April, 22 2021, 12:00am EDT
Biden Administration Announces Restrictions on Overseas Fossil Fuel Financing but Remains Silent on EXIM and Other Key Agencies
Today, in the lead up to President Biden's Climate Summit, the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) announced it will be net zero by 2040.
Kate DeAngelis, International Finance Program Manager at Friends of the Earth U.S., issued the following statement in response:
WASHINGTON
Today, in the lead up to President Biden's Climate Summit, the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) announced it will be net zero by 2040.
Kate DeAngelis, International Finance Program Manager at Friends of the Earth U.S., issued the following statement in response:
DFC's broad-based restrictions on fossil fuel financing are a first for any U.S. institution, but still insufficient to address the true nature of the climate crisis. DFC should have taken the opportunity of the climate summit to once and for all end support for all fossil fuels immediately. In putting forward a net zero target, DFC is ignoring the lifetime and lifecycle emissions of its portfolio while putting off real climate action with dangerous and ineffective offsets.
Even more alarming is Biden's silence on the Export-Import Bank, which provides billions of dollars every year to disastrous projects like Mozambique LNG and the Vaca Muerta fracking projects in Argentina. While the United Kingdom has shown true climate leadership by ending support for overseas fossil fuel projects, Biden has failed to take a whole-of-government approach to stop enabling overseas carbon emissions.
A full analysis of the announcement is below.
This announcement follows President Biden's Executive Order on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad, calling on DFC and EXIM "to identify steps . . . [to] promote ending international financing of carbon-intensive fossil fuel-based energy while simultaneously advancing sustainable development and a green recovery." In response, nearly 450 organizations called on the Biden Administration to immediately end all US public financing for fossil fuels, including natural gas.
In the past five years, DFC and its predecessor, Overseas Private Investment Corporation, approved almost $4 billion for overseas fossil fuel projects. In addition, EXIM has approved over $5 billion for fossil fuel projects abroad in just the last two years. Other agencies, including the U.S. Trade and Development Agency (USTDA) and Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), have provided technical assistance and policy guidance in support of overseas fossil fuel projects.
Friends of the Earth's rapid response analysis of Biden's announcement:
- DFC's restrictions are not a blanket ban on fossil fuel financing unlike the approach of other development finance institutions like Swedfund. The announcement indicates the continued allowance of support for midstream and downstream gas projects that could result in only minor changes to DFC's energy portfolio and financed emissions inventory. Moreover, it could allow for more support for disastrous projects like Rovuma LNG in northern Mozambique and Vaca Muerta fracking projects in Argentina. Considering that gas can be as bad for the climate as coal, DFC will have limited effect until it bans all support for fossil fuels from all sources, including financial intermediaries. Moreover, DFC's inaccurate greenhouse accounting fails to assess the lifetime and lifecycle emissions of its projects, meaning that any targets will underestimate and, therefore, fail to properly mitigate DFC's real climate impact.
- DFC's net zero target will require carbon offsets, which have proven to be ineffective at reducing emissions at any significant scale and perpetuate environmental racism and compromise human rights, and undermine healthy, sustainable, and resilient communities and food systems. Reaching "net zero" will lead to massive demand for lands that can soak up ongoing emissions, which will result in landgrabs and the dispossession of Indigenous Peoples, peasants and local communities. Moreover, net zero by 2040 implicitly means that Biden is pushing the problem on to the next generation. In contrast, a "real zero" approach requires emission reductions at sufficient scale and speed to keep warming below 1.5degC. It requires all entities to bend their emissions curve towards zero immediately. DFC's "net zero" target needs to be turned into a "real zero" target.
- Conspicuously missing is any commitment to curb fossil fuel financing by the U.S. Export-Import Bank (EXIM), which is the U.S. export credit agency and the largest source of U.S. Government financing for fossil fuel projects abroad. EXIM's existing portfolio of supported projects emits tens of millions of tons of CO2 annually. EXIM fossil fuel financing includes nearly $5 billion for the Mozambique LNG project and nearly $1 billion for the Sasan coal plant and mine in India, which has caused at least 36 project deaths. A failure to address EXIM's financing will allow for billions of dollars to continue to flow from the U.S. government to fossil fuel projects all over the world and potentially also domestically. This failure stands in stark contrast to the United Kingdom's ending of its support for overseas fossil fuel projects as of March 31, 2021.
