20 Climate Killing Banks - Chase spends $22 billion annually on coal
It just gets too easy to blame banks these days - especially with lists like this. When an Chase Banks spends an estimated $22 billion annually on coal investments and JP Morgan funds mountaintop removal, they deserve to be featured on a list called the Top 20 Climate Killing Banks. Thank you to the ethical banking organization, Bank Track for their analyis.
Numbers are after the jump:
The Top Twenty Climate Killer Banks
Bank |
in million Euro |
Ranking |
JPMorgan Chase |
16,540 |
1 |
Citi |
13,751 |
2 |
Bank of America |
12,590 |
3 |
Morgan Stanley |
12,117 |
4 |
Barclays |
11,514 |
5 |
Deutsche Bank |
11,477 |
6 |
Royal Bank of Scotland |
10,946 |
7 |
BNP Paribas |
10,694 |
8 |
Credit Suisse |
9,495 |
9 |
UBS |
8,217 |
10 |
Goldman Sachs |
6,770 |
11 |
Bank of China |
6,323 |
12 |
Industrial and Commercial Bank of China |
6,182 |
13 |
Crédit Agricole / Calyon |
5,637 |
14 |
UniCredit / HVB |
5,231 |
15 |
China Construction Bank |
5,110 |
16 |
Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group |
4,980 |
17 |
Société Générale |
4,742 |
18 |
Wells Fargo |
4,523 |
19 |
HSBC |
4,432 |
20 |
Data provided by Profundo |
From Treehugger:
As you can see, the runners up are also big American banks. Citi invests $18.27 billion annually, and Bank of America dumps $16.79 billion into the coal industry.
The report also explains the objective of revealing these numbers, noting that "Coal-fired power plants are not cheap to build. Typically, a 600 Megawatt plant will cost around US$ 2 billion. Power producers therefore rely heavily on banks to provide and mobilize the necessary capital for coal plants."
BankTrack also quotes Tristen Taylor of Earthlife Africa Johannesburg, with a startling observation: "Our figures clearly show that coal financing is on the rise. Between 2005 and 2010, coal financing almost doubled. If we don't take Banks to task now, coal financing will continue to grow." And more coal financing means more coal plants. And more coal plants means more greenhouse gas emissions. And more ... you get the picture.
The report showcases yet another way in which the 1% is exerting their influence at the expense of the 99% -- who, it should be noted, call for more investment in clean energy every year in clear majorities.