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
For Immediate Release
April, 22 2021, 12:00am EDT
Contact:
Kate DeAngelis, Friends of the Earth U.S., kdeangelis@foe.org
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
Blue No Matter Who?: Jeffries Slammed for 'Gutless' Refusal to Endorse Zohran Mamdani
Mamdani won the House minority leader's district by double digits in New York City's Democratic mayoral primary, prompting one critic to ask, "Do those voters not matter?"
Aug 15, 2025
Zohran Mamdani is the Democratic nominee for New York City mayor, but Democratic U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries—whose district Mamdani won by double digits—is still refusing to endorse him, "blue-no-matter-who" mantra be damned.
Criticism of Jeffries (D-N.Y.) mounted Friday after he sidestepped questions about whether he agreed with the democratic socialist Mamdani's proposed policies—including a rent freeze, universal public transportation, and free supermarkets—during an interview on CNBC's "Squawk Box" earlier this week.
"He's going to have to demonstrate to a broader electorate—including in many of the neighborhoods that I represent in Brooklyn—that his ideas can actually be put into reality," Jeffries said in comments that drew praise from scandal-ridden incumbent Democratic Mayor Eric Adams, who opted to run independently. Another Democrat, disgraced former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, is also running on his own.
"Shit like this does more to undermine faith in the institution of the Democratic Party than anything Mamdani might ever say or do," Amanda Litman, co-founder and executive director of Run For Something—a political action group that recruits young, diverse progressives to run for down-ballot offices—said on social media in response to Jeffries' refusal to endorse Mamdani.
"He won the primary! Handily!!" Litman added. "Does that electorate not count? Do those voters not matter?"
Writer and professor Roxane Gay noted on Bluesky that "Jeffries is an establishment Democrat. He will always work for the establishment. He is not a disruptor or innovator or individual thinker. Within that framework, his gutless behavior toward Mamdani or any progressive candidate makes a lot of sense."
City College of New York professor Angus Johnston said on the social network Bluesky that "even if Jeffries does eventually endorse Mamdani, the only response available to Mamdani next year if someone asks him whether he's endorsing Jeffries is three seconds of incredulous laughter."
Jeffries has repeatedly refused to endorse Mamdani, a staunch supporter of Palestinian liberation and vocal opponent of Israel's genocidal annihilation of Gaza. The minority leader—whose all-time top campaign donor is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, according to AIPAC Tracker—has especially criticized Mamdani's use of the phrase "globalize the intifada," a call for universal justice and liberation.
Mamdani's stance doesn't seem to have harmed his support among New York's Jewish voters, who according to recent polling prefer him over any other mayoral candidate by a double-digit margin.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Legitimate Question': UEFA Chief Addresses Hypocrisy of Banning Russia But Not Israel
UEFA also allowed the on-pitch display of a banner reading "STOP KILLING CHILDREN" before a Super Cup match amid controversy over its response to Israel's killing of a beloved Palestinian footballer.
Aug 15, 2025
The head of European football's governing body on Thursday addressed what critics say is its hypocritical policy of banning Russia but not Israel, remarks that came amid backlash over the organization's response to Israel's slaying of a prominent Palestinian footballer and over a banner unfurled at a recent match.
Union of European Football Associations president Aleksander Čeferin was asked during an interview with the Slovenian news channel Odmevi why Russia is banned from UEFA events but Israel is not.
"This is a legitimate question," Čeferin replied, adding that "in principle, I do not support banning athletes from participating in competitions."
"In the case of Russia, the athletes have not been participating for three-and-a-half years and the war has only worsened," Čeferin continued. "I know that many of the athletes oppose the regime, but they still cannot play. I am against being denied the right to participate in our competitions."
"Israel is allowed to play in our facilities. This is our decision as of now," he said. "It's hard for me to say what will happen in the future, but I really think that all athletes should be given the opportunity to compete. The rest of the things should be resolved in other ways."
While Russia's ongoing invasion and occupation of Ukraine is believed to have killed or wounded nearly 50,000 civilians, Israel's US-backed assault and siege on Gaza has left more than three times that number of civilians dead or injured, based on estimates from United Nations agencies and Israel Defense Forces that between two-thirds and three-quarters of slain Palestinians were noncombatants.
Both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are fugitives from the International Criminal Court. In 2023 the ICC issued a warrant for the arrest of Putin and Commissioner for Children's Rights Maria Lvova-Belova for the alleged war crime of abducting Ukrainian children to Russia.
The following year, the Hague-based tribunal ordered the arrest of Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes including murder and forced starvation. Israel also faces a genocide case at the International Court of Justice.
