Big banks abandoned a climate alliance. Now, critics are calling for new laws.

In the period before the opening day, all six The largest banks in the United States It retracted the United Nations climate initiative, amid attacks by conservative and organizers.

Bank of America, Citigram, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, and Wales Vargo left the net banking alliance between December and January in what was considered a privilege of right-wing criticism of the so-called ESG-making decisions that he leads in the environment, social and companies. He released nineteen Republican lawyers.Civil investigation demands“In 2022, these banks are required to hand over information about their ESG practices. They argued that the alliance was distinguished for the“ climate waking agenda ”and that it violated the anti -monopoly laws.

While the exit of banks from the coalition definitely seems to be a setback for climate progress for the banking sector, environmental defenders say it is a reminder that voluntary initiatives were not sufficient to lead the sector Carbon removal.

“Other companies we can use to account for banks,” said Alison Fagan Tornrr, an energy -financing company in the Renafors Action Non -profit network, which publishes. The annual report On the amount of money, banks are committed to fossil fuel projects. In light of the Trump administration’s gas administration agenda, she said that over the next four years, activists and policy makers will have to continue to pressure the tougher legislation at government and international levels.

“It is quite clear that major American banks will not spread themselves,” she added.

The pure banking alliance, or Nzba, It was launched in 2021 In light of the United Nations Environment Program Initiative and has about 140 members after the six American banks – and Four Canadian – He came out. The coalition requests member banks to adhere to the achievement of net greenhouse emissions through their operations and “lending and investment portfolios” by 2050, and determining the goals of reducing intermediate emissions for the year 2030 and every five years after that. It also requires banks to reveal their annual emissions, and specifies some recommendations to limit the application of carbon displacement to the climate targets of the banks.

but, It is very similar to the Paris Agreement to reduce the phenomenon of global warmingNZBA depends on voluntary participation and compliance, and has no enforcement salad. He was criticized for not asking enough of its members, which are allowed to participate even if they continue to subscribe to expanding the oil and gas infrastructure. It faces the proposals of the United Nations that will tighten its requirements – especially about fossil fuel financing – Strong opposition It is recently leaving banks such as JP Morgan and Bank of America.

Even some NZBA banks themselves recognized the coalition restrictions in the face of the government’s failure. In 2023, the Sugar Sustainability Summary at the Maldah Bank, Ivan Freshburg, Tell the commercial publication the responsible investor The signatories were left on NZBA alone in the altar, “as governments around the world failed to legislate a process of moving away from fossil fuels. GLS, based in Germany, Leave the alliance in the same year In protest against the support of other NZBA members of fossil fuel projects in Africa.

Wells Vargo refused to comment on the logical basis behind his departure from Nzba. Goldman Sachs said he made “great progress” on the goals of Safi, but he did not explain the reason for leaving the coalition. The other four banks that recently left the inquiries from Grist.

Unlike volunteer initiatives, governments have the authority to ensure that banks rise to the level of declared climatic promises and push them to make more effort. At an event in New York City last November – especially, even before Nzba Shakeup – US Deputy Secretary of the Treasury, Sarah Bloom Raskin, suggested that states take this role.

She said that the countries “have a unique opportunity to lead,” noting the runner -up of the presidential administration received. At that time, California was already Laws passed Large companies, including banks, are required to report greenhouse gas emissions annually and detect their climate -related financial risks. These laws recently survived a legal challenge from the American Chamber of Commerce and the project of New York State Make similar bills In January. A representative of a democratic state in Illinois A presented Detection bill last month.

Daniel Fujir, chief and chief advisor to defend non -profit shareholders while you are planning, said that the disclosure is a prerequisite for banks’ contract for their climatic goals. She said, “We want to understand what they are doing.” Laws such as California highlighting the financial instability caused by changing climate based on fossil fuel-theoretical, at least-the financing that will exacerbate it will exacerbate.

Of course, it does not require merely that banks reveal their emissions and climate risks is unlikely to prevent the worst effects of global warming. According to Landmark 2021 report From the International Energy Agency, no of the oil, gas and coal infrastructure can be built if the world limits global warming to 1.5 ° C (2.7 ° F). This is why Patrick McCole, a great analyst in the transmission of energy in the field of non -profit restoration, which calls for a more sustainable banking sector, told the legislators, “They are pushing banks to reduce their financing for fossil fuel.”

“These companies act against the interests of humanity, and we need to stop them.”

However, Fajans Turner said that such a policy will be difficult to write in the law, and it is likely to face legal challenges even in the most advanced states, as the ban on natural gas was on the new construction. It was beaten by industry groups.

Anne Lipton, Professor of Business Law at Toulin University, said that there is a better way for policy makers to reduce new fossil fuel projects is to look beyond the banking sector. For example, legislators can ask insurance companies to deal with climate-related financial risks when designing their policies-which may make it difficult for fossil fuel projects to obtain coverage. She said: “We would like the banks to stop financing risky activities, but at the end of the day, the bank’s function is to finance profitable things expected.” “It is the task of the rest of society to make this [thing] Unstable. “

Another strategy is to claim banking to publish a clear carbon removal plan, which, in theory, can be a kind of rear doors to prohibit new fossil fuel investments. “Implicitly in the presence of a goal is that the bank takes a kind of action to ensure that this goal is met,” said Fujir. If the “Net-Zero” plan is mentioned by a specific date, it must be reliable, it must include a kind of scaling fossil fuel financing. If you claim to be in line with a path to reduce global warming to 1.5 ° C, it should not be able to expand fossil fuels.

In the United States, investors are as you grow Presse on many large banks To provide more information voluntarily about their plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but requests were for more details to reject last year. (At least one bank, Wales Vargo, has a face around the face, recently Discounting his net scratch goal completely.)

The legislation that requires detailed carbon removal plans witnessed more success on the international stage. For example, the European Union began using two directions for the sustainability of companies approved by Parliament to request financial institutions to adopt. “The transition plan to reduce climate change“Laws require institutions to make” their best “efforts to ensure that their plans are compatible with the road towards achieving climate neutrality by 2050 and reducing global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

Maklali said that these regulations are promising, but indicate an increasing opposition from right -wing governments in Europe. “We need to defeat this decline to ensure that the legislation will be able to stay,” he said.

Even while pressing the strongest government supervision of the banking industry, organizations such as the rainy work network and the recovery of financing say they are planning to continue to draw communications between fossil fuel financing and damage projects that may cause these projects to societies – both directly, due to the risk of oil spills and explosions, or because of the non -change of climate. The mass demonstrations and research publications such as the annual report of the RainForest Action Network in theory can be increased from the public’s appetite for government, national and international organization.

“It is difficult to be optimistic,” said Queen Obino, a non -profit banjet policy analyst, who is researching and calling for the role of banks in the climate crisis and human rights violations. “But we have a lot of people working on the floor, doing a lot of research, and they make a lot of effort together to try to make a change. I think we’ll get there, even if it is not the best environment to work in it at the present time.”