September, 15 2021, 04:14pm EDT
Advocates Call on Biden to Nominate Fed Chair Who Will Address Climate-Related Financial Risk
Fossil Free Finance Act would require big banks to align emissions financing with U.S obligations under the Paris Climate Agreement, prohibit bank financing of all fossil fuel projects after 2030.
WASHINGTON
Today, Congressman Mondaire Jones (D-NY), Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), and Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) introduced the Fossil Free Finance Act, legislation to require the Federal Reserve (Fed) to mandate banks and other Systemically Important Financial Institutions (SIFIs) align their financing of greenhouse gas emissions with science-based emissions targets. The Fossil Free Finance Act requires the Fed to acknowledge the existential threat climate change poses to the core tenants of its monetary policy and supervisory mandates and act to mitigate the financial stability threats of climate risk.
"The climate crisis poses an existential threat to every aspect of our society, including our economy and financial system," said Congressman Jones. "But for too long, the Federal Reserve has failed to acknowledge climate change as the threat that it is. As climate disasters grow in frequency and intensity, we can no longer afford to stand by while big banks and other financial institutions invest trillions in the companies fueling the climate crisis. That's why I'm proud to introduce the Fossil Free Finance Act, which will end the era of unmitigated emissions financing and ensure financial institutions do their part to address our climate crisis before it's too late."
"For too long, our federal government has looked the other way while our nation's largest banks bankroll the dirtiest fossil fuel projects, exacerbating the climate crisis and setting us up for a massive, climate-induced economic collapse. That must change," said Rep. Pressley. "It's time for a financial system that is truly safe, sound, and just. One that recognizes the existential threat posed by climate change and takes aggressive action to save our economy, save our planet, and save lives. Our bill would do just that by requiring banks put an end to financing fossil fuel projects so we can meet our obligations under the Paris Climate Agreement and begin to confront this crisis head on. We can and must act before it's too late."
"My residents deserve to breathe clean air. For over a decade, Wayne County, Michigan has not met the Clean Air Act standards leaving us with high rates of asthma and respiratory illnesses," said Congresswoman Tlaib. "Our planet is burning. Over the last five years, financial institutions under the Federal Reserve's supervision provided trillions in direct fossil fuel financing--and each new project brings us closer to the brink. The Federal Reserve's role is not to surrender our planet to corporate polluters and shepherd our financial system to its destruction. The Federal Reserve's role is to act. I am proud to join Rep. Jones and Rep. Pressley in introducing the Fossil Free Finance Act to require the Federal Reserve to finally address the risks climate change poses--and act at the scale this crisis demands."
The Fossil Free Finance Act requires the Fed to mandate that all bank holding companies with more than $50 billion in assets and all nonbank SIFIs align their financing of greenhouse gas emissions and deforestation risk commodities with science-based emissions targets.
Specifically this bill mandates alignment with America's obligations under the Paris Climate Agreement and the emissions financing reduction targets below:
- 50% reduction in financed emissions by 2030
- 100% reduction in financed emissions by 2050
- Prohibits new or expanded fossil fuel projects after 2022
- Prohibits the financing of all fossil fuel projects after 2030
- Prohibits thermal coal financing after 2024
In addition to Reps. Jones, Pressley, and Tlaib, the Fossil Free Finance Act is co-sponsored by: Reps. Adriano Espaillat (D-NY), Marie Newman (D-IL), Ritchie Torres (D-NY), Jesus G. "Chuy" Garcia (D-IL), Jared Huffman (D-CA), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Emanuel Cleaver, II (D-MO), Jamaal Bowman, Ed.D. (D-NY), Cori Bush (D-MO), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Mark Takano (D-CA), Grace Meng (D-NY), Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), and Ro Khanna (D-CA).
The Fossil Free Finance Act is endorsed by Public Citizen, 350.org, Evergreen Action, Zero Hour, Stand.earth, Friends of the Earth US, Future Coalition, Action Center on Race and the Economy, Revolving Door Project, Sunrise Movement, Americans for Financial Reform, and Sierra Club.
"The Federal Reserve's mandate includes protecting our communities and economy, and no longer propping up the culprits of climate chaos," said Tracey Lewis, 350.org Senior Climate Finance Policy Analyst. "The historic Fossil Free Finance Act will blaze a trail in addressing the climate crisis at scale, and we thank climate champions Reps. Jones, Tlaib, and all co-sponsors of this Act for their visionary leadership. It's time for a Fossil Free Federal Reserve that steers our economy away from investment in high-risk fossil fuels, incorporates climate risk across policies and lending, and prioritizes racial justice, including through full employment, ahead of COP26 this November."
"Wall Street banks have made it clear that, without strong federal oversight and regulation, they plan to continue pouring money into the fossil fuels that are driving the climate crisis and pushing us toward another financial crisis," said Sierra Club Fossil-Free Finance Campaign Manager Ben Cushing. "The Federal Reserve has long failed to use its existing tools to adequately rein in Wall Street's risky fossil fuel investments. We applaud Representatives Jones, Tlaib, and Pressley for their leadership in pushing the Fed to do its job and protect our financial system from a climate-driven crash."
"The Fossil Free Finance Act sends a powerful message that Congress won't accept the Federal Reserve's failure to do its job," said Yevgeny Shrago, Policy Counsel at Public Citizen's Climate Program. "The agency has tremendous power to protect the financial system from the effects of the climate crisis and to make sure it's prepared for the coming clean energy transition. But just like with the 2008 financial crisis, the Fed is standing by as banks increase their risky bets on toxic assets. We applaud the sponsors of this bill for addressing this threat and directing the Fed to use the tools at its disposal to protect vulnerable communities from the financial impacts of the climate crisis, instead of safeguarding Wall Street profits.
"Regulators' refusal to rein in Wall Street's reckless risk-taking drove our economy off a cliff in 2008, and now, Wall Street's climate-risky behavior could lead to an even bigger financial disaster if financial regulators don't act," said Evergreen Action Campaigns Director Lena Moffitt. "The Fed must fulfill its mandate to protect the American economy from a climate-fueled crash by using every available tool to limit climate risk in our market, but so far, it hasn't done nearly enough. The Fossil Free Financing Act will bring us one step closer to sound financial regulation by ordering the Fed to do something it already has the authority to be doing--limiting how much greenhouse gas pollution a bank can finance, which is absolutely essential to reducing the climate risks that the financial sector, and all of us, face. We applaud Representatives Mondaire Jones, Ayanna Pressley, and Rashida Tlaib for their work on this important legislation, and we look forward to their continued work to protect working Americans from Wall Street's short-sighted greed.
"Right now, a future free from the shackles of the fossil fuel industry is at stake because big banks continue to fund carbon polluters like Exxon, with no oversight or repercussions," said Sunrise Movement Advocacy Director Lauren Maunus. "As banks make billions funding climate polluters, one in three Americans are facing a climate catastrophe right now. We must hold bad actors accountable by passing the Fossil Free Finance Act so we can finally put a stop to the endless funding of fossil fuel companies who pollute the air we breathe and the water we drink."
"Addressing our global climate catastrophe requires an all-of-government, all-of-society approach that creatively pulls every available lever, and this legislation is a critical step in that direction," said Katie Eder, Co-founder and Executive Director of Future Coalition. "By holding accountable the financial institutions underwriting the destruction of our planet, we can win a significant battle in the fight against climate change and show how collective action and climate justice can create a more sustainable economy that benefits everyone."
Rep. Jones has consistently called for the federal government to address the role of the financial system in perpetuating the climate crisis. In April, he led a group of lawmakers in calling on the Fed to take action to prepare financial institutions and the broader economy for the risk and destabilizing impact of climate change. In June, he led colleagues in urging Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen to restore and expand the designation of Systemically Important Financial Institutions ("SIFIs") to account for the existential threat of climate change to the stability of our financial institutions.
350 is building a future that's just, prosperous, equitable and safe from the effects of the climate crisis. We're an international movement of ordinary people working to end the age of fossil fuels and build a world of community-led renewable energy for all.
LATEST NEWS
'Highly Inspiring' Court Ruling Affirms Nations' Legal Duty to Combat Climate Emergency
"While the United States and some other major polluters have chosen to ignore climate science, the rest of the international community is advancing protections," said one observer.
Jul 04, 2025
In a landmark advisory opinion published Thursday, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights—of which the United States, the world's second-biggest carbon polluter, is not a member—affirmed the right to a stable climate and underscored nations' duty to act to protect it and address the worsening planetary emergency.
"States must refrain from any conduct that reverses, slows down, or truncates the outcome of measures necessary to protect human rights in the face of the impacts of climate change," a summary of the 234-page ruling states. "Any rollback of climate or environmental policies that affect human rights must be exceptional, duly justified based on objective criteria, and comply with standards of necessity and proportionality."
"The court also held that... states must take all necessary measures to reduce the risks arising, on the one hand, from the degradation of the global climate system and, on the other, from exposure and vulnerability to the effects of such degradation," the summary adds.
"States must refrain from any conduct that reverses, slows down, or truncates the outcome of measures necessary to protect human rights in the face of the impacts of climate change."
The case was brought before the Costa-Rica based IACtHR by Chile and Colombia, both of which "face the daily challenge of dealing with the consequences of the climate emergency, including the proliferation of droughts, floods, landslides, and fires, among others."
"These phenomena highlight the need to respond urgently and based on the principles of equity, justice, cooperation, and sustainability, with a human rights-based approach," the court asserted.
IACtHR President Judge Nancy Hernández López said following the ruling that "states must not only refrain from causing significant environmental damage but have the positive obligation to take measures to guarantee the protection, restoration, and regeneration of ecosystems."
"Causing massive and irreversible environmental harm...alters the conditions for a healthy life on Earth to such an extent that it creates consequences of existential proportions," she added. "Therefore, it demands universal and effective legal responses."
The advisory opinion builds on two landmark decisions last year. In April 2024, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the Swiss government violated senior citizens' human rights by refusing to abide by scientists' warnings to rapidly phase out fossil fuel production.
The following month, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea found in an advisory opinion that greenhouse gas emissions are marine pollution under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and that signatories to the accord "have the specific obligation to adopt laws and regulations to prevent, reduce, and control" them.
The IACtHR advisory opinion is expected to boost climate and human rights lawsuits throughout the Americas, and to impact talks ahead of November's United Nations Climate Change Conference, or COP30, in Belém, Brazil.
Climate defenders around the world hailed Thursday's advisory opinion, with United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk calling it "a landmark step forward for the region—and beyond."
"As the impact of climate change becomes ever more visible across the world, the court is clear: People have a right to a stable climate and a healthy environment," Türk added. "States have a bedrock obligation under international law not to take steps that cause irreversible climate and environmental damage, and they have a duty to act urgently to take the necessary measures to protect the lives and rights of everyone—both those alive now and the interests of future generations."
Amnesty International head of strategic litigation Mandi Mudarikwa said, "Today, the Inter-American Court affirmed and clarified the obligations of states to respect, ensure, prevent, and cooperate in order to realize human rights in the context of the climate crisis."
"Crucially, the court recognized the autonomous right to a healthy climate for both individuals and communities, linked to the right to a healthy environment," Mudarikwa added. "The court also underscored the obligation of states to protect cross-border climate-displaced persons, including through the issuance of humanitarian visas and protection from deportation."
Delta Merner, lead scientist at the Science Hub for Climate Litigation at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in a statement that "this opinion sets an important precedent affirming that governments have a legal duty to regulate corporate conduct that drives climate harm."
"Though the United States is not a party to the treaty governing the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, this opinion should be a clarion call for transnational fossil fuel companies that have deceived the public for decades about the risks of their products," Merner added. "The era of accountability is here."
Markus Gehring, a fellow and director of studies in law at Hughes Hall at the University of Cambridge in England, called the advisory opinion "highly inspiring" and "seminal."
Drew Caputo, vice president of litigation for lands, wildlife, and oceans at Earthjustice, said that "the Inter-American Court's ruling makes clear that climate change is an overriding threat to human rights in the world."
"Governments must act to cut carbon emissions drastically," Caputo stressed. "While the United States and some other major polluters have chosen to ignore climate science, the rest of the international community is advancing protections for all from the realities of climate harm."
Climate litigation is increasing globally in the wake of the 2015 Paris climate agreement. In the Americas, Indigenous peoples, children, and green groups are among those who have been seeking climate justice via litigation.
However, in the United States, instead of acknowledging the climate emergency, President Donald Trump has declared an "energy emergency" while pursuing a "drill, baby, drill" policy of fossil fuel extraction and expansion.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Admin Quietly Approves Massive Crude Oil Expansion Project
"This thinly analyzed decision threatens the lifeblood of the American Southwest," said one environmental attorney.
Jul 04, 2025
The Trump administration has quietly fast-tracked a massive oil expansion project that environmentalists and Democratic lawmakers warned could have a destructive impact on local communities and the climate.
As reported recently by the Oil and Gas Journal, the plan "involves expanding the Wildcat Loadout Facility, a key transfer point for moving Uinta basin crude oil to rail lines that transport it to refineries along the Gulf Coast."
The goal of the plan is to transfer an additional 70,000 barrels of oil per day from the Wildcat Loadout Facility, which is located in Utah, down to the Gulf Coast refineries via a route that runs along the Colorado River. Controversially, the Trump administration is also plowing ahead with the project by invoking emergency powers to address energy shortages despite the fact that the United States for the last couple of years has been producing record levels of domestic oil.