- Also conspicuously missing is any commitment to curb U.S. public money that goes towards fossil fuels overseas through international financial institutions like the World Bank Group and the International Monetary Fund, even though they are addressed by the same Biden Administration Executive Order. These institutions finance billions in fossil fuel projects a year, and importantly, also influence policy changes in client countries that enable fossil fuel expansion and dependency. As a major--and in some cases the largest--shareholder in these institutions, the U.S. government, through the Department of Treasury, must issue an ambitious and accountable strategy on how the U.S. government's "voice and vote" will be used on the Boards of Directors of these institutions towards phasing out support for coal, oil and gas and scaling up international support for a just transition and clean development pathway for workers and communities. This strategy must be released as soon as possible, in order to establish the U.S. position ahead of important relevant processes coming up like the release of the World Bank's Climate Change Action Plan.
Friends of the Earth fights for a more healthy and just world. Together we speak truth to power and expose those who endanger the health of people and the planet for corporate profit. We organize to build long-term political power and campaign to change the rules of our economic and political systems that create injustice and destroy nature.
(202) 783-7400LATEST NEWS
'The Next Recession Starts Here': Trump Team Weighs Abolishing Bank Regulators
The president-elect's advisers are reportedly discussing plans to shrink or eliminate key bank watchdogs, including the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Dec 13, 2024
President-elect Donald Trump and his advisers are reportedly considering plans to weaken—or abolish altogether—top bank regulators, including the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.
The Wall Street Journalreported Thursday that members of Trump's transition team and the new Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency have asked nominees under consideration to head the FDIC and OCC if the bank watchdogs could be eliminated and have their functions absorbed by the Treasury Department, which is set to be run by a billionaire hedge fund manager and crypto enthusiast.
"Bank executives are optimistic President-elect Donald Trump will ease a host of regulations on capital cushions and consumer protections, as well as scrutiny of consolidation in the industry," the Journal reported. "But FDIC deposit insurance is considered near sacred. Any move that threatened to undermine even the perception of deposit insurance could quickly ripple through banks and in a crisis might compound customer fears."
The Trump team's internal and fluid discussions about the fate of the key bank regulators broadly aligns with Project 2025's proposal to "merge the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the National Credit Union Administration, and the Federal Reserve's non-monetary supervisory and regulatory functions."
The FDIC, which is primarily funded by bank insurance premiums, was established during the Great Depression to restore public trust in the nation's banking system, and the agency played a central role in navigating the 2023 bank failures that threatened a systemic crisis.
Observers warned that gutting the FDIC and OCC could catalyze another economic meltdown.
"The next recession starts here," tech journalist Jacob Silverman warned in response to the Journal's reporting.
Eric Rauchway, a historian of the New Deal, wrote that "even Milton Friedman appreciated the FDIC," underscoring the extreme nature of the incoming Trump administration's deregulatory ambitions.
Musk, the world's wealthiest man, is also pushing for the elimination of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, an agency established in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis.
The Journal noted Thursday that "Rep. Andy Barr, a Republican from Kentucky and Trump ally on the House Financial Services Committee, has backed the plan to eliminate or drastically alter the CFPB and said he wants to get rid of what he calls 'one-size-fits-all' regulation for banks."
Barr has received millions of dollars in campaign donations from the financial sector and "introduced many pieces of pro-industry legislation, including significant rollbacks of protections stemming from the 2008 financial crisis," according to the watchdog group Accountable.US.
Keep ReadingShow Less
UN Chief Warns of Israel's Syria Invasion and Land Seizures
United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres stressed the "urgent need" for Israel to "de-escalate violence on all fronts."
Dec 12, 2024
United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres said Thursday that he is "deeply concerned" by Israel's "recent and extensive violations of Syria's sovereignty and territorial integrity," including a ground invasion and airstrikes carried out by the Israel Defense Forces in the war-torn Mideastern nation.
Guterres "is particularly concerned over the hundreds of Israeli airstrikes on several locations in Syria" and has stressed the "urgent need to de-escalate violence on all fronts throughout the country," said U.N. spokesperson Stephane Dujarric.
Israel claims its invasion and bombardment of Syria—which come as the United States and Turkey have also violated Syrian sovereignty with air and ground attacks—are meant to create a security buffer along the countries' shared border in the wake of last week's fall of former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and amid the IDF's ongoing assault on Gaza, which has killed or wounded more than 162,000 Palestinians and is the subject of an International Court of Justice genocide case.
While Israel argues that its invasion of Syria does not violate a 1974 armistice agreement between the two countries because the Assad dynasty no longer rules the neighboring nation, Dujarric said Guterres maintains that Israel must uphold its obligations under the deal, "including by ending all unauthorized presence in the area of separation and refraining from any action that would undermine the cease-fire and stability in Golan."
Israel conquered the western two-thirds of the Golan Heights in 1967 and has illegally occupied it ever since, annexing the seized lands in 1981.
Other countries including France, Russia, and Saudi Arabia have criticized Israel's invasion, while the United States defended the move.
"The Syrian army abandoned its positions in the area... which potentially creates a vacuum that could have been filled by terrorist organizations," U.S. State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said at a press briefing earlier this week. "Israel has said that these actions are temporary to defend its borders. These are not permanent actions... We support all sides upholding the 1974 disengagement agreement."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Sanders Says 'Political Movement,' Not Murder, Is the Path to Medicare for All
"Killing people is not the way we're going to reform our healthcare system," he said. "The way we're going to reform our healthcare system is having people come together."
Dec 12, 2024
Addressing the assassination of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson and conversations it has sparked about the country's for-profit system, longtime Medicare for All advocate Sen. Bernie Sanders on Wednesday condemned the murder and stressed that getting to universal coverage will require a movement challenging corporate money in politics.
"Look, when we talk about the healthcare crisis, in my view, and I think the view of a majority of Americans, the current system is broken, it is dysfunctional, it is cruel, and it is wildly inefficient—far too expensive," said Sanders (I-Vt.), whose position is backed up by various polls.
"The reason we have not joined virtually every other major country on Earth in guaranteeing healthcare to all people as a human right is the political power and financial power of the insurance industry and drug companies," he told Jacobin. "It will take a political revolution in this country to get Congress to say, 'You know what, we're here to represent ordinary people, to provide quality care to ordinary people as a human right,' and not to worry about the profits of insurance and drug companies."
Asked about Thompson's alleged killer—26-year-old Luigi Mangione, whose reported manifesto railed against the nation's expensive healthcare system and low life expectancy—Sanders said: "You don't kill people. It's abhorrent. I condemn it wholeheartedly. It was a terrible act. But what it did show online is that many, many people are furious at the health insurance companies who make huge profits denying them and their families the healthcare that they desperately need."
"What you're seeing, the outpouring of anger at the insurance companies, is a reflection of how people feel about the current healthcare system."
"What you're seeing, the outpouring of anger at the insurance companies, is a reflection of how people feel about the current healthcare system," he continued, noting the tens of thousands of Americans who die each year because they can't get to a doctor.
"Killing people is not the way we're going to reform our healthcare system," Sanders added. "The way we're going to reform our healthcare system is having people come together and understanding that it is the right of every American to be able to walk into a doctor's office when they need to and not have to take out their wallet."
"The way we're going to bring about the kind of fundamental changes we need in healthcare is, in fact, by a political movement which understands the government has got to represent all of us, not just the 1%," the senator told Jacobin.
The 83-year-old Vermonter, who was just reelected to what he says is likely his last six-year term, is an Independent but caucuses with Democrats and sought their presidential nomination in 2016 and 2020. He has urged the Democratic Party to recognize why some working-class voters have abandoned it since Republicans won the White House and both chambers of Congress last month. A refusal to take on insurance and drug companies and overhaul the healthcare system, he argues, is one reason.
Sanders—one of the few members of Congress who regularly talks about Medicare for All—isn't alone in suggesting that unsympathetic responses to Thompson's murder can be explained by a privatized healthcare system that fails so many people.
In addition to highlighting Sanders' interview on social media, Congressman Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) pointed out to Business Insider on Wednesday that "you've got thousands of people that are sharing their stories of frustration" in the wake of Thompson's death.
Khanna—a co-sponsor of the Medicare for All Act, led in the House of Representatives by Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.)—made the case that you can recognize those stories without accepting the assassination.
"You condemn the murder of an insurance executive who was a father of two kids," he said. "At the same time, you say there's obviously an outpouring behavior of people whose claims are being denied, and we need to reform the system."
Two other Medicare for All advocates, Reps. Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), also made clear to Business Insider that they oppose Thompson's murder but understand some of the responses to it.
"Of course, we don't want to see the chaos that vigilantism presents," said Ocasio-Cortez. "We also don't want to see the extreme suffering that millions of Americans confront when your life changes overnight from a horrific diagnosis, and people are led to just some of the worst, not just health events, but the worst financial events of their and their family's lives."
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)—a co-sponsor of Sanders' Medicare for All Act—similarly toldHuffPost in a Tuesday interview, "The visceral response from people across this country who feel cheated, ripped off, and threatened by the vile practices of their insurance companies should be a warning to everyone in the healthcare system."
"Violence is never the answer, but people can be pushed only so far," she continued. "This is a warning that if you push people hard enough, they lose faith in the ability of their government to make change, lose faith in the ability of the people who are providing the healthcare to make change, and start to take matters into their own hands in ways that will ultimately be a threat to everyone."
After facing some criticism for those comments, Warren added Wednesday: "Violence is never the answer. Period... I should have been much clearer that there is never a justification for murder."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular