Deregulation advocates blame the inability to secure permits for the project’s failure, but the real issue was a lack of demand. In the absence of genuine need, there was no way to justify the investment, seizure of private property, or harm the project would unleash on the community’s health, economy, or environment.
Faulting regulations that protect communities and prevent wasteful investment for the fossil fuel industry’s failure to deliver is misplaced. Reforming the way that environmental permitting works, even removing the requirement to secure these permits entirely, won’t solve the industry’s fundamental duplicity.
Indeed, in today’s environment—with a federal government that is actively hostile to clean energy, that believes climate change is a hoax, and is fully in thrall to monied interests bent on extracting every dollar possible from the natural world, whatever the consequences to our health, our communities, or our environments—advocating that states roll back environmental protections and shut communities out of the decision-making process is laughably naive at best, and complicit in the resulting harms at worst.
Removing the ability of communities to push back on these harms, and instead counting on the fossil fuel industry to police itself, will not result in abundance for all, but profits for a select few.
Rather than regulatory rollbacks, we need a reorientation—one that advances clean energy abundance without empowering fossil fuels. We must undergird our system with a recognition that all Americans have an inherent right to pure water, clean air, and a healthy environment. That is how Green Amendments will support economic progress while also protecting our environment.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular