Banks significantly increased fossil fuel financing in 2024, analysis finds
The world's biggest banks significantly increased their fossil fuel finance in 2024, according to an analysis.
The top 65 lenders – which include UK giants Barclays, HSBC, Natwest and Lloyds Banking Group – committed 869 billion dollars (£639 billion) in financing to fossil fuels, the 16th annual Banking on Climate Chaos report said.
A coalition of research and campaign groups, including the Rainforest Action Network and Reclaim finance, analysed the banks' lending and underwriting to 2,730 companies active across the fossil fuel industry.
These were reported in sources such as Urgewald's Global Oil and Gas Exit List (GOGEL) and Global Coal Exit List (GCEL), Bloomberg and London Stock Exchange Group (LSEG).
According to this year's findings, the top banks increased fossil fuel financing by 162 billion dollars (£120 billion) from 2023 to 2024.
This marks a shift in direction after fossil fuel financing had been decreasing over the previous years since 2021.
Since Donald Trump's election victory in the US last year, companies across many sectors have been weakening their climate commitments, cutting ESG investments and pulling out of climate groups.
Major US lenders have left the Net Zero Banking Alliance, the sector's top climate coalition, and an increasing number of banks have watered down, or abandoned, past commitments regarding fossil fuels.
The Banking on Climate Chaos report found that since the 2015 UN Paris Agreement – an international deal secured in 2015 in France to limit rising temperatures – banks have now financed fossil fuels by 7.9 trillion dollars (£5.8 trillion).
The analysis also suggests that loans were the top form of financing last year, with an increase to 467 billion dollars (£343 billion) from 422 billion dollars (£310 billion) in 2023.
The International Energy Agency has said that no new fossil fuel projects should be developed beyond existing fields to remain within the temperature limit.
However, the report found that banks have financed companies that are expanding fossil fuels with 1.6 trillion dollars (£1.1 trillion) since 2021, and 429 billion dollars (£315 billion) alone in 2024 – a rise of 85 billion dollars (£62 billion) from the year before.
The report also identifies JP Morgan Chase as the largest fossil fuel financier in the world, committing 53.5 billion dollars (£39.3 billion) to fossil fuel companies in 2024.
British bank Barclays was the largest fossil fuel financier Europe in 2024, at 35.4 billion dollars (£26.0 billion), according to the report, which also found it to be among the top four with the largest absolute increase in fossil fuel financing.
For the other UK banks on the list, HSBC provided a total of 16.2 billion dollars (£11.9 billion) in fossil fuel financing, Natwest provided 2.7 billion dollars (£1.9 billion), and Lloyds provided 1.6 billion dollars (£1.1 billion) – although the latter comes as a decrease from 2.3 billion dollars (£1.7 billion) in 2023, according to the analysis.
Banking on Climate Chaos is authored by Rainforest Action Network, BankTrack, the Centre for Energy, Ecology, and Development, Indigenous Environmental Network, Oil Change International, Reclaim Finance, Sierra Club, and Urgewald.
Allison Fajans-Turner, policy Lead at Rainforest Action Network, said: 'Even in the face of worsening disasters and increasingly dire warnings of scientists and policy experts, banks actually increased their financing to fossil fuels between 2023 and 2024 and still poured billions into expanded fossil infrastructure.
'Only rapid and robust binding government regulation and oversight can make banks change course.
'Without binding regulation, banking on climate chaos will remain banks' dominant investment strategy, tanking our economy and our planet.'
Tom BK Goldtooth, executive director of the Indigenous Environmental Network, said: 'Despite their greenwashing and false promises, these banks continue to bankroll the expansion of the fossil fuel industry and the false solutions that deepen climate injustice, land grabbing, and human rights abuse.
'From carbon markets to carbon capture to geoengineering techno-fixes, these schemes are distractions from the real solutions rooted in Indigenous sovereignty, traditional Indigenous knowledge, land and oceans defence, and a just and energy transition away from extractive capitalism.
'Our lands and waters are not sacrifice zones, and our Peoples are not collateral damage.'
David Tong, global industry campaign manager at Oil Change International, said: 'In 2025, banks have no excuse to keep financing fossil fuel companies.
'No major oil and gas companies we analyse plan to do anything even close to what is needed to hold global warming to 1.5C.'
Lucie Pinson, director and founder at Reclaim Finance, said: 'This year, banks have shown their true colours — many have walked away from climate commitments and doubled down on financing fossil fuel expansion, even as global temperatures break records.
'A few European banks may have inched forward, but for most, the lure of dirty money has proven too strong.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Glasgow Times
7 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
Work to get US steel tariffs removed to go on in coming ‘days, weeks and months'
US President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer signed off a US-UK deal that will slash trade barriers on goods from both countries at the G7 on Monday. But US tariffs for the steel industry will stand at 25% for now rather than falling to zero as originally agreed. This is less than the US global rate of 50% for steel and aluminium. Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander said the UK Government is keen for the site to be part of a commercially-operated business (Chris Radburn/PA) The two leaders pledged to 'make progress towards 0% tariffs on core steel products as agreed', the Department for Business and Trade said. The Chinese ownership of the British Steel could be a sticking point in the deal on steel as the executive order signed by Mr Trump suggests the US wants assurances that the metal originates in the UK. 'The United Kingdom also committed to working to meet American requirements on the security of the supply chains of steel and aluminium products intended for export to the United States and on the nature of ownership of relevant production facilities,' the order states. After signing it, the US President was asked whether steel tariffs would be eliminated, to which he replied: 'We're gonna let you have that information in a little while.' In April, the UK Government used emergency powers to take control of British Steel and continue production at the site after Chinese owners Jingye proposed shutting the Scunthorpe site's two blast furnaces and other key steelmaking operations. But its future is still uncertain, with Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander saying the Government is eager for it to be 'part of a commercially-operated business with private investment'. 'We're talking to a number of third parties about that. At the moment, no options are off the table,' she told Sky News. She said there was still 'more work to do' to get steel tariffs eliminated, including on 'technical detail'. 'We're working through some technical detail around steel because we want to bring that 25% tariff that applies at the moment obviously down further,' she told BBC Breakfast. She said the UK is 'working on getting that implemented'. 'And we're determined to go further and we'll be working on those issues around steel in the coming days, weeks and months,' she added. Alasdair McDiarmid, assistant general secretary of the Community union, said it was 'absolutely vital' to secure a deal on steel as quickly as possible. Mr Trump did not say when the tariffs would be eliminated (Suzanne Plunkett/PA) 'Our steel producers and their US customers need an end to the current state of uncertainty to allow normal business to resume. 'Crucially, we must see a full exemption for all UK steel exports to the US – without that guarantee some of our leading steel businesses could be left behind, with a threat to jobs and livelihoods.' It comes as a £500 million five-year deal has been struck between Network Rail and British Steel, which Ms Alexander said was a 'vote of confidence'. Workers at the British Steel site in Scunthorpe will make rail tracks (Danny Lawson/PA) British Steel is to supply 337,000 tonnes of rail track, with a further 80-90,000 tonnes to be provided by other European manufacturers. The Network Rail contract will start on July 1 and is set to provide the company with 80% of its rail needs. Jingye, which bought British Steel in 2020, launched a consultation in March which it said would affect between 2,000 and 2,700 jobs, despite months of negotiations and a £500 million co-investment offer from the Government. The Scunthorpe plant has been producing steel for Britain's railways since 1865. Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander is finalising the deal (Joe Giddens/PA) The Network Rail agreement is the first major public procurement since the Government's emergency legislation was passed. Network Rail's group director for railway business services Clive Berrington said: 'We are committed to buying British where it makes economic sense to do so and British Steel remain extremely competitive in the provision of rail and will remain our main supplier in the years ahead.' Craig Harvey, British Steel's commercial director for rail, added: 'The contract represents a huge vote of confidence in UK workers and British industry, underpinning the vital role we play in ensuring millions of passengers and freight operators enjoy safe, enjoyable and timely journeys on Britain's railways.' Charlotte Brumpton-Childs, national officer at the GMB union, said it was a 'crucial first step in securing the future of our steel industry' and urged ministers to make sure British Steel has a 'constant flow of orders' from other infrastructure projects.
Spectator
11 minutes ago
- Spectator
The good and bad news about the UK-US trade deal
Donald Trump and Keir Starmer's transatlantic trade deal has finally been signed. Before making an early exit from the G7, the US president approved an executive order giving legal effect to parts of the US-UK deal. The outline of the agreement was settled weeks earlier during a conference call, with Trump in the White House and Peter Mandelson, the UK ambassador in Washington, standing, slightly creepily, over his shoulder, as Starmer dialled in from 4,000 miles away. If the deal is to progress further, an almighty row could be brewing The delay in any further announcement left conservatives, and businesses, wondering whether the deal outline a month ago was turning into a fiction. But the executive order Trump signed on Monday gives effect to the agreement at the end of the month. There are, however, some changes to what had originally been trailed one month ago. Tariffs on UK car exports to the United States (the UK's biggest goods export) will come down from 27.5 per cent to 10 per cent. But the 100,000 limit on the number of cars we can export to the US effectively puts a cap on growth within that part of the industry, as we already export roughly that amount of cars anyway. There was a bonus announcement too with Britain's aerospace sector exempted from even the baseline 10 per cent tariffs. It was bad news for steel, though. The agreed reduction of tariffs from 25 per cent to zero was absent from the president's executive order. Civil servants working on the deal say talks are ongoing, with disputes remaining over quotas on the amount of steel we'd be allowed to send before steeper tariffs kick in. Fingers crossed. There also seem to be complications surrounding Chinese ownership of British steel – something the Americans clearly don't like. Trump wasn't his best as he announced the singing of the deal alongside Starmer outside the G7 meeting in Canada. A slip of the tongue led him to say the deal was with the EU, rather than the UK. He then managed to drop the papers everywhere before Starmer helped pick them up. The Prime Minister fared better with Trump saying: 'He's slightly more liberal than I but for some reason we get along.' The deal finally being given legal effect by the president is clearly good news for Britain and undeniably a Brexit win. Had the UK had a closer relationship with the EU we'd be lumped in with the higher tariffs they're having to put up across all goods; we'd also get carried along with any retaliatory measures imposed by Brussels. These might please voters but they are, in reality, economic self harm. We shouldn't pretend this deal is more than it is though. This is not a wide-ranging free trade agreement – something which the government says it is still striving towards – but measures that mitigate the tariffs Trump unleashed on the world on his 'liberation day' in April. We are certainly better of, both compared with much of the world and with when those tariffs were initially announced. But we are still in a worse position than at the start of the year. What's also clear is that the White House is calling the shots. They feel under no pressure to further the deal with us and will only sign incremental steps as and when it suits them. If the deal is to progress further, an almighty row could be brewing. One of the aspects of global trade that reportedly enrages Trump is how much Americans – and American hospitals – pay for drugs, even those produced domestically. The NHS, as a single buyer purchasing in bulk on a massive scale, secures medicines at far lower prices. Trump sees that as unfair. He can't do much to force companies to lower prices for US customers, but he can try to push them up for the UK. Indeed, documents released after the agreement was outlined in May say the NHS will 'look at the concerns of the president' on this issue. But it's hard to see how any British Prime Minister or Health Secretary could agree to anything that increases NHS costs – politically or fiscally. This aspect of the deal may be flying under the radar for now, but it could well stop further progress towards free trade in its tracks.
The Sun
11 minutes ago
- The Sun
Royal Ascot 2025 betting offer: Get £30 in free bets with bet365
BET365 are rolling out the red carpet for Royal Ascot 2025, which gets underway today! Brand new bet365 customers who register an account and spend a tenner on horse racing will receive a fabulous £30 in free bets, and it's available to clim right NOW! No bet365 account? No problem! We'll get you set up in no time! To claim bet365's amazing welcome bonus, simply visit the website HERE* Register an account, and deposit between £5 and £10 to claim the offer and receive three times your first bet as bet credits. Place your first bet equal to the qualifying deposit amount of between £5 and £10 on any qualifying Sportsbook markets. Your Free Bets will be available shortly after your qualifying bets have settled. You can then place your Free Bets, just select 'Use Bet Credits' in the bet slip. *18+. Min deposit requirement. Free Bets are paid as Bet Credits and are available for use upon settlement of qualifying bets. Min odds, bet and payment method exclusions apply. Returns exclude Bet Credits stake. Time limits and T&Cs apply. Remember to gamble responsibly A responsible gambler is someone who: For help with a gambling problem, call the National Gambling Helpline on 0808 8020 133 or go to to be excluded from all UK-regulated gambling websites.
