Big Banks Haven't Quit Fossil Fuel, With $4 Trillion Since Paris_老虎社区_美港股上老虎

Big Banks Haven't Quit Fossil Fuel, With $4 Trillion Since Paris

Bloomberg2021-10-25

As executives from JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup., Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for the most important UN climate summit in six years, their companies continue to help provide almost ...

网页链接

免责声明：本文观点仅代表作者个人观点，不构成本平台的投资建议，本平台不对文章信息准确性、完整性和及时性做出任何保证，亦不对因使用或信赖文章信息引发的任何损失承担责任。

SvdB
·2021-10-25
Ok
回复
点赞
举报
SPOT_ON
·2021-10-25
Watch DYNA-MAC..- FLOATING PLATFORM STORAGE AND OFFLOADING SPECIALIST $DYNA-MAC HOLDINGS LTD.(NO4.SI)$
回复
1
举报
sylarspock
·2021-10-25
Great news
回复
1
举报
Atsc89
·2021-10-25
Like pls
回复
3
举报
收起
- sylarspock:
  Wow
  2021-10-25
  回复
  举报
- TeslaLegend:
  Nice
  2021-10-25
  回复
  举报

热议股票

7x24

全部

关于我们·老虎社区守则·老虎社区账号管理规范·老虎社区服务协议·老虎社区隐私政策

公司名称：北京至简风宜信息技术有限公司

违法和不良信息投诉：010-5681-3562（工作时间9:30-18:30）

邮箱：service@laohu8.com

营业执照：91110105MA01A4U55R

ICP备：京ICP备18016422号

网安备：京公网安备11010502036490

关注我们

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"data":{"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2178302447?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","thumbnail":"","is_english":true,"pubTime":"2021-10-25 15:18","share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/5f26f4a48f9cb3e29be4d71d3ba8c038","id":"2178302447","market":"us","top_or_hot":-1,"title":"Big Banks Haven't Quit Fossil Fuel, With $4 Trillion Since Paris","media":"Bloomberg","content":"<div>\n<p>As executives from JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup., Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for the most important UN climate summit in six years, their companies continue to help provide almost ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-banks-havent-quit-fossil-040109473.html\">网页链接</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":"yahoofinance","html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Big Banks Haven't Quit Fossil Fuel, With $4 Trillion Since Paris</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBig Banks Haven't Quit Fossil Fuel, With $4 Trillion Since Paris\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-25 15:18 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-banks-havent-quit-fossil-040109473.html><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>As executives from JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup., Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for the most important UN climate summit in six years, their companies continue to help provide almost ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-banks-havent-quit-fossil-040109473.html\">网页链接</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","isBrief":false,"type":0,"news_type":1,"symbol":"JPM","symbol_name":"摩根大通","start_time":0,"source_url":"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-banks-havent-quit-fossil-040109473.html","article_id":"2178302447","we_media_id":null,"thumbnails":[],"rights":null,"url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2178302447","pubTimestamp":1635146319,"columns":[],"sourceInfo":{"source_id":"yahoofinance","name":"雅虎金融"},"weMediaInfo":null,"summary":"As executives from JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup., Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for ","collect":0,"end_time":0,"defaultTopTitle":"yahoo.com","property":[],"viewcount":null,"language":"en","relate_stocks":{"JPM":"摩根大通"},"translate_title":"大银行还没有放弃福思燃料，自巴黎会议以来有4万亿美元","themeId":null,"isJumpTheme":false,"ttsUrl":null,"symbols_score_info":{"JPM":0.9},"content_text":"As executives from JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup., Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for the most important UN climate summit in six years, their companies continue to help provide almost as much money for fossil fuels as for green projects.\nScientists have made clear that time is running out to prevent a climate catastrophe. Yet this year alone, banks have organized $459 billion of bonds and loans for the oil, gas and coal sectors, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. At the same time, they arranged $463 billion worth of green bonds and loans, with fees more or less evenly split.\nSince the Paris Agreement at the end of 2015, banks have played a prominent role in enabling the warming that’s behind increasingly deadly storms, fires and floods. During the period, the industry generated more than $17 billion of fees from facilitating almost $4 trillion of fossil-fuel financing. The money has helped feed carbon emissions that, at the current pace, mean temperatures will rise well above the 1.5 degrees Celsius identified as critical to avert irreversible damage.\nNow, as global leaders prepare to descend on Glasgow, Scotland, for the COP26 climate talks, a growing chorus of investors and activists are demanding that banks stop funding polluters -- before it’s too late.\n“What banks need to do is extremely clear,” said Miguel Nogales, co-chief investment officer at Generation Investment Management LLP, the $36 billion fund manager co-founded by former U.S. Vice President Al Gore. “No financing for new coal plants, no financing for new oil fields.”\nNext month’s talks in Glasgow have been dubbed the finance COP, meaning focus will be on the extent to which the banking industry is pulling its weight to help prevent carbon dioxide from spewing into the atmosphere. In the lead-up to the talks, banks and asset managers have released a deluge of climate declarations, assuring stakeholders they’re committed to eliminating net emissions from their lending and investing portfolios -- or reaching net zero -- by the middle of the century.\nOn the surface, banks are acknowledging the issue. Most of the world’s biggest lenders, including JPMorgan, Citigroup, Deutsche Bank and  Bank of America Corp., are part of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero. But in reality, they’ve yet to show that they can purge their loan books of CO2 fast enough.\n“At the top of many big banks, there is a realization that they will have to step back from financing certain fossil-fuel projects, but many are only just beginning this journey,” said Jessica Ground, the London-based global head of environmental, social and governance at Capital Group, which has $2.6 trillion of assets under management.\nBill Winters, the chief executive officer of Standard Chartered Plc, said earlier this month that \" it’s just not practical” to expect banks to stop financing the fossil-fuel industry, in part because to do so would undermine transition efforts, particularly in the emerging markets. And then last week, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. CEO David Solomon said his firm won’t abruptly stop working with fossil-fuel companies, stressing the need for a balanced transition to green energy that avoids higher energy prices.\nAccording to the Sunrise Project, an environmental nonprofit based in Australia, if banks are to be taken seriously on their net-zero commitments, they need to stop financing companies and projects expanding coal, oil and gas output infrastructure or power generation. And all corporate finance and underwriting of rich-world coal companies should be phased out by 2030 “at the very latest,” the group said in an email. For non-OECD countries, the deadline should be 2040, it said.\nBanks will often respond to criticisms of their fossil-fuel financing by citing their commitment to funding clean energy, Sunrise Project said. But the group characterized this as a “distraction.” Investing in clean energy doesn’t alleviate the effects of lending to the world’s worst polluters, it said.\nJPMorgan, the biggest U.S. bank, is the world’s leading provider of finance to the fossil-fuel industry and also ranks as the No. 1 underwriter of green bonds, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The New York-based firm has made about $985 million in revenue since the end of 2015 arranging debt and lending for the oil, gas and coal industries. That compares with the roughly $310 million it generated in income from green finance.\nSan Francisco-based Wells Fargo & Co. provides even more loans to the fossil-fuel industry than JPMorgan, but does far less bond underwriting. Citigroup places second among the top providers of fossil finance, from which it has generated almost $890 million in revenue during the past six years, Bloomberg data show. Bank of America is next with roughly $690 million.\nTo measure the involvement of each bank, Bloomberg’s data include the bonds and syndicated loans underwritten for companies that produce or extract oil, natural gas and coal. Those figures are assessed against the debt that each bank arranged on behalf of corporate and government issuers for eligible climate or environmental projects.\nThere are weaknesses in the data set. For example, it’s possible some portion of a loan to an oil company might have been used on a clean-energy project. Bloomberg started tracking fees that banks earn from extending loans in 2018, so fees from 2016 and 2017 might be under-represented. But none of that changes the overall picture left by the data -- namely that banks have financed hundreds of billions of dollars worth of carbon emissions.\nAt the current rate of greenhouse-gas emissions, the United Nations warns that the average global temperature is set to be 2.7 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by the end of this century. At that level of warming, whole populations will be displaced by rising sea levels, vast numbers of species will face extinction, and deadly wild fires and flooding will become far more frequent.\nThe International Energy Agency said this month that the world is woefully behind in delivering the necessary emissions cuts. “Every data point showing the speed of change in energy can be countered by another showing the stubbornness of the status quo,” the agency said in its latest report.\nAt JPMorgan, executives say they’re aware of the urgency of the moment. “Climate change is a critical issue of our time, and we are committed to doing our part to address it,” Marisa Buchanan, the firm’s global head of sustainability, said earlier this month in connection with a public commitment to carbon neutrality by mid-century.\nJPMorgan said in May that it plans to report a 35% reduction in “operational carbon intensity” for its oil and gas portfolio by the end of the decade. The commitment followed the company’s announcement last year that it was aligning its financing activities with the Paris Agreement.\nNogales called JPMorgan’s decision to join the Net-Zero Banking Alliance a “positive step.” But he also referred to it as “a high standard of action that, according to the IEA, means turning off the finance tap to new fossil-fuel projects as soon as this year.” The extent to which signatories do this will be the “real test,” and one that investors “will be watching very closely,” Nogales said.\nAn important plank of the 2015 Paris climate agreement was to involve the financial industry, reflecting the need to steer money away from activities that pollute. The latest flurry of net-zero commitments from banks and asset managers follows on from that agreement. But details on how they plan to achieve carbon neutrality 30 years from now remain scarce.\nNogales said part of the problem is that most net-zero goals are too far in the future. “The problem with very long-term targets is that it’s typically going to be a different set of executives running those businesses at that point,” he said, adding that Generation Management wants to see CO2 targets set for 2030, in line with the UN’s recommendations to halve emissions in the coming decade.\nThe latest assessment by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change “was extremely clear,” Nogales said. “We’re facing a massive emergency.”","kind":"news","is_publish_news":true,"is_publish_highlight":false,"is_publish_live":false,"is_publish_wemedia":null,"editions":null,"column":"","sentiment":"0","news_tag":"","news_rank":0,"symbols":[],"gpt_button":1},"commentList":[{"id":856114803,"gmtCreate":1635160629324,"gmtModify":1635160629324,"author":{"id":"3581903617103899","authorId":"3581903617103899","name":"SvdB","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5122e985be0048597462b4591a72fb46","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3581903617103899","authorIdStr":"3581903617103899"},"htmlText":"Ok","listText":"Ok","text":"Ok","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/856114803","repostId":2178302447,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2178302447","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1635146319,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2178302447?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-25 15:18","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Big Banks Haven't Quit Fossil Fuel, With $4 Trillion Since Paris","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2178302447","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"As executives from JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup., Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for ","content":"<p>As executives from JPMorgan Chase &amp; Co., Citigroup.,&nbsp;Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for the most important UN climate summit in six years, their companies&nbsp;continue&nbsp;to help provide&nbsp;almost as much money for&nbsp;fossil fuels as for&nbsp;green projects.</p>\n<p>Scientists have made clear that time is running out to prevent a climate catastrophe. Yet this year alone, banks have organized&nbsp;$459&nbsp;billion of bonds and loans for the oil, gas and coal sectors, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. At the same time, they&nbsp;arranged $463&nbsp;billion worth of green bonds and loans, with fees more or less evenly split.</p>\n<p>Since the Paris Agreement at the end of 2015, banks have played a prominent role in enabling the warming that’s behind increasingly deadly storms, fires and floods. During&nbsp;the&nbsp;period, the industry generated more than $17 billion of&nbsp;fees from facilitating almost $4&nbsp;trillion of fossil-fuel&nbsp;financing. The money has helped feed carbon emissions that, at the current pace, mean temperatures will rise well above the 1.5 degrees Celsius identified as critical to avert irreversible damage.</p>\n<p>Now, as global leaders prepare to descend on Glasgow, Scotland, for the COP26 climate talks, a growing chorus of investors and activists are demanding that banks stop funding polluters -- before it’s too late.</p>\n<p>“What banks need to do is extremely clear,” said Miguel Nogales, co-chief investment officer at Generation Investment Management LLP, the $36 billion fund manager co-founded by former U.S. Vice President Al Gore. “No financing for new coal plants, no financing for new oil fields.”</p>\n<p>Next month’s talks in Glasgow have been dubbed the finance COP, meaning focus will be on the extent to which the banking&nbsp;industry is pulling its weight to help prevent carbon dioxide from spewing into the atmosphere. In the lead-up to the talks, banks and asset managers have released a deluge of climate declarations, assuring stakeholders they’re committed to eliminating net emissions from their lending and investing portfolios --&nbsp;or reaching net zero --&nbsp;by the middle of the century.</p>\n<p>On the surface, banks are acknowledging the issue. Most of the world’s biggest lenders, including JPMorgan, Citigroup, Deutsche Bank and&nbsp; Bank of America Corp., are part of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero. But in reality, they’ve yet to show that they can purge their loan books of CO2 fast enough.</p>\n<p>“At the top of many big banks, there is a realization that they will have to step back from financing certain fossil-fuel projects, but many are only just beginning this journey,” said Jessica Ground, the London-based global head of environmental, social and governance&nbsp;at Capital Group, which has $2.6&nbsp;trillion of assets under management.</p>\n<p>Bill Winters, the chief executive officer of Standard Chartered Plc, said earlier this month that \" it’s just not practical” to expect banks to stop financing the fossil-fuel industry, in part because to do so would undermine transition efforts, particularly in the emerging markets. And then last week,&nbsp;Goldman Sachs Group Inc. CEO David Solomon said his firm won’t abruptly stop working with fossil-fuel companies, stressing the need for a balanced transition to green energy that avoids higher energy prices.</p>\n<p>According to the Sunrise Project, an environmental nonprofit based in Australia, if banks are to be taken seriously on their net-zero commitments, they need to stop financing companies and projects expanding coal, oil and gas output infrastructure or power generation. And all corporate finance and underwriting of rich-world coal companies should be phased out by 2030 “at the very latest,” the group said in an email. For non-OECD countries, the deadline should be 2040, it said.</p>\n<p>Banks will often respond to criticisms of their fossil-fuel financing by citing their commitment to funding clean energy, Sunrise Project said. But the group characterized this as a “distraction.” Investing in clean energy doesn’t alleviate the effects of lending to the world’s worst polluters, it said.</p>\n<p>JPMorgan, the biggest U.S. bank, is the world’s leading provider of finance to the fossil-fuel industry and also ranks as the No. 1 underwriter of green bonds, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The New York-based firm has made about&nbsp;$985&nbsp;million in revenue since the end of 2015&nbsp;arranging debt and lending for the oil, gas and coal industries. That compares with the roughly $310 million it generated in income from green finance.</p>\n<p>San Francisco-based Wells Fargo &amp; Co. provides even more loans to the fossil-fuel industry than JPMorgan, but does far less bond underwriting. Citigroup places second&nbsp;among the top providers of fossil finance, from which it has generated almost $890&nbsp;million in revenue during the past six years, Bloomberg data show. Bank of America is next with roughly $690 million.</p>\n<p>To measure the involvement of each bank, Bloomberg’s data include the bonds and syndicated loans underwritten for companies that produce or extract oil, natural gas and coal. Those figures are assessed against the debt that&nbsp;each bank arranged on behalf of corporate and government issuers for eligible climate or environmental projects.</p>\n<p>There are weaknesses in the data set. For example, it’s possible some portion of a loan to an oil company might have been used on a clean-energy project. Bloomberg started tracking fees that banks earn from extending loans in 2018, so fees from 2016 and 2017 might be under-represented. But none of that changes the overall picture left by the data --&nbsp;namely that banks have financed hundreds of billions of dollars worth of carbon emissions.</p>\n<p>At the current rate of greenhouse-gas emissions, the United Nations warns that the average global temperature is set to be 2.7 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by the end of this century. At that level of warming, whole populations will be displaced by rising sea levels, vast numbers of species will face extinction, and deadly wild fires and flooding will become far more frequent.</p>\n<p>The International Energy Agency said this month that the world is woefully behind in delivering the necessary emissions cuts. “Every data point showing the speed of change in energy can be countered by another showing the stubbornness of the status quo,” the agency said in its latest report.</p>\n<p>At JPMorgan, executives say they’re aware of the urgency of the moment. “Climate change is a critical issue of our time, and we are committed to doing our part to address it,” Marisa Buchanan, the firm’s global head of sustainability, said earlier this month in connection with a public commitment to carbon neutrality by mid-century.</p>\n<p>JPMorgan said in May that it plans to report a 35% reduction in “operational carbon intensity” for its oil and gas portfolio by the end of the decade. The commitment followed the company’s announcement last year that it was aligning its financing activities with the Paris Agreement.</p>\n<p>Nogales called JPMorgan’s decision to join the Net-Zero Banking Alliance a “positive step.” But he also referred to it as “a high standard of action that, according to the IEA, means turning off the finance tap to new fossil-fuel projects as soon as this year.” The extent to which signatories do this will be the “real test,” and one that investors “will be watching very closely,” Nogales said.</p>\n<p>An important&nbsp;plank of the 2015 Paris climate agreement was to involve the financial industry, reflecting the need to steer money away from activities that pollute. The latest flurry of net-zero commitments from banks and asset managers follows on from that agreement. But details on how they plan to achieve carbon neutrality 30 years from now remain scarce.</p>\n<p>Nogales said&nbsp;part of the problem is that most net-zero goals are too far in the future. “The problem with very long-term targets is that it’s typically going to be a different set of executives running those businesses at that point,” he said, adding that&nbsp;Generation Management wants to see CO2 targets set for 2030, in line with the UN’s recommendations to halve emissions in the coming decade.</p>\n<p>The latest assessment by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change “was extremely clear,” Nogales said. “We’re facing a massive emergency.”</p>","source":"yahoofinance","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Big Banks Haven't Quit Fossil Fuel, With $4 Trillion Since Paris</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBig Banks Haven't Quit Fossil Fuel, With $4 Trillion Since Paris\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-25 15:18 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-banks-havent-quit-fossil-040109473.html><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>As executives from JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup., Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for the most important UN climate summit in six years, their companies continue to help provide almost ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-banks-havent-quit-fossil-040109473.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"JPM":"摩根大通"},"source_url":"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-banks-havent-quit-fossil-040109473.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/5f26f4a48f9cb3e29be4d71d3ba8c038","article_id":"2178302447","content_text":"As executives from JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup., Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for the most important UN climate summit in six years, their companies continue to help provide almost as much money for fossil fuels as for green projects.\nScientists have made clear that time is running out to prevent a climate catastrophe. Yet this year alone, banks have organized $459 billion of bonds and loans for the oil, gas and coal sectors, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. At the same time, they arranged $463 billion worth of green bonds and loans, with fees more or less evenly split.\nSince the Paris Agreement at the end of 2015, banks have played a prominent role in enabling the warming that’s behind increasingly deadly storms, fires and floods. During the period, the industry generated more than $17 billion of fees from facilitating almost $4 trillion of fossil-fuel financing. The money has helped feed carbon emissions that, at the current pace, mean temperatures will rise well above the 1.5 degrees Celsius identified as critical to avert irreversible damage.\nNow, as global leaders prepare to descend on Glasgow, Scotland, for the COP26 climate talks, a growing chorus of investors and activists are demanding that banks stop funding polluters -- before it’s too late.\n“What banks need to do is extremely clear,” said Miguel Nogales, co-chief investment officer at Generation Investment Management LLP, the $36 billion fund manager co-founded by former U.S. Vice President Al Gore. “No financing for new coal plants, no financing for new oil fields.”\nNext month’s talks in Glasgow have been dubbed the finance COP, meaning focus will be on the extent to which the banking industry is pulling its weight to help prevent carbon dioxide from spewing into the atmosphere. In the lead-up to the talks, banks and asset managers have released a deluge of climate declarations, assuring stakeholders they’re committed to eliminating net emissions from their lending and investing portfolios -- or reaching net zero -- by the middle of the century.\nOn the surface, banks are acknowledging the issue. Most of the world’s biggest lenders, including JPMorgan, Citigroup, Deutsche Bank and  Bank of America Corp., are part of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero. But in reality, they’ve yet to show that they can purge their loan books of CO2 fast enough.\n“At the top of many big banks, there is a realization that they will have to step back from financing certain fossil-fuel projects, but many are only just beginning this journey,” said Jessica Ground, the London-based global head of environmental, social and governance at Capital Group, which has $2.6 trillion of assets under management.\nBill Winters, the chief executive officer of Standard Chartered Plc, said earlier this month that \" it’s just not practical” to expect banks to stop financing the fossil-fuel industry, in part because to do so would undermine transition efforts, particularly in the emerging markets. And then last week, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. CEO David Solomon said his firm won’t abruptly stop working with fossil-fuel companies, stressing the need for a balanced transition to green energy that avoids higher energy prices.\nAccording to the Sunrise Project, an environmental nonprofit based in Australia, if banks are to be taken seriously on their net-zero commitments, they need to stop financing companies and projects expanding coal, oil and gas output infrastructure or power generation. And all corporate finance and underwriting of rich-world coal companies should be phased out by 2030 “at the very latest,” the group said in an email. For non-OECD countries, the deadline should be 2040, it said.\nBanks will often respond to criticisms of their fossil-fuel financing by citing their commitment to funding clean energy, Sunrise Project said. But the group characterized this as a “distraction.” Investing in clean energy doesn’t alleviate the effects of lending to the world’s worst polluters, it said.\nJPMorgan, the biggest U.S. bank, is the world’s leading provider of finance to the fossil-fuel industry and also ranks as the No. 1 underwriter of green bonds, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The New York-based firm has made about $985 million in revenue since the end of 2015 arranging debt and lending for the oil, gas and coal industries. That compares with the roughly $310 million it generated in income from green finance.\nSan Francisco-based Wells Fargo & Co. provides even more loans to the fossil-fuel industry than JPMorgan, but does far less bond underwriting. Citigroup places second among the top providers of fossil finance, from which it has generated almost $890 million in revenue during the past six years, Bloomberg data show. Bank of America is next with roughly $690 million.\nTo measure the involvement of each bank, Bloomberg’s data include the bonds and syndicated loans underwritten for companies that produce or extract oil, natural gas and coal. Those figures are assessed against the debt that each bank arranged on behalf of corporate and government issuers for eligible climate or environmental projects.\nThere are weaknesses in the data set. For example, it’s possible some portion of a loan to an oil company might have been used on a clean-energy project. Bloomberg started tracking fees that banks earn from extending loans in 2018, so fees from 2016 and 2017 might be under-represented. But none of that changes the overall picture left by the data -- namely that banks have financed hundreds of billions of dollars worth of carbon emissions.\nAt the current rate of greenhouse-gas emissions, the United Nations warns that the average global temperature is set to be 2.7 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by the end of this century. At that level of warming, whole populations will be displaced by rising sea levels, vast numbers of species will face extinction, and deadly wild fires and flooding will become far more frequent.\nThe International Energy Agency said this month that the world is woefully behind in delivering the necessary emissions cuts. “Every data point showing the speed of change in energy can be countered by another showing the stubbornness of the status quo,” the agency said in its latest report.\nAt JPMorgan, executives say they’re aware of the urgency of the moment. “Climate change is a critical issue of our time, and we are committed to doing our part to address it,” Marisa Buchanan, the firm’s global head of sustainability, said earlier this month in connection with a public commitment to carbon neutrality by mid-century.\nJPMorgan said in May that it plans to report a 35% reduction in “operational carbon intensity” for its oil and gas portfolio by the end of the decade. The commitment followed the company’s announcement last year that it was aligning its financing activities with the Paris Agreement.\nNogales called JPMorgan’s decision to join the Net-Zero Banking Alliance a “positive step.” But he also referred to it as “a high standard of action that, according to the IEA, means turning off the finance tap to new fossil-fuel projects as soon as this year.” The extent to which signatories do this will be the “real test,” and one that investors “will be watching very closely,” Nogales said.\nAn important plank of the 2015 Paris climate agreement was to involve the financial industry, reflecting the need to steer money away from activities that pollute. The latest flurry of net-zero commitments from banks and asset managers follows on from that agreement. But details on how they plan to achieve carbon neutrality 30 years from now remain scarce.\nNogales said part of the problem is that most net-zero goals are too far in the future. “The problem with very long-term targets is that it’s typically going to be a different set of executives running those businesses at that point,” he said, adding that Generation Management wants to see CO2 targets set for 2030, in line with the UN’s recommendations to halve emissions in the coming decade.\nThe latest assessment by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change “was extremely clear,” Nogales said. “We’re facing a massive emergency.”","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"CN"},{"id":856319312,"gmtCreate":1635149887901,"gmtModify":1635149903757,"author":{"id":"3582922989777578","authorId":"3582922989777578","name":"SPOT_ON","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/080f029371339d9db26930961de6adb1","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3582922989777578","authorIdStr":"3582922989777578"},"htmlText":"Watch DYNA-MAC..- FLOATING PLATFORM STORAGE AND OFFLOADING SPECIALIST&nbsp;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NO4.SI\">$DYNA-MAC HOLDINGS LTD.(NO4.SI)$</a>","listText":"Watch DYNA-MAC..- FLOATING PLATFORM STORAGE AND OFFLOADING SPECIALIST&nbsp;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NO4.SI\">$DYNA-MAC HOLDINGS LTD.(NO4.SI)$</a>","text":"Watch DYNA-MAC..- FLOATING PLATFORM STORAGE AND OFFLOADING SPECIALIST $DYNA-MAC HOLDINGS LTD.(NO4.SI)$","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/856319312","repostId":2178302447,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2178302447","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1635146319,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2178302447?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-25 15:18","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Big Banks Haven't Quit Fossil Fuel, With $4 Trillion Since Paris","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2178302447","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"As executives from JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup., Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for ","content":"<p>As executives from JPMorgan Chase &amp; Co., Citigroup.,&nbsp;Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for the most important UN climate summit in six years, their companies&nbsp;continue&nbsp;to help provide&nbsp;almost as much money for&nbsp;fossil fuels as for&nbsp;green projects.</p>\n<p>Scientists have made clear that time is running out to prevent a climate catastrophe. Yet this year alone, banks have organized&nbsp;$459&nbsp;billion of bonds and loans for the oil, gas and coal sectors, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. At the same time, they&nbsp;arranged $463&nbsp;billion worth of green bonds and loans, with fees more or less evenly split.</p>\n<p>Since the Paris Agreement at the end of 2015, banks have played a prominent role in enabling the warming that’s behind increasingly deadly storms, fires and floods. During&nbsp;the&nbsp;period, the industry generated more than $17 billion of&nbsp;fees from facilitating almost $4&nbsp;trillion of fossil-fuel&nbsp;financing. The money has helped feed carbon emissions that, at the current pace, mean temperatures will rise well above the 1.5 degrees Celsius identified as critical to avert irreversible damage.</p>\n<p>Now, as global leaders prepare to descend on Glasgow, Scotland, for the COP26 climate talks, a growing chorus of investors and activists are demanding that banks stop funding polluters -- before it’s too late.</p>\n<p>“What banks need to do is extremely clear,” said Miguel Nogales, co-chief investment officer at Generation Investment Management LLP, the $36 billion fund manager co-founded by former U.S. Vice President Al Gore. “No financing for new coal plants, no financing for new oil fields.”</p>\n<p>Next month’s talks in Glasgow have been dubbed the finance COP, meaning focus will be on the extent to which the banking&nbsp;industry is pulling its weight to help prevent carbon dioxide from spewing into the atmosphere. In the lead-up to the talks, banks and asset managers have released a deluge of climate declarations, assuring stakeholders they’re committed to eliminating net emissions from their lending and investing portfolios --&nbsp;or reaching net zero --&nbsp;by the middle of the century.</p>\n<p>On the surface, banks are acknowledging the issue. Most of the world’s biggest lenders, including JPMorgan, Citigroup, Deutsche Bank and&nbsp; Bank of America Corp., are part of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero. But in reality, they’ve yet to show that they can purge their loan books of CO2 fast enough.</p>\n<p>“At the top of many big banks, there is a realization that they will have to step back from financing certain fossil-fuel projects, but many are only just beginning this journey,” said Jessica Ground, the London-based global head of environmental, social and governance&nbsp;at Capital Group, which has $2.6&nbsp;trillion of assets under management.</p>\n<p>Bill Winters, the chief executive officer of Standard Chartered Plc, said earlier this month that \" it’s just not practical” to expect banks to stop financing the fossil-fuel industry, in part because to do so would undermine transition efforts, particularly in the emerging markets. And then last week,&nbsp;Goldman Sachs Group Inc. CEO David Solomon said his firm won’t abruptly stop working with fossil-fuel companies, stressing the need for a balanced transition to green energy that avoids higher energy prices.</p>\n<p>According to the Sunrise Project, an environmental nonprofit based in Australia, if banks are to be taken seriously on their net-zero commitments, they need to stop financing companies and projects expanding coal, oil and gas output infrastructure or power generation. And all corporate finance and underwriting of rich-world coal companies should be phased out by 2030 “at the very latest,” the group said in an email. For non-OECD countries, the deadline should be 2040, it said.</p>\n<p>Banks will often respond to criticisms of their fossil-fuel financing by citing their commitment to funding clean energy, Sunrise Project said. But the group characterized this as a “distraction.” Investing in clean energy doesn’t alleviate the effects of lending to the world’s worst polluters, it said.</p>\n<p>JPMorgan, the biggest U.S. bank, is the world’s leading provider of finance to the fossil-fuel industry and also ranks as the No. 1 underwriter of green bonds, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The New York-based firm has made about&nbsp;$985&nbsp;million in revenue since the end of 2015&nbsp;arranging debt and lending for the oil, gas and coal industries. That compares with the roughly $310 million it generated in income from green finance.</p>\n<p>San Francisco-based Wells Fargo &amp; Co. provides even more loans to the fossil-fuel industry than JPMorgan, but does far less bond underwriting. Citigroup places second&nbsp;among the top providers of fossil finance, from which it has generated almost $890&nbsp;million in revenue during the past six years, Bloomberg data show. Bank of America is next with roughly $690 million.</p>\n<p>To measure the involvement of each bank, Bloomberg’s data include the bonds and syndicated loans underwritten for companies that produce or extract oil, natural gas and coal. Those figures are assessed against the debt that&nbsp;each bank arranged on behalf of corporate and government issuers for eligible climate or environmental projects.</p>\n<p>There are weaknesses in the data set. For example, it’s possible some portion of a loan to an oil company might have been used on a clean-energy project. Bloomberg started tracking fees that banks earn from extending loans in 2018, so fees from 2016 and 2017 might be under-represented. But none of that changes the overall picture left by the data --&nbsp;namely that banks have financed hundreds of billions of dollars worth of carbon emissions.</p>\n<p>At the current rate of greenhouse-gas emissions, the United Nations warns that the average global temperature is set to be 2.7 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by the end of this century. At that level of warming, whole populations will be displaced by rising sea levels, vast numbers of species will face extinction, and deadly wild fires and flooding will become far more frequent.</p>\n<p>The International Energy Agency said this month that the world is woefully behind in delivering the necessary emissions cuts. “Every data point showing the speed of change in energy can be countered by another showing the stubbornness of the status quo,” the agency said in its latest report.</p>\n<p>At JPMorgan, executives say they’re aware of the urgency of the moment. “Climate change is a critical issue of our time, and we are committed to doing our part to address it,” Marisa Buchanan, the firm’s global head of sustainability, said earlier this month in connection with a public commitment to carbon neutrality by mid-century.</p>\n<p>JPMorgan said in May that it plans to report a 35% reduction in “operational carbon intensity” for its oil and gas portfolio by the end of the decade. The commitment followed the company’s announcement last year that it was aligning its financing activities with the Paris Agreement.</p>\n<p>Nogales called JPMorgan’s decision to join the Net-Zero Banking Alliance a “positive step.” But he also referred to it as “a high standard of action that, according to the IEA, means turning off the finance tap to new fossil-fuel projects as soon as this year.” The extent to which signatories do this will be the “real test,” and one that investors “will be watching very closely,” Nogales said.</p>\n<p>An important&nbsp;plank of the 2015 Paris climate agreement was to involve the financial industry, reflecting the need to steer money away from activities that pollute. The latest flurry of net-zero commitments from banks and asset managers follows on from that agreement. But details on how they plan to achieve carbon neutrality 30 years from now remain scarce.</p>\n<p>Nogales said&nbsp;part of the problem is that most net-zero goals are too far in the future. “The problem with very long-term targets is that it’s typically going to be a different set of executives running those businesses at that point,” he said, adding that&nbsp;Generation Management wants to see CO2 targets set for 2030, in line with the UN’s recommendations to halve emissions in the coming decade.</p>\n<p>The latest assessment by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change “was extremely clear,” Nogales said. “We’re facing a massive emergency.”</p>","source":"yahoofinance","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Big Banks Haven't Quit Fossil Fuel, With $4 Trillion Since Paris</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBig Banks Haven't Quit Fossil Fuel, With $4 Trillion Since Paris\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-25 15:18 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-banks-havent-quit-fossil-040109473.html><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>As executives from JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup., Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for the most important UN climate summit in six years, their companies continue to help provide almost ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-banks-havent-quit-fossil-040109473.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"JPM":"摩根大通"},"source_url":"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-banks-havent-quit-fossil-040109473.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/5f26f4a48f9cb3e29be4d71d3ba8c038","article_id":"2178302447","content_text":"As executives from JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup., Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for the most important UN climate summit in six years, their companies continue to help provide almost as much money for fossil fuels as for green projects.\nScientists have made clear that time is running out to prevent a climate catastrophe. Yet this year alone, banks have organized $459 billion of bonds and loans for the oil, gas and coal sectors, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. At the same time, they arranged $463 billion worth of green bonds and loans, with fees more or less evenly split.\nSince the Paris Agreement at the end of 2015, banks have played a prominent role in enabling the warming that’s behind increasingly deadly storms, fires and floods. During the period, the industry generated more than $17 billion of fees from facilitating almost $4 trillion of fossil-fuel financing. The money has helped feed carbon emissions that, at the current pace, mean temperatures will rise well above the 1.5 degrees Celsius identified as critical to avert irreversible damage.\nNow, as global leaders prepare to descend on Glasgow, Scotland, for the COP26 climate talks, a growing chorus of investors and activists are demanding that banks stop funding polluters -- before it’s too late.\n“What banks need to do is extremely clear,” said Miguel Nogales, co-chief investment officer at Generation Investment Management LLP, the $36 billion fund manager co-founded by former U.S. Vice President Al Gore. “No financing for new coal plants, no financing for new oil fields.”\nNext month’s talks in Glasgow have been dubbed the finance COP, meaning focus will be on the extent to which the banking industry is pulling its weight to help prevent carbon dioxide from spewing into the atmosphere. In the lead-up to the talks, banks and asset managers have released a deluge of climate declarations, assuring stakeholders they’re committed to eliminating net emissions from their lending and investing portfolios -- or reaching net zero -- by the middle of the century.\nOn the surface, banks are acknowledging the issue. Most of the world’s biggest lenders, including JPMorgan, Citigroup, Deutsche Bank and  Bank of America Corp., are part of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero. But in reality, they’ve yet to show that they can purge their loan books of CO2 fast enough.\n“At the top of many big banks, there is a realization that they will have to step back from financing certain fossil-fuel projects, but many are only just beginning this journey,” said Jessica Ground, the London-based global head of environmental, social and governance at Capital Group, which has $2.6 trillion of assets under management.\nBill Winters, the chief executive officer of Standard Chartered Plc, said earlier this month that \" it’s just not practical” to expect banks to stop financing the fossil-fuel industry, in part because to do so would undermine transition efforts, particularly in the emerging markets. And then last week, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. CEO David Solomon said his firm won’t abruptly stop working with fossil-fuel companies, stressing the need for a balanced transition to green energy that avoids higher energy prices.\nAccording to the Sunrise Project, an environmental nonprofit based in Australia, if banks are to be taken seriously on their net-zero commitments, they need to stop financing companies and projects expanding coal, oil and gas output infrastructure or power generation. And all corporate finance and underwriting of rich-world coal companies should be phased out by 2030 “at the very latest,” the group said in an email. For non-OECD countries, the deadline should be 2040, it said.\nBanks will often respond to criticisms of their fossil-fuel financing by citing their commitment to funding clean energy, Sunrise Project said. But the group characterized this as a “distraction.” Investing in clean energy doesn’t alleviate the effects of lending to the world’s worst polluters, it said.\nJPMorgan, the biggest U.S. bank, is the world’s leading provider of finance to the fossil-fuel industry and also ranks as the No. 1 underwriter of green bonds, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The New York-based firm has made about $985 million in revenue since the end of 2015 arranging debt and lending for the oil, gas and coal industries. That compares with the roughly $310 million it generated in income from green finance.\nSan Francisco-based Wells Fargo & Co. provides even more loans to the fossil-fuel industry than JPMorgan, but does far less bond underwriting. Citigroup places second among the top providers of fossil finance, from which it has generated almost $890 million in revenue during the past six years, Bloomberg data show. Bank of America is next with roughly $690 million.\nTo measure the involvement of each bank, Bloomberg’s data include the bonds and syndicated loans underwritten for companies that produce or extract oil, natural gas and coal. Those figures are assessed against the debt that each bank arranged on behalf of corporate and government issuers for eligible climate or environmental projects.\nThere are weaknesses in the data set. For example, it’s possible some portion of a loan to an oil company might have been used on a clean-energy project. Bloomberg started tracking fees that banks earn from extending loans in 2018, so fees from 2016 and 2017 might be under-represented. But none of that changes the overall picture left by the data -- namely that banks have financed hundreds of billions of dollars worth of carbon emissions.\nAt the current rate of greenhouse-gas emissions, the United Nations warns that the average global temperature is set to be 2.7 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by the end of this century. At that level of warming, whole populations will be displaced by rising sea levels, vast numbers of species will face extinction, and deadly wild fires and flooding will become far more frequent.\nThe International Energy Agency said this month that the world is woefully behind in delivering the necessary emissions cuts. “Every data point showing the speed of change in energy can be countered by another showing the stubbornness of the status quo,” the agency said in its latest report.\nAt JPMorgan, executives say they’re aware of the urgency of the moment. “Climate change is a critical issue of our time, and we are committed to doing our part to address it,” Marisa Buchanan, the firm’s global head of sustainability, said earlier this month in connection with a public commitment to carbon neutrality by mid-century.\nJPMorgan said in May that it plans to report a 35% reduction in “operational carbon intensity” for its oil and gas portfolio by the end of the decade. The commitment followed the company’s announcement last year that it was aligning its financing activities with the Paris Agreement.\nNogales called JPMorgan’s decision to join the Net-Zero Banking Alliance a “positive step.” But he also referred to it as “a high standard of action that, according to the IEA, means turning off the finance tap to new fossil-fuel projects as soon as this year.” The extent to which signatories do this will be the “real test,” and one that investors “will be watching very closely,” Nogales said.\nAn important plank of the 2015 Paris climate agreement was to involve the financial industry, reflecting the need to steer money away from activities that pollute. The latest flurry of net-zero commitments from banks and asset managers follows on from that agreement. But details on how they plan to achieve carbon neutrality 30 years from now remain scarce.\nNogales said part of the problem is that most net-zero goals are too far in the future. “The problem with very long-term targets is that it’s typically going to be a different set of executives running those businesses at that point,” he said, adding that Generation Management wants to see CO2 targets set for 2030, in line with the UN’s recommendations to halve emissions in the coming decade.\nThe latest assessment by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change “was extremely clear,” Nogales said. “We’re facing a massive emergency.”","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"CN"},{"id":856339009,"gmtCreate":1635149220186,"gmtModify":1635149220738,"author":{"id":"3582677817626222","authorId":"3582677817626222","name":"sylarspock","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/af2ee7f5466dab8465d661a72c047672","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3582677817626222","authorIdStr":"3582677817626222"},"htmlText":"Great news&nbsp;","listText":"Great news&nbsp;","text":"Great news","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/856339009","repostId":2178302447,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2178302447","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1635146319,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2178302447?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-25 15:18","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Big Banks Haven't Quit Fossil Fuel, With $4 Trillion Since Paris","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2178302447","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"As executives from JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup., Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for ","content":"<p>As executives from JPMorgan Chase &amp; Co., Citigroup.,&nbsp;Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for the most important UN climate summit in six years, their companies&nbsp;continue&nbsp;to help provide&nbsp;almost as much money for&nbsp;fossil fuels as for&nbsp;green projects.</p>\n<p>Scientists have made clear that time is running out to prevent a climate catastrophe. Yet this year alone, banks have organized&nbsp;$459&nbsp;billion of bonds and loans for the oil, gas and coal sectors, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. At the same time, they&nbsp;arranged $463&nbsp;billion worth of green bonds and loans, with fees more or less evenly split.</p>\n<p>Since the Paris Agreement at the end of 2015, banks have played a prominent role in enabling the warming that’s behind increasingly deadly storms, fires and floods. During&nbsp;the&nbsp;period, the industry generated more than $17 billion of&nbsp;fees from facilitating almost $4&nbsp;trillion of fossil-fuel&nbsp;financing. The money has helped feed carbon emissions that, at the current pace, mean temperatures will rise well above the 1.5 degrees Celsius identified as critical to avert irreversible damage.</p>\n<p>Now, as global leaders prepare to descend on Glasgow, Scotland, for the COP26 climate talks, a growing chorus of investors and activists are demanding that banks stop funding polluters -- before it’s too late.</p>\n<p>“What banks need to do is extremely clear,” said Miguel Nogales, co-chief investment officer at Generation Investment Management LLP, the $36 billion fund manager co-founded by former U.S. Vice President Al Gore. “No financing for new coal plants, no financing for new oil fields.”</p>\n<p>Next month’s talks in Glasgow have been dubbed the finance COP, meaning focus will be on the extent to which the banking&nbsp;industry is pulling its weight to help prevent carbon dioxide from spewing into the atmosphere. In the lead-up to the talks, banks and asset managers have released a deluge of climate declarations, assuring stakeholders they’re committed to eliminating net emissions from their lending and investing portfolios --&nbsp;or reaching net zero --&nbsp;by the middle of the century.</p>\n<p>On the surface, banks are acknowledging the issue. Most of the world’s biggest lenders, including JPMorgan, Citigroup, Deutsche Bank and&nbsp; Bank of America Corp., are part of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero. But in reality, they’ve yet to show that they can purge their loan books of CO2 fast enough.</p>\n<p>“At the top of many big banks, there is a realization that they will have to step back from financing certain fossil-fuel projects, but many are only just beginning this journey,” said Jessica Ground, the London-based global head of environmental, social and governance&nbsp;at Capital Group, which has $2.6&nbsp;trillion of assets under management.</p>\n<p>Bill Winters, the chief executive officer of Standard Chartered Plc, said earlier this month that \" it’s just not practical” to expect banks to stop financing the fossil-fuel industry, in part because to do so would undermine transition efforts, particularly in the emerging markets. And then last week,&nbsp;Goldman Sachs Group Inc. CEO David Solomon said his firm won’t abruptly stop working with fossil-fuel companies, stressing the need for a balanced transition to green energy that avoids higher energy prices.</p>\n<p>According to the Sunrise Project, an environmental nonprofit based in Australia, if banks are to be taken seriously on their net-zero commitments, they need to stop financing companies and projects expanding coal, oil and gas output infrastructure or power generation. And all corporate finance and underwriting of rich-world coal companies should be phased out by 2030 “at the very latest,” the group said in an email. For non-OECD countries, the deadline should be 2040, it said.</p>\n<p>Banks will often respond to criticisms of their fossil-fuel financing by citing their commitment to funding clean energy, Sunrise Project said. But the group characterized this as a “distraction.” Investing in clean energy doesn’t alleviate the effects of lending to the world’s worst polluters, it said.</p>\n<p>JPMorgan, the biggest U.S. bank, is the world’s leading provider of finance to the fossil-fuel industry and also ranks as the No. 1 underwriter of green bonds, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The New York-based firm has made about&nbsp;$985&nbsp;million in revenue since the end of 2015&nbsp;arranging debt and lending for the oil, gas and coal industries. That compares with the roughly $310 million it generated in income from green finance.</p>\n<p>San Francisco-based Wells Fargo &amp; Co. provides even more loans to the fossil-fuel industry than JPMorgan, but does far less bond underwriting. Citigroup places second&nbsp;among the top providers of fossil finance, from which it has generated almost $890&nbsp;million in revenue during the past six years, Bloomberg data show. Bank of America is next with roughly $690 million.</p>\n<p>To measure the involvement of each bank, Bloomberg’s data include the bonds and syndicated loans underwritten for companies that produce or extract oil, natural gas and coal. Those figures are assessed against the debt that&nbsp;each bank arranged on behalf of corporate and government issuers for eligible climate or environmental projects.</p>\n<p>There are weaknesses in the data set. For example, it’s possible some portion of a loan to an oil company might have been used on a clean-energy project. Bloomberg started tracking fees that banks earn from extending loans in 2018, so fees from 2016 and 2017 might be under-represented. But none of that changes the overall picture left by the data --&nbsp;namely that banks have financed hundreds of billions of dollars worth of carbon emissions.</p>\n<p>At the current rate of greenhouse-gas emissions, the United Nations warns that the average global temperature is set to be 2.7 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by the end of this century. At that level of warming, whole populations will be displaced by rising sea levels, vast numbers of species will face extinction, and deadly wild fires and flooding will become far more frequent.</p>\n<p>The International Energy Agency said this month that the world is woefully behind in delivering the necessary emissions cuts. “Every data point showing the speed of change in energy can be countered by another showing the stubbornness of the status quo,” the agency said in its latest report.</p>\n<p>At JPMorgan, executives say they’re aware of the urgency of the moment. “Climate change is a critical issue of our time, and we are committed to doing our part to address it,” Marisa Buchanan, the firm’s global head of sustainability, said earlier this month in connection with a public commitment to carbon neutrality by mid-century.</p>\n<p>JPMorgan said in May that it plans to report a 35% reduction in “operational carbon intensity” for its oil and gas portfolio by the end of the decade. The commitment followed the company’s announcement last year that it was aligning its financing activities with the Paris Agreement.</p>\n<p>Nogales called JPMorgan’s decision to join the Net-Zero Banking Alliance a “positive step.” But he also referred to it as “a high standard of action that, according to the IEA, means turning off the finance tap to new fossil-fuel projects as soon as this year.” The extent to which signatories do this will be the “real test,” and one that investors “will be watching very closely,” Nogales said.</p>\n<p>An important&nbsp;plank of the 2015 Paris climate agreement was to involve the financial industry, reflecting the need to steer money away from activities that pollute. The latest flurry of net-zero commitments from banks and asset managers follows on from that agreement. But details on how they plan to achieve carbon neutrality 30 years from now remain scarce.</p>\n<p>Nogales said&nbsp;part of the problem is that most net-zero goals are too far in the future. “The problem with very long-term targets is that it’s typically going to be a different set of executives running those businesses at that point,” he said, adding that&nbsp;Generation Management wants to see CO2 targets set for 2030, in line with the UN’s recommendations to halve emissions in the coming decade.</p>\n<p>The latest assessment by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change “was extremely clear,” Nogales said. “We’re facing a massive emergency.”</p>","source":"yahoofinance","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Big Banks Haven't Quit Fossil Fuel, With $4 Trillion Since Paris</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBig Banks Haven't Quit Fossil Fuel, With $4 Trillion Since Paris\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-25 15:18 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-banks-havent-quit-fossil-040109473.html><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>As executives from JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup., Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for the most important UN climate summit in six years, their companies continue to help provide almost ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-banks-havent-quit-fossil-040109473.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"JPM":"摩根大通"},"source_url":"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-banks-havent-quit-fossil-040109473.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/5f26f4a48f9cb3e29be4d71d3ba8c038","article_id":"2178302447","content_text":"As executives from JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup., Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for the most important UN climate summit in six years, their companies continue to help provide almost as much money for fossil fuels as for green projects.\nScientists have made clear that time is running out to prevent a climate catastrophe. Yet this year alone, banks have organized $459 billion of bonds and loans for the oil, gas and coal sectors, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. At the same time, they arranged $463 billion worth of green bonds and loans, with fees more or less evenly split.\nSince the Paris Agreement at the end of 2015, banks have played a prominent role in enabling the warming that’s behind increasingly deadly storms, fires and floods. During the period, the industry generated more than $17 billion of fees from facilitating almost $4 trillion of fossil-fuel financing. The money has helped feed carbon emissions that, at the current pace, mean temperatures will rise well above the 1.5 degrees Celsius identified as critical to avert irreversible damage.\nNow, as global leaders prepare to descend on Glasgow, Scotland, for the COP26 climate talks, a growing chorus of investors and activists are demanding that banks stop funding polluters -- before it’s too late.\n“What banks need to do is extremely clear,” said Miguel Nogales, co-chief investment officer at Generation Investment Management LLP, the $36 billion fund manager co-founded by former U.S. Vice President Al Gore. “No financing for new coal plants, no financing for new oil fields.”\nNext month’s talks in Glasgow have been dubbed the finance COP, meaning focus will be on the extent to which the banking industry is pulling its weight to help prevent carbon dioxide from spewing into the atmosphere. In the lead-up to the talks, banks and asset managers have released a deluge of climate declarations, assuring stakeholders they’re committed to eliminating net emissions from their lending and investing portfolios -- or reaching net zero -- by the middle of the century.\nOn the surface, banks are acknowledging the issue. Most of the world’s biggest lenders, including JPMorgan, Citigroup, Deutsche Bank and  Bank of America Corp., are part of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero. But in reality, they’ve yet to show that they can purge their loan books of CO2 fast enough.\n“At the top of many big banks, there is a realization that they will have to step back from financing certain fossil-fuel projects, but many are only just beginning this journey,” said Jessica Ground, the London-based global head of environmental, social and governance at Capital Group, which has $2.6 trillion of assets under management.\nBill Winters, the chief executive officer of Standard Chartered Plc, said earlier this month that \" it’s just not practical” to expect banks to stop financing the fossil-fuel industry, in part because to do so would undermine transition efforts, particularly in the emerging markets. And then last week, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. CEO David Solomon said his firm won’t abruptly stop working with fossil-fuel companies, stressing the need for a balanced transition to green energy that avoids higher energy prices.\nAccording to the Sunrise Project, an environmental nonprofit based in Australia, if banks are to be taken seriously on their net-zero commitments, they need to stop financing companies and projects expanding coal, oil and gas output infrastructure or power generation. And all corporate finance and underwriting of rich-world coal companies should be phased out by 2030 “at the very latest,” the group said in an email. For non-OECD countries, the deadline should be 2040, it said.\nBanks will often respond to criticisms of their fossil-fuel financing by citing their commitment to funding clean energy, Sunrise Project said. But the group characterized this as a “distraction.” Investing in clean energy doesn’t alleviate the effects of lending to the world’s worst polluters, it said.\nJPMorgan, the biggest U.S. bank, is the world’s leading provider of finance to the fossil-fuel industry and also ranks as the No. 1 underwriter of green bonds, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The New York-based firm has made about $985 million in revenue since the end of 2015 arranging debt and lending for the oil, gas and coal industries. That compares with the roughly $310 million it generated in income from green finance.\nSan Francisco-based Wells Fargo & Co. provides even more loans to the fossil-fuel industry than JPMorgan, but does far less bond underwriting. Citigroup places second among the top providers of fossil finance, from which it has generated almost $890 million in revenue during the past six years, Bloomberg data show. Bank of America is next with roughly $690 million.\nTo measure the involvement of each bank, Bloomberg’s data include the bonds and syndicated loans underwritten for companies that produce or extract oil, natural gas and coal. Those figures are assessed against the debt that each bank arranged on behalf of corporate and government issuers for eligible climate or environmental projects.\nThere are weaknesses in the data set. For example, it’s possible some portion of a loan to an oil company might have been used on a clean-energy project. Bloomberg started tracking fees that banks earn from extending loans in 2018, so fees from 2016 and 2017 might be under-represented. But none of that changes the overall picture left by the data -- namely that banks have financed hundreds of billions of dollars worth of carbon emissions.\nAt the current rate of greenhouse-gas emissions, the United Nations warns that the average global temperature is set to be 2.7 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by the end of this century. At that level of warming, whole populations will be displaced by rising sea levels, vast numbers of species will face extinction, and deadly wild fires and flooding will become far more frequent.\nThe International Energy Agency said this month that the world is woefully behind in delivering the necessary emissions cuts. “Every data point showing the speed of change in energy can be countered by another showing the stubbornness of the status quo,” the agency said in its latest report.\nAt JPMorgan, executives say they’re aware of the urgency of the moment. “Climate change is a critical issue of our time, and we are committed to doing our part to address it,” Marisa Buchanan, the firm’s global head of sustainability, said earlier this month in connection with a public commitment to carbon neutrality by mid-century.\nJPMorgan said in May that it plans to report a 35% reduction in “operational carbon intensity” for its oil and gas portfolio by the end of the decade. The commitment followed the company’s announcement last year that it was aligning its financing activities with the Paris Agreement.\nNogales called JPMorgan’s decision to join the Net-Zero Banking Alliance a “positive step.” But he also referred to it as “a high standard of action that, according to the IEA, means turning off the finance tap to new fossil-fuel projects as soon as this year.” The extent to which signatories do this will be the “real test,” and one that investors “will be watching very closely,” Nogales said.\nAn important plank of the 2015 Paris climate agreement was to involve the financial industry, reflecting the need to steer money away from activities that pollute. The latest flurry of net-zero commitments from banks and asset managers follows on from that agreement. But details on how they plan to achieve carbon neutrality 30 years from now remain scarce.\nNogales said part of the problem is that most net-zero goals are too far in the future. “The problem with very long-term targets is that it’s typically going to be a different set of executives running those businesses at that point,” he said, adding that Generation Management wants to see CO2 targets set for 2030, in line with the UN’s recommendations to halve emissions in the coming decade.\nThe latest assessment by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change “was extremely clear,” Nogales said. “We’re facing a massive emergency.”","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"CN"},{"id":856944355,"gmtCreate":1635146449498,"gmtModify":1635146449874,"author":{"id":"3562791266647459","authorId":"3562791266647459","name":"Atsc89","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9ec47b1c36e59ba1ef8caac8ab619319","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3562791266647459","authorIdStr":"3562791266647459"},"htmlText":"Like pls","listText":"Like pls","text":"Like pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/856944355","repostId":2178302447,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2178302447","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1635146319,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2178302447?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-25 15:18","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Big Banks Haven't Quit Fossil Fuel, With $4 Trillion Since Paris","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2178302447","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"As executives from JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup., Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for ","content":"<p>As executives from JPMorgan Chase &amp; Co., Citigroup.,&nbsp;Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for the most important UN climate summit in six years, their companies&nbsp;continue&nbsp;to help provide&nbsp;almost as much money for&nbsp;fossil fuels as for&nbsp;green projects.</p>\n<p>Scientists have made clear that time is running out to prevent a climate catastrophe. Yet this year alone, banks have organized&nbsp;$459&nbsp;billion of bonds and loans for the oil, gas and coal sectors, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. At the same time, they&nbsp;arranged $463&nbsp;billion worth of green bonds and loans, with fees more or less evenly split.</p>\n<p>Since the Paris Agreement at the end of 2015, banks have played a prominent role in enabling the warming that’s behind increasingly deadly storms, fires and floods. During&nbsp;the&nbsp;period, the industry generated more than $17 billion of&nbsp;fees from facilitating almost $4&nbsp;trillion of fossil-fuel&nbsp;financing. The money has helped feed carbon emissions that, at the current pace, mean temperatures will rise well above the 1.5 degrees Celsius identified as critical to avert irreversible damage.</p>\n<p>Now, as global leaders prepare to descend on Glasgow, Scotland, for the COP26 climate talks, a growing chorus of investors and activists are demanding that banks stop funding polluters -- before it’s too late.</p>\n<p>“What banks need to do is extremely clear,” said Miguel Nogales, co-chief investment officer at Generation Investment Management LLP, the $36 billion fund manager co-founded by former U.S. Vice President Al Gore. “No financing for new coal plants, no financing for new oil fields.”</p>\n<p>Next month’s talks in Glasgow have been dubbed the finance COP, meaning focus will be on the extent to which the banking&nbsp;industry is pulling its weight to help prevent carbon dioxide from spewing into the atmosphere. In the lead-up to the talks, banks and asset managers have released a deluge of climate declarations, assuring stakeholders they’re committed to eliminating net emissions from their lending and investing portfolios --&nbsp;or reaching net zero --&nbsp;by the middle of the century.</p>\n<p>On the surface, banks are acknowledging the issue. Most of the world’s biggest lenders, including JPMorgan, Citigroup, Deutsche Bank and&nbsp; Bank of America Corp., are part of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero. But in reality, they’ve yet to show that they can purge their loan books of CO2 fast enough.</p>\n<p>“At the top of many big banks, there is a realization that they will have to step back from financing certain fossil-fuel projects, but many are only just beginning this journey,” said Jessica Ground, the London-based global head of environmental, social and governance&nbsp;at Capital Group, which has $2.6&nbsp;trillion of assets under management.</p>\n<p>Bill Winters, the chief executive officer of Standard Chartered Plc, said earlier this month that \" it’s just not practical” to expect banks to stop financing the fossil-fuel industry, in part because to do so would undermine transition efforts, particularly in the emerging markets. And then last week,&nbsp;Goldman Sachs Group Inc. CEO David Solomon said his firm won’t abruptly stop working with fossil-fuel companies, stressing the need for a balanced transition to green energy that avoids higher energy prices.</p>\n<p>According to the Sunrise Project, an environmental nonprofit based in Australia, if banks are to be taken seriously on their net-zero commitments, they need to stop financing companies and projects expanding coal, oil and gas output infrastructure or power generation. And all corporate finance and underwriting of rich-world coal companies should be phased out by 2030 “at the very latest,” the group said in an email. For non-OECD countries, the deadline should be 2040, it said.</p>\n<p>Banks will often respond to criticisms of their fossil-fuel financing by citing their commitment to funding clean energy, Sunrise Project said. But the group characterized this as a “distraction.” Investing in clean energy doesn’t alleviate the effects of lending to the world’s worst polluters, it said.</p>\n<p>JPMorgan, the biggest U.S. bank, is the world’s leading provider of finance to the fossil-fuel industry and also ranks as the No. 1 underwriter of green bonds, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The New York-based firm has made about&nbsp;$985&nbsp;million in revenue since the end of 2015&nbsp;arranging debt and lending for the oil, gas and coal industries. That compares with the roughly $310 million it generated in income from green finance.</p>\n<p>San Francisco-based Wells Fargo &amp; Co. provides even more loans to the fossil-fuel industry than JPMorgan, but does far less bond underwriting. Citigroup places second&nbsp;among the top providers of fossil finance, from which it has generated almost $890&nbsp;million in revenue during the past six years, Bloomberg data show. Bank of America is next with roughly $690 million.</p>\n<p>To measure the involvement of each bank, Bloomberg’s data include the bonds and syndicated loans underwritten for companies that produce or extract oil, natural gas and coal. Those figures are assessed against the debt that&nbsp;each bank arranged on behalf of corporate and government issuers for eligible climate or environmental projects.</p>\n<p>There are weaknesses in the data set. For example, it’s possible some portion of a loan to an oil company might have been used on a clean-energy project. Bloomberg started tracking fees that banks earn from extending loans in 2018, so fees from 2016 and 2017 might be under-represented. But none of that changes the overall picture left by the data --&nbsp;namely that banks have financed hundreds of billions of dollars worth of carbon emissions.</p>\n<p>At the current rate of greenhouse-gas emissions, the United Nations warns that the average global temperature is set to be 2.7 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by the end of this century. At that level of warming, whole populations will be displaced by rising sea levels, vast numbers of species will face extinction, and deadly wild fires and flooding will become far more frequent.</p>\n<p>The International Energy Agency said this month that the world is woefully behind in delivering the necessary emissions cuts. “Every data point showing the speed of change in energy can be countered by another showing the stubbornness of the status quo,” the agency said in its latest report.</p>\n<p>At JPMorgan, executives say they’re aware of the urgency of the moment. “Climate change is a critical issue of our time, and we are committed to doing our part to address it,” Marisa Buchanan, the firm’s global head of sustainability, said earlier this month in connection with a public commitment to carbon neutrality by mid-century.</p>\n<p>JPMorgan said in May that it plans to report a 35% reduction in “operational carbon intensity” for its oil and gas portfolio by the end of the decade. The commitment followed the company’s announcement last year that it was aligning its financing activities with the Paris Agreement.</p>\n<p>Nogales called JPMorgan’s decision to join the Net-Zero Banking Alliance a “positive step.” But he also referred to it as “a high standard of action that, according to the IEA, means turning off the finance tap to new fossil-fuel projects as soon as this year.” The extent to which signatories do this will be the “real test,” and one that investors “will be watching very closely,” Nogales said.</p>\n<p>An important&nbsp;plank of the 2015 Paris climate agreement was to involve the financial industry, reflecting the need to steer money away from activities that pollute. The latest flurry of net-zero commitments from banks and asset managers follows on from that agreement. But details on how they plan to achieve carbon neutrality 30 years from now remain scarce.</p>\n<p>Nogales said&nbsp;part of the problem is that most net-zero goals are too far in the future. “The problem with very long-term targets is that it’s typically going to be a different set of executives running those businesses at that point,” he said, adding that&nbsp;Generation Management wants to see CO2 targets set for 2030, in line with the UN’s recommendations to halve emissions in the coming decade.</p>\n<p>The latest assessment by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change “was extremely clear,” Nogales said. “We’re facing a massive emergency.”</p>","source":"yahoofinance","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Big Banks Haven't Quit Fossil Fuel, With $4 Trillion Since Paris</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBig Banks Haven't Quit Fossil Fuel, With $4 Trillion Since Paris\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-25 15:18 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-banks-havent-quit-fossil-040109473.html><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>As executives from JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup., Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for the most important UN climate summit in six years, their companies continue to help provide almost ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-banks-havent-quit-fossil-040109473.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"JPM":"摩根大通"},"source_url":"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-banks-havent-quit-fossil-040109473.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/5f26f4a48f9cb3e29be4d71d3ba8c038","article_id":"2178302447","content_text":"As executives from JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup., Deutsche Bank AG and other lenders prepare for the most important UN climate summit in six years, their companies continue to help provide almost as much money for fossil fuels as for green projects.\nScientists have made clear that time is running out to prevent a climate catastrophe. Yet this year alone, banks have organized $459 billion of bonds and loans for the oil, gas and coal sectors, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. At the same time, they arranged $463 billion worth of green bonds and loans, with fees more or less evenly split.\nSince the Paris Agreement at the end of 2015, banks have played a prominent role in enabling the warming that’s behind increasingly deadly storms, fires and floods. During the period, the industry generated more than $17 billion of fees from facilitating almost $4 trillion of fossil-fuel financing. The money has helped feed carbon emissions that, at the current pace, mean temperatures will rise well above the 1.5 degrees Celsius identified as critical to avert irreversible damage.\nNow, as global leaders prepare to descend on Glasgow, Scotland, for the COP26 climate talks, a growing chorus of investors and activists are demanding that banks stop funding polluters -- before it’s too late.\n“What banks need to do is extremely clear,” said Miguel Nogales, co-chief investment officer at Generation Investment Management LLP, the $36 billion fund manager co-founded by former U.S. Vice President Al Gore. “No financing for new coal plants, no financing for new oil fields.”\nNext month’s talks in Glasgow have been dubbed the finance COP, meaning focus will be on the extent to which the banking industry is pulling its weight to help prevent carbon dioxide from spewing into the atmosphere. In the lead-up to the talks, banks and asset managers have released a deluge of climate declarations, assuring stakeholders they’re committed to eliminating net emissions from their lending and investing portfolios -- or reaching net zero -- by the middle of the century.\nOn the surface, banks are acknowledging the issue. Most of the world’s biggest lenders, including JPMorgan, Citigroup, Deutsche Bank and  Bank of America Corp., are part of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero. But in reality, they’ve yet to show that they can purge their loan books of CO2 fast enough.\n“At the top of many big banks, there is a realization that they will have to step back from financing certain fossil-fuel projects, but many are only just beginning this journey,” said Jessica Ground, the London-based global head of environmental, social and governance at Capital Group, which has $2.6 trillion of assets under management.\nBill Winters, the chief executive officer of Standard Chartered Plc, said earlier this month that \" it’s just not practical” to expect banks to stop financing the fossil-fuel industry, in part because to do so would undermine transition efforts, particularly in the emerging markets. And then last week, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. CEO David Solomon said his firm won’t abruptly stop working with fossil-fuel companies, stressing the need for a balanced transition to green energy that avoids higher energy prices.\nAccording to the Sunrise Project, an environmental nonprofit based in Australia, if banks are to be taken seriously on their net-zero commitments, they need to stop financing companies and projects expanding coal, oil and gas output infrastructure or power generation. And all corporate finance and underwriting of rich-world coal companies should be phased out by 2030 “at the very latest,” the group said in an email. For non-OECD countries, the deadline should be 2040, it said.\nBanks will often respond to criticisms of their fossil-fuel financing by citing their commitment to funding clean energy, Sunrise Project said. But the group characterized this as a “distraction.” Investing in clean energy doesn’t alleviate the effects of lending to the world’s worst polluters, it said.\nJPMorgan, the biggest U.S. bank, is the world’s leading provider of finance to the fossil-fuel industry and also ranks as the No. 1 underwriter of green bonds, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The New York-based firm has made about $985 million in revenue since the end of 2015 arranging debt and lending for the oil, gas and coal industries. That compares with the roughly $310 million it generated in income from green finance.\nSan Francisco-based Wells Fargo & Co. provides even more loans to the fossil-fuel industry than JPMorgan, but does far less bond underwriting. Citigroup places second among the top providers of fossil finance, from which it has generated almost $890 million in revenue during the past six years, Bloomberg data show. Bank of America is next with roughly $690 million.\nTo measure the involvement of each bank, Bloomberg’s data include the bonds and syndicated loans underwritten for companies that produce or extract oil, natural gas and coal. Those figures are assessed against the debt that each bank arranged on behalf of corporate and government issuers for eligible climate or environmental projects.\nThere are weaknesses in the data set. For example, it’s possible some portion of a loan to an oil company might have been used on a clean-energy project. Bloomberg started tracking fees that banks earn from extending loans in 2018, so fees from 2016 and 2017 might be under-represented. But none of that changes the overall picture left by the data -- namely that banks have financed hundreds of billions of dollars worth of carbon emissions.\nAt the current rate of greenhouse-gas emissions, the United Nations warns that the average global temperature is set to be 2.7 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by the end of this century. At that level of warming, whole populations will be displaced by rising sea levels, vast numbers of species will face extinction, and deadly wild fires and flooding will become far more frequent.\nThe International Energy Agency said this month that the world is woefully behind in delivering the necessary emissions cuts. “Every data point showing the speed of change in energy can be countered by another showing the stubbornness of the status quo,” the agency said in its latest report.\nAt JPMorgan, executives say they’re aware of the urgency of the moment. “Climate change is a critical issue of our time, and we are committed to doing our part to address it,” Marisa Buchanan, the firm’s global head of sustainability, said earlier this month in connection with a public commitment to carbon neutrality by mid-century.\nJPMorgan said in May that it plans to report a 35% reduction in “operational carbon intensity” for its oil and gas portfolio by the end of the decade. The commitment followed the company’s announcement last year that it was aligning its financing activities with the Paris Agreement.\nNogales called JPMorgan’s decision to join the Net-Zero Banking Alliance a “positive step.” But he also referred to it as “a high standard of action that, according to the IEA, means turning off the finance tap to new fossil-fuel projects as soon as this year.” The extent to which signatories do this will be the “real test,” and one that investors “will be watching very closely,” Nogales said.\nAn important plank of the 2015 Paris climate agreement was to involve the financial industry, reflecting the need to steer money away from activities that pollute. The latest flurry of net-zero commitments from banks and asset managers follows on from that agreement. But details on how they plan to achieve carbon neutrality 30 years from now remain scarce.\nNogales said part of the problem is that most net-zero goals are too far in the future. “The problem with very long-term targets is that it’s typically going to be a different set of executives running those businesses at that point,” he said, adding that Generation Management wants to see CO2 targets set for 2030, in line with the UN’s recommendations to halve emissions in the coming decade.\nThe latest assessment by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change “was extremely clear,” Nogales said. “We’re facing a massive emergency.”","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":6317176,"gmtCreate":1635149212399,"gmtModify":1635149212442,"authorId":3582677817626222,"author":{"id":3582677817626222,"idStr":"3582677817626222","authorId":3582677817626222,"name":"sylarspock","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/af2ee7f5466dab8465d661a72c047672","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":856944355,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Wow","text":"Wow","html":"Wow"},{"id":6317036,"gmtCreate":1635147961404,"gmtModify":1635147961502,"authorId":3572489627147183,"author":{"id":3572489627147183,"idStr":"3572489627147183","authorId":3572489627147183,"name":"TeslaLegend","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/180ad6f06095bcbf2b6594d26c494752","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":856944355,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Nice","text":"Nice","html":"Nice"}],"langContent":"CN"}],"hasMoreComments":true,"newsSizeData":{"likeSize":19,"commentSize":4,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":0,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false}}