

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Released today, the 12th edition of the most comprehensive report on fossil fuel bank financing documents an alarming disconnect between the global scientific consensus on climate change and the continued practices of the world's largest banks. This year's report, titled Banking on Climate Chaos 2021, expands its focus from 35 to 60 of the world's largest banks and reveals that in the 5 years since the Paris Agreement was adopted, these banks have pumped over $3.8 trillion into the fossil fuel industry. The report also concludes that fossil fuel financing was higher in 2020 than in 2016, a trend that stands in direct opposition to the Agreement's stated goal of rapidly reducing carbon emissions with the aim to limit global temperature rise to 1.5deg Celsius.
The report demonstrates that, even amidst a pandemic-induced recession that resulted in an across-the-board reduction of fossil fuel financing of roughly 9%, the world's 60 largest banks still increased their financing in 2020 to the 100 companies most responsible for fossil fuel expansion by over 10%. These banks have poured nearly $1.5 trillion over the past 5 years into 100 top companies expanding fossil fuels. This includes companies behind highly controversial projects like the Line 3 tar sands oil pipeline and the expansion of fracking on the land of Indigenous Mapuche communities in Argentina's Patagonia region, which are just two of the nearly 20 case studies featured in the report.
Banking on Climate Chaos was authored by Rainforest Action Network, BankTrack, Indigenous Environmental Network, Oil Change International, Reclaim Finance, and Sierra Club, and is endorsed by over 300 organizations from 50 countries around the world.
U.S.-based banks continue to be the largest global drivers of emissions in 2020, with JPMorgan Chase remaining the world's worst fossil bank. Chase recently committed to align its financing with the Paris Agreement and yet continues essentially unrestrained financing of fossil fuels. From 2016 through 2020, Chase's lending and underwriting activities have provided nearly $317 billion to fossil fuels, fully 33% more than Citi, the next worst fossil bank over this period.
Wells Fargo's total fossil financing plunged by a surprising 42% in 2020. As a result, Wells dropped from fourth-worst fossil bank in 2019, to ninth worst in 2020. This is the only time over the past five years that Wells has not been one of the worst four fossil banks. Another surprising result from the 2020 data is that BNP Paribas (whose U.S. subsidiary is Bank of the West, which strongly advertises its supposed responsibility on climate) came in as the fourth-worst fossil bank in 2020. BNP Paribas provided $41 billion in fossil financing in 2020, a huge 41% increase over its 2019 activity. This means the biggest absolute increase in fossil financing last year came from BNP Paribas, despite the bank's strong policy commitments restricting financing for unconventional oil and gas.
The report also examines existing climate policy commitments by banks and finds them grossly insufficient and out of alignment with the goals of the Paris Agreement across the board. Recent high profile bank policies focus either on the distant and ill-defined goal of achieving 'net zero by 2050' or on restricting financing for unconventional fossil fuels. In general, existing bank policies are strongest with regards to restrictions for direct project-related financing. And yet, project-related financing made up only 5% of the total fossil fuel financing analyzed in this report.
The authoring organizations behind this report are united in their demand that respect for Indigenous rights, including the right to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent, and human rights more broadly must be a non-negotiable requirement for all bank financing decisions.
This report names the largest funders of fossil fuels around the world, with JPMorgan Chase the worst overall, RBC the worst in Canada, Barclays the worst in the UK, BNP Paribas worst in the EU, MUFG worst in Japan and Bank of China worst in China.
Rainforest Action Network - Ginger Cassady, Executive Director
"The unprecedented COVID-19 dip in global financing for fossil fuels offers the world's largest banks a stark choice point going forward; they can decide to lock in the downward trajectory of support for the primary industry driving the climate crisis or they can recklessly snap back to business as usual as the economy recovers. U.S.-based banks continue to be the worst financiers of fossil fuels by a wide margin. Going into the Glasgow climate summit at the end of the year, the stakes could not be higher. Wall Street must act now to stop financing fossil expansion and commit to fossil zero, so as to truly align its financing practices with keeping our planet from heating up more than 1.5 degrees."
Indigenous Environmental Network - Tom Goldtooth, Executive Director
"We must understand that by bankrolling the expansion of oil and gas the top banks of the world have blood on their hands and no amount of greenwashing, carbon markets, unproven techno-fixes, or net-zero commitments can absolve their crimes against humanity and Mother Earth. Indigenous lands globally are being plundered, our inherent rights are being violated and the value of our lives has been diminished to nothing in the face of fossil fuel expansion. For the sacredness and the territorial integrity of Mother Earth, these banks must be held accountable for covering the cost of her destruction."
Reclaim Finance - Lucie Pinson, Founder and Executive Director
"These numbers expose the hollowness of banks' ever-multiplying commitments to be net-zero or align with the Paris Agreement climate targets. A perfect example can be found in France. Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire is fond of calling Paris the capital of green finance - but this data exposes it as 2020's capital of climate hypocrisy, with four unscrupulous banks making France the largest backer of oil, gas and coal in Europe. BNP Paribas merits singling out as the world's fourth-largest fossil financier in 2020, having funnelled multi-billion dollar loans to oil giants like BP and Total. Nonetheless, it's clear that all banks need to replace empty promises with meaningful policies enacting zero tolerance for fossil fuel developers."
Sierra Club - Ben Cushing, Financial Advocacy Campaign Manager
"Many of the world's largest banks, including all six major U.S. banks, have made splashy commitments in recent months to zero-out the climate impact of their financing over the next 30 years. But what matters most is what they're doing now, and the numbers don't lie. This report separates words from actions, and the picture it paints is alarming: major banks around the world, led by U.S. banks in particular, are fueling climate chaos by dumping trillions of dollars into the fossil fuels that are causing the crisis. Big banks don't deserve a pat on the back if their 2050 pledges are not paired with meaningful 2021 actions to cut fossil financing."
BankTrack - Johan Frijns, Director
"As the date of the crucial Glasgow Climate Summit approaches - and god forbid the global corona crisis prevents the world from meeting to address that other, much bigger existential crisis - we witness one bank after another making solemn promises to become 'net zero by 2050'. There exists no pathway towards this laudable goal of a generation away that does not require dealing with bank finance for the fossil fuel industry right here and now, yet too many current promises lack precisely that; a firm commitment to start severing ties with all coal, oil and gas companies that plan on continuing their climate wrecking activities in the years to come."
Oil Change International - Lorne Stockman, Senior Research Analyst
"This report serves as a reality check for banks that think that vague 'net-zero' goals are enough to stop the climate crisis. Our future goes where the money flows, and in 2020 these banks have ploughed billions into locking us into further climate chaos. Banks need to be focused on reducing fossil fuel production now, rather than on a far off and insufficient goal in the distant future. The time for half-measures is over."
Methodology note:
This report aggregates bank lending and underwriting of debt and equity issuances according to Bloomberg's league credit methodology (which divides credit among banks leading a transaction) to companies with any reported fossil fuel activity according to Bloomberg Finance L.P. and the Global Coal Exit List. The league credit assigned to a bank for a given transaction is adjusted by an approximation of the fossil fuel intensity of the particular borrower or issuer. Draft report findings are shared with banks in advance, and they are given an opportunity to comment on financing and policy assessments.
The Sierra Club is the most enduring and influential grassroots environmental organization in the United States. We amplify the power of our 3.8 million members and supporters to defend everyone's right to a healthy world.
(415) 977-5500"They killed more than 127 people aboard boats, in 33 attacks, in five months," said one analyst. "And the amount of cocaine found at the US land border keeps increasing."
Just over a week after the families of two Trinidadian men sued the Trump administration over the boat bombings that killed their relatives, the US Department of Defense killed two more people in the eastern Pacific Ocean, bringing the total death toll to at least 128 in the White House's operation that it claims is targeting drug traffickers.
The US Southern Command said in a social media post that at the direction of Cmdr. Gen. Francis L. Donovan, "Joint Task Force Southern Spear conducted a lethal kinetic strike on a vessel operated by designated terrorist organizations."
As with the other dozens of strikes the Pentagon has carried out in the Pacific and the Caribbean Sea since September, Southern Command did not provide evidence for its claim that "narco-terrorists" were killed in the attack or that the vessel was traveling "along known narco-trafficking routes in the Eastern Pacific and was engaged in narco-trafficking operations."
The White House has persistently claimed that the boat strikes are aimed at stopping drug cartels based in Venezuela from sending drugs to the US, but international and domestic intelligence agencies have not identified Venezuela as a major player in the trafficking of illicit substances—particularly not of fentanyl, the leading cause of overdoses in the US.
President Donald Trump has claimed the US is in an "armed conflict" with drug cartels. Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle have unsuccessfully sought to pass war powers resolutions to stop the administration from attacking vessels and targets in Venezuela.
Dozens of strikes preceded the Trump administration's invasion of Venezuela and abduction of President Nicolás Maduro, whom the White House has accused of being directly involved with drug trafficking. Since attacking Venezuela, though, administration officials have all but admitted their goal in the South American country is to take control of its oil supply.
The killings of nearly 130 people in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific have been denounced as extrajudicial "murders" by numerous legal experts, and a top military lawyer at the Pentagon warned officials in August, weeks before the operations began, that carrying out the strikes could expose military top brass as well as rank-and-file service members to legal liability.
In the case of at least one bombing in September, the official who oversaw the strike told Congress that the boat was found to have been headed to Suriname, not the United States. One vessel had turned back toward Venezuela, away from the US, when it was struck.
The strike on Thursday was announced soon after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth claimed that "some top cartel drug-traffickers... have decided to cease all narcotics operations INDEFINITELY due to recent (highly effective) kinetic strikes in the Caribbean.” Hegseth did not provide evidence for the claim.
Adam Isacson of the Washington Office on Latin America emphasized on Thursday that after killing more than 127 people in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, the administration has nothing to show for the operation but "a collection of gruesome videos" of the bombings.
"The amount of cocaine found at the US land border keeps increasing," he said, citing Customs and Border Protection statistics.
Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar, who received the invite, said that what the president is "trying to do is really disrupt the midterm election.”
State election officials were left unnerved after being summoned by the FBI to a mysterious conference to discuss "preparations" for this year's midterm elections, which President Donald Trump has recently called for Republicans to "nationalize" in violation of the Constitution.
On Tuesday, election officials in all 50 states received an email from Kellie M. Hardiman, who identified herself as an “FBI Election Executive.”
Hardiman said the officials were invited to a call on February 25 with “your election partners” at the FBI, the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the US Postal Inspection Service (USPIS), and the Election Assistance Commission (EAC).
The email, obtained via a public records request by Matt Berg of Crooked Media, did not specify the purpose of the meeting other than to say it was "to prepare for the 2026 US midterm elections."
Hardiman added that the FBI and other agencies "would like to invite you to a call where we can discuss our preparations for the cycle, as well as updates and resources we can provide to you and your staff.”
At the end of the email, she reiterated, "We look forward to speaking with you in support of the 2026 midterm elections."
Berg said he contacted the FBI for comment, to which a spokesperson responded: "Thank you for reaching out. The FBI has no comment.”
The email has heightened fears that the Trump administration is meddling in the midterms or planning to do so; he has suggested on multiple occasions that the elections should be “canceled” outright. Republican strategists are reportedly increasingly worried that the GOP could lose control of both the US Senate and the House.
Although the Constitution plainly states that elections are to be run by state governments, Trump earlier this week said Republicans should "nationalize" elections and “take control of the voting in at least 15 places" led by Democrats.
Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar told Berg he'd never heard of a conference call like this. He said he wrote back to Hardiman: “Is this real? Given what’s occurred over the last two weeks, I am concerned.”
“I was just like, ‘What is this?’ It’s the strangest thing in the world that the FBI is reaching out to us and trying to coordinate election security,” Aguilar said. "It's never happened in the past. The casualness which they did… it was just beyond crazy.”
A former DOJ official told Berg that while it is normal for the department to monitor elections, the email and conference call were highly unusual: “I can’t imagine why it would be coordinated in that way," he said.
Another official who received the email told NBC News that the message was “unusual and unexpected."
Speaking of Hardiman, the official said, “No one has heard of this person—and we’re all wondering what an 'FBI Election Executive' is." NBC reported that a LinkedIn page for Hardiman showed she was appointed to the position seven months ago.
The inclusion of the Department of Homeland Security as one of the election "partners" is also noteworthy, given the recent suggestion by Trump ally Steve Bannon that the president will "have ICE surround the polls," referring to Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
The agency has increasingly acted as a sort of paramilitary force for Trump in the localities where it's been deployed, most recently in Minnesota.
After federal agents killed three US citizens and provoked furious protests, Trump offered to withdraw agents from the state, but only if it turned over its voting rolls to the federal government.
At Trump's apparent direction, the FBI raided an election hub in Atlanta last week to seize materials from the 2020 election to further his already disproven claims that his loss to former President Joe Biden was the result of fraud.
And earlier this week, it was reported that back in May, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard sent a team to Puerto Rico to seize voting machines in an effort to investigate another outlandish Trump claim that they were hacked by Venezuela. Sources with knowledge of the investigation told Reuters that no evidence of that conspiracy was uncovered.
“It’s unconstitutional for the president to do what he wants to do,” Aguilar said. “We understand that what he’s trying to do is really disrupt the midterm election, because the ‘26 election is critical to the ‘28 election.”
Aguilar said officials in Nevada are “constantly preparing and strategizing" for whatever Trump might attempt and said, “We have to prepare for that litigation at a moment’s notice, and we will be prepared in Nevada to push back."
Danny Miller, an attorney who has worked for Renew Democracy and Democracy Forward, expressed fear about Trump's coordination of federal law enforcement agencies to patrol elections, given that he has already supported one violent attempt to overturn his loss in 2020.
"Trump will try to do something far worse than January 6th before all is said and done," Miller said. "It’s up to civil society to use all the tools of democracy to stop him."
One Olympic athlete, a skier representing Britain, registered his disgust with US immigration enforcement agents by urinating the message "Fuck ICE" in the snow.
Hundreds of protesters gathered in the streets of Milan, Italy on Friday to protest the presence of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents at the 2026 Winter Olympics, with protesters waving "FCK ICE" signs and condemning Trump administration officials—including Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Reuters reported that demonstrators rallying ahead of the opening ceremony could be heard "blowing plastic whistles, which have become a symbol of anti-ICE rallies in the US." The Trump administration said a small group of ICE officers would be traveling to Milan to help provide security for Vance and Rubio, who arrived in the city on Thursday.
One demonstrator, a Minnesotan currently studying in Europe, told the outlet that she "thought that this was a good opportunity to show that the rest of the world is not okay with what's happening in Minnesota."
"It's not okay to just acquiesce and go with the status quo," the protester said.

The protests came a day after Gus Kenworthy, a skier representing Britain, urinated the message "Fuck ICE" in the snow ahead of the winter games' opening festivities and urged Americans to pressure their representatives to rein in the agency.
"Innocent people have been murdered, and enough is enough," Kenworthy wrote on social media. "We can’t wait around while ICE continues to operate with unchecked power."