- Global fossil fuel financing rose
by $162.5 billion in 2024
- 65 major banks committed $869
billion to fossil fuel companies
- Top US banks JPMorgan, Bank of America,
and Citi led the surge
- Fossil fuel expansion financing
also increased after two years of decline
- US banks alone accounted for
nearly one-third of total global fossil fuel financing
- Several major banks rolled back
climate coalition commitments
- Banks accused of exploiting
policy loopholes to continue fossil fuel support
- Critics question the credibility
of clients' energy transition plans
- Researchers claim banks ignored
due diligence in climate risk assessment
- Report reflects growing tension
between political pressure and climate action
Fossil fuel financing surged in 2024 as the world’s biggest banks reversed a two-year decline in funding the sector, according to the newly released Banking on Climate Chaos report.
The data reveals that 65 global banks provided $869 billion to fossil fuel companies in 2024, marking a $162.5 billion year-over-year jump and an abrupt deviation from prior efforts to curb fossil fuel expansion.
The report, compiled by the Rainforest Action Network, Sierra Club, Reclaim Finance and other environmental organisations, outlines a widespread resurgence in fossil fuel funding, with 45 of the covered banks increasing their commitments compared to the previous year.
Topping the list were the usual suspects – JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, and Citi – who not only led fossil fuel financing overall but also topped the charts for funding expansion projects.
The data paints a stark picture of backsliding, particularly in the United States, where major banks have begun distancing themselves from public climate commitments.
U.S. lenders contributed $289 billion to fossil fuel projects in 2024, nearly one-third of all global financing covered by the report. That figure includes significant contributions from Wells Fargo and Barclays, with each of the top four banks upping their investments by more than $10 billion.
“This is a pretty significant year for the report, given the reverse in trajectory,” said Caleb Schwartz, Senior Research Strategist at RAN. “Banks are putting money into fossil fuels and into expansionism, despite everything we know about climate risk.”
Climate campaigners were quick to condemn the shift. Jessye Waxman, a senior strategist with the Sierra Club’s Fossil-Free Finance Campaign, labelled the retreat “deeply irresponsible” and a “capitulation to political pressure.”
She said banks must realign with credible transition plans and genuinely support decarbonisation efforts rather than defaulting to short-term gains.
The report also highlights a critical gap in current bank policies. While many institutions have banned project-level funding for new fossil fuel developments, these same banks continue financing parent companies behind such initiatives.
This discrepancy, say the report’s authors, is exploited to maintain financial relationships with major emitters under the guise of facilitating their transition.
Allison Fajans-Turner, Policy Lead at RAN, said too many banks are either failing to vet the credibility of their clients’ energy transition plans or are wilfully choosing to ignore the inadequacies.
“What we’re seeing is a set of policies full of loopholes,” she said. “Third-party experts have evaluated these transition plans and found them lacking in substance.”
The data collection covered over 2,700 fossil fuel-linked subsidiaries and 1,800 parent companies. Banks were given the opportunity to review and confirm the data prior to the report’s publication, ensuring transparency in the findings.