Čeferin's remarks came a day after UEFA invited refugee children including Gazans to unfurl a banner reading "STOP KILLING CHILDREN" and "STOP KILLING CIVILIANS" on the pitch before Wednesday's Super Cup match between Paris Saint-Germain and Tottenham Hotspur in Udine, Italy.
The move drew criticism from defenders of both Israel and Palestine, the latter of whom took issue with the conspicuous omission of who is doing the killing. According to Israel's Channel 12, the Israeli government attempted to block the banner's display but settled for a compromise in which the country would not be named.
Wait up, someone’s killing children and other civilians?Who? Who is doing this UEFA? Do you know?
[image or embed]
— Polly Pallister-Wilkins (@pollypw.bsky.social) August 13, 2025 at 2:38 PM
The banner display came amid backlash over UEFA's response to Israel's recent killing of Suleiman al-Obeid—known as the "Pelé of Palestinian football"—while he was trying to obtain food aid amid a growing forced famine in Gaza. As with the banner, UEFA declined to say where al-Obeid was killed, or by whom.
"Can you tell us how he died, where, and why?" Liverpool FC star and Egyptian national team captain Mohamed Salah asked last week.
Israeli forces have killed hundreds of Palestinian footballers in Gaza since October 2023, prompting calls for the country to be banned not only from UEFA matches but also from the 2026 International Federation of Association Football (FIFA) World Cup in Canada, Mexico, and the United States.
"There are 760 Palestinian athletes martyred by Israel, including 420 footballers, while 140 football facilities have been destroyed," former Egyptian national team star Mohamed Aboutrika said earlier this week.
"FIFA and UEFA stopped Russia over its war on Ukraine," he added. "When will the Israeli occupation be stopped? We don't want just words, we want real action."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'A Disgrace': CFPB Union Rips Court for Allowing Trump Assault on Consumer Agency
"None of us can stand idly by while Russ Vought and Donald Trump destroy the agency that protects working Americans from financial predators," said the union president.
Aug 15, 2025
The head of a union representing employees of the US Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was among those who blasted a Friday ruling from a federal appellate court that lets President Donald Trump continue with an effort to gut the CFPB.
"Today's ruling is a disgrace. It empowers Donald Trump to unilaterally eliminate vital public services established by Congress," said CFPB Union president Cat Farman in a statement. "Without a functioning CFPB, there is less oversight of the biggest banks, which means more fraud and less help for veterans and the elderly who are major targets for financial scams."
The union president took aim at the acting leader of the CFPB, Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought, and Trump, who has a broader mission to tear apart the federal bureaucracy with his Department of Government Efficiency, previously led by billionaire Elon Musk.
"None of us can stand idly by while Russ Vought and Donald Trump destroy the agency that protects working Americans from financial predators," Farman declared. "CFPB workers aren't giving up our fight to defend the rule of law from executive overreach and protect the hard-earned paychecks of working people from Wall Street greed."
In Friday's 2-1 decision, a panel from the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found that a district judge exceeded her authority by blocking the Trump administration's sweeping attack on the federal agency earlier this year. Judge Greg Katsas wrote the new opinion, joined by Judge Neomi Rao; they were both appointed by Trump during his first term.
Judge Nina Pillard—an appointee of former President Barack Obama, who signed the bill that established the CFPB—dissented. She wrote, "The notion that courts are powerless to prevent the president from abolishing the agencies of the federal government that he was elected to lead cannot be reconciled with either the constitutional separation of powers or our nation's commitment to a government of laws."
US Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), a former Harvard University professor who spearheaded the creation of the CFBP, stressed on social media Friday that "the fight continues."
This divided decision willfully ignores the Administration’s lawless attempt to destroy an agency created by Congress that has helped millions.But the Administration cannot yet resume its illegal attempt to shut down the CFPB. The fight continues.
[image or embed]
— Elizabeth Warren (@warren.senate.gov) August 15, 2025 at 3:25 PM
The Trump appointees' decision will not take effect immediately, giving critics time to seek further appeals. Adina Rosenbaum, an attorney with Public Citizen Litigation Group, which represented plaintiffs who sued over attacks on the CFPB, signaled that her organization may take further action.
"The Trump administration does not have the authority to abolish the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which was created by Congress and which plays an important role in protecting consumers across the country," Rosenbaum said in a statement.
"The district court found that the defendants were trying to eliminate the agency, and it entered an injunction to prohibit them from doing so while the case is ongoing. The court of appeals should have upheld that injunction to ensure that the administration does not illegally close the agency and deprive consumers of the protections to which they are entitled," she added. "We are strongly considering filing a petition for rehearing en banc."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular