Reprinted from GreenBuzz, a free weekly newsletter.Subscribe here。

对银行业的挫败感正在获得货币，尤其是该行业在化石燃料融资中的作用。

A新报告from a consortium of activist NGOs led by the Rainforest Action Network (RAN) found that fossil-fuel financing from the world’s 60 largest banks has reached nearly $4.6 trillion in the six years since the adoption of the Paris Agreement. The funding was dominated by four U.S. banks — Bank of America, Citi, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo — which together accounted for a quarter of all fossil-fuel financing since 2015. The report also cited Royal Bank of Canada, Barclays in Europe, and MUFG, Japan’s largest bank, as the biggest fossil-fuel funders in their respective countries.

该报告“依靠气候混乱”指出，美国四家银行都是净零银行联盟的成员，是该联盟的一部分格拉斯哥金融联盟净零group, or GFANZ. Last November, at COP26, GFANZ members said they had committed $130 trillion of capital to achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions — a move that the RAN report dismissed as a "self-congratulatory announcement."

As the report noted:

These banks may tout their commitments to helping their clients transition and yet the 60 banks profiled in this report funneled $185.5 billion just last year into the 100 companies doing the most to expand the fossil-fuel sector, such as Saudi Aramco and ExxonMobil — even when carbon budgets make clear that we cannot afford any new coal, gas or oil supply or infrastructure.

当然，激进主义者对银行的压力已经存在数十年。But the last year or so has seen an escalation by activists, institutional investors and others born in large part from comparing banks’ net-zero commitments with their continued financing and development of fossil-fuel assets: oil and gas fields, coal mines, new or expanded oil and gas pipelines, LNG terminals, coal-fired power plants and the like.

所有的命名和羞辱是否可能驯服世界上最大的银行和拥有它们的投资者阶级的最糟糕的冲动？

该报告显示，从2020年到2021年，焦油砂融资项目增加了51％，加拿大银行加拿大皇家银行和TD以及摩根大通（JPMorgan Chase）的增长最大。去年，压裂项目获得了超过620亿美元的融资，富国银行（Wells Fargo）领先。摩根大通（JPMorgan Chase），Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corp.和Intesa Sanpaolo去年是北极石油和天然气活动的最高支持者。摩根士丹利，加拿大皇家银行和高盛是2021年最大的液化天然气金融家。煤矿融资由中国的Everbright Bank和Citic Bank领导。

Of course, many of these banks must get credit for having pledged massive sums to sustainability-related financing. Bank of America, for example,committedto "mobilize $1 trillion by 2030" toward "low-carbon, sustainable business activities." Citi similarlypledged到2030年，$ 1万亿美元，以“资助和促进各种气候解决方案”。富国银行说这会pony up$500 billion by 2030 toward activities "that help the transition to a low-carbon economy." And JPMorgan Chase matched those three banks’ combined commitments when it宣布到2030年底，它将“融资和促进”超过2.5万亿美元，以提高解决气候变化并有助于可持续发展的长期解决方案。”

顺便说一句，那些相当柔和的术语 - “动员”，“提前”，“财务和促进” - 值得进一步探索，以更好地了解这些资金中有多少用于净新贷款和投资，以加速过渡的过渡净零未来。

‘Clear disconnect’

However defined, those sums are offset by the funds still flowing directly toward dirty energy. For example, if those four banks continued to fund fossil fuels for the rest of the decade at the rate they did in 2021, it would total just over $1.6 trillion of new investment by 2030. This at a time when scientists say fossil-fuel production and consumption must ramp down sharply. Hence the growing focus on banks’ say-do gap.

The RAN report was merely one pressure point. Anotherreport，由伦敦的非营利性影响力于上周出版，评估了与气候相关的政策和实践的30个最大金融机构。它发现“具体的短期目标与应对气候紧急情况所需的措施与金融部门目前正在设定的有限长期目标所需的行动之间存在明显的脱节。”它说：

与基于科学的指导形成鲜明对比的形成鲜明对比的是，所有主要金融集团都保留了反对欧盟，英国和美国的行业协会的核心成员资格，其银行和资产管理武器在化石燃料生产融资中仍然很活跃，与基于科学的指导形成了鲜明的抗议。该行业的气候计划确实集中在2050个目标上，几乎没有短期行动计划的证据。

InfluenceMap found that 15 of the 30 financial institutions are members of industry associations that are lobbying on positions that directly support fossil-fuel interests.

There’s more:

• The regulators are tiptoeing in.联邦存款保险公司（Fed Forecress）是国会旨在维持公众对国家银行信心的机构的FDIC，上周发布了请求评论关于拟议的原则，有关资产超过1000亿美元的银行如何评估和减轻与气候相关的财务风险。它指出：“与气候相关的金融风险对美国金融体系构成了明显而重大的风险，如果不明智的话，可能会对安全，合理的银行业务和财务稳定构成近期威胁。”
• The upcoming season of annual general meetings will see its share of action.RAN says that over the next two months, six Wall Street banks are expected to face shareholder resolutions calling on them to stop financing fossil-fuel expansion and otherwise align their business practices with limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. The chances of their passing are low, but that’s not always the point of such resolutions, whose backers hope to spur an earnest conversation with C-suites and boards of directors.
• 有一个新兴的公民起义。Third Act这是一个由激进主义者比尔·麦基本（Bill McKibben）于今年早些时候发起的压力小组，以利用60岁以上的“经验丰富的美国人”的热情，正专注于向银行施加压力，以“停止资助气候破坏”。它的策略包括：让成员从上面引用的四大大型银行中削减信用卡。它计划交付petitions到目前为止，到目前为止，向银行的首席执行官提供了22,000多个签名。
• And then there are the small, values-driven banks that aim to capitalize on all this.Earlier this year, nine regional banks formed theFossil Free Banking Alliance，他们的成员“不为化石燃料公司或项目融资，并承诺将来不这样做。”And while it’s unlikely that these financial Davids can do much to stem the relentless flows of fossil-fuel money proffered by the banking Goliaths, they provide a viable alternative for both consumers and small and midsize firms that, over time, could become another pressure point.

毫不奇怪，从化石燃料中脱离的银行的整个想法已经成为一项政治足球，至少在美国，共和党国家财政部长的15个州联盟已承诺“审查或潜在地削减与公司采用企业的银行的削减未来的业务policies to cut off financing for the coal, oil and natural gas industries," according to West Virginia State Treasurer Riley Moore, the group’sde facto leader。

这一切都将在哪里？所有的命名和羞辱是否可能驯服世界上最大的银行和拥有它们的投资者阶级的最糟糕的冲动？还是他们会屈服于保守权的意愿，而保守权似乎对促进化石燃料利益的意愿没有限制？

It’s hard to see a path forward. It will likely take one of the major banks to break from the pack, committing to exiting fossil-fuel financing well before the end of the decade. In the short term, that could open the floodgates for other, less-scrupulous banks to grab those abandoned clients. To the extent it creates a virtuous bandwagon, that could make all the difference in the world.

OK, that’s a bit of a pipe dream. Maybe, just maybe, one or more of the world’s largest financial institutions will change its tune, and it practices, and do so within a reasonably short timescale.

但是我不会依靠它。

I invite you tofollow me on推特或者LinkedIn, subscribe to my Monday morning newsletter,GreenBuzz，从中重印，然后听GreenBiz 350，我的每周播客与希瑟·克兰西（Heather Clancy）共同主持。