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) issued a joint statement condemning the Trump administration's push to approve the project while rushing through environmental impact reviews.
"The Bureau of Land Management's decision to fast-track the Wildcat Loadout expansion—a project that would transport an additional 70,000 barrels of crude oil on train tracks along the Colorado River—using emergency procedures is profoundly flawed," the Colorado Democrats said. "These procedures give the agency just 14 days to complete an environmental review—with no opportunity for public input or administrative appeal—despite the project's clear risks to Colorado. There is no credible energy emergency to justify bypassing public involvement and environmental safeguards. The United States is currently producing more oil and gas than any country in the world."
On Thursday, the Bureau of Land Management announced the completion of its accelerated environmental review of the project, drawing condemnation from climate advocates.
Wendy Park, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, described the administration's rush to approve the project as "pure hubris," especially given its "refusal to hear community concerns about oil spill risks." She added that "this fast-tracked review breezed past vital protections for clean air, public safety and endangered species."
Landon Newell, staff attorney for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, accused the Trump administration of manufacturing an energy emergency to justify plans that could have a dire impact on local habitats.
"This thinly analyzed decision threatens the lifeblood of the American Southwest by authorizing the transport of more than 1 billion gallons annually of additional oil on railcars traveling alongside the Colorado River," he said. "Any derailment and oil spill would have a devastating impact on the Colorado River and the communities and ecosystems that rely upon it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'An Act of Retaliation': EPA Suspends 140+ Employees for Signing 'Declaration of Dissent'
The employees were put on leave after they signed a letter saying the Trump EPA's actions "endanger public health and erode scientific progress."
Jul 04, 2025
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has put 144 employees on leave after they signed a letter criticizing the Trump administration's "harmful" policies.
EPA press secretary Brigit Hirsch accused the employees of "undermining, sabotaging, and undercutting the administration's agenda." But the union that represents these employees is calling it an act of illegal "retaliation."
The "declaration of dissent", published by Stand Up for Science Monday, had been signed by 620 people as of Thursday. Addressed to EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, the letter accused the administration of "recklessly undermining" the agency's mission under his watch. It accused the administration of "ignoring scientific consensus to benefit polluters."
"This administration's actions directly contradict EPA's own scientific assessments on human health risks, most notably regarding asbestos, mercury, and greenhouse gases," the letter said.
Since Trump retook office, the administration has eviscerated policies meant to contain pollution, slashing funding for green energy production and electric vehicles while championing increased fossil fuel drilling and consumption. It has also rolled back the enforcement of limits on cancer-causing "forever chemicals" in water.
The signatories also pointed to the Trump EPA's "undermining of public trust" by using official channels to trumpet "misinformation and overtly partisan rhetoric."
They called out EPA press releases, which have referred to climate science as a "religion," EPA grants as "green slush funds," and "clean coal" as "beautiful." The letter also suggested the EPA had violated the Hatch Act by promoting political initiatives like Trump's tariffs and the Republican budget reconciliation bill.
"Make no mistake: your actions endanger public health and erode scientific progress—not only in America—but around the world," the letter said.
The employees also accused the administration of "promoting a culture of fear." They cited comments by top Trump officials, such as Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought, who has said he wanted to put EPA employees "in trauma" and make them unable "to go to work because they are increasingly viewed as the villains."
While some signatories signed their names, many others chose to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation. That retaliation came Thursday, when—according to The New York Times—144 employees received an email putting them on leave for the next two weeks "pending an administrative investigation."
The decision was widely criticized as a violation of the employees' First Amendment rights.
Tim Whitehouse, the executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, which has previously represented EPA and other employees, said federal employees are allowed to publicly criticize the administration they work for.
"The letter of dissent did really nothing to undermine or sabotage the agenda of the administration," Whitehouse told The Washington Post. "We believe strongly that the EPA should protect the First Amendment rights of their employees."
Bill Wolfe, a former environmental policy professional with Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, said that the letter "was a classic form of whistleblowing that is protected by federal whistleblower laws and the 1st Amendment, as upheld by federal courts."
Justin Chen, the union representative for EPA employees under the American Federation of Government Employees, told the Times that the agency's actions were "clearly an act of retaliation" and said the union would "protect our members to the full extent of the law."
Despite the punishment, one of the signatories anonymously told The Post that they had no regrets.
"I took the risk knowing what was up," the employee wrote. "I'll say it before, and now it rings even more true … if this is the EPA they want me to work for, then I don't want to work for the EPA."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular