According to a new report, last year the world’s largest financial institutions allocated $906 billion to the fossil fuel sector. Experts call this investment surge “unthinkable”: amid the ongoing overheating of the planet, such infusions guarantee the expansion of coal, oil, and gas extraction for many years to come.
The coalition of environmental organizations that prepared the analysis notes that the volume of new lending increased by $64 billion (almost 8%) compared to 2024, writes The Guardian.
This proves that the decisions of the 65 largest banks on the planet directly contradict international agreements to curb climate change.
The absolute leader in fossil fuel financing once again became the American conglomerate JPMorgan Chase. As stated in the annual report Banking on Climate Chaos, last year the bank directed $58 billion to this sector — 13% more than in 2024.
Bank of America took the second spot in terms of financing volumes, followed by Japanese holdings MUFG and Mizuho Financial. Another American giant, Citigroup, rounds out the top five. British Barclays is in eighth place, becoming the leader in investment volume among UK banks.
“We hoped that last year would be a turning point when historical financing figures would finally begin to steadily decline. Instead, we recorded growth that continues to this day,” comments Caleb Schwartz, policy analyst at the Rainforest Action Network, co-author of the report. “This is an extremely alarming trend.”
In response to a request for comment, a representative of JPMorgan Chase stated:
“As one of the world’s largest investors in energy, we support the full spectrum of technological solutions in this field. Our priority is the reliability, affordability, security, and long-term sustainability of energy systems. We are convinced that our own data reflects the structure of our activities much more fully and accurately than external assessments.”
Stakes are rising, commitments are collapsing
In 2015, under the Paris Climate Agreement, world leaders pledged to make every effort to keep the rise in global temperature within 1.5 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial times. Exceeding these limits threatens the planet with catastrophic heatwaves, floods, droughts, and other cataclysms.
To prevent disaster, emissions from burning fossil fuels must be virtually reduced to zero. However, since the signing of the Paris Agreement, the world’s largest banks have directed a colossal $8.7 trillion to the exploration and extraction of coal, oil, and gas.
Today, scientists predict that the 1.5 degrees Celsius threshold will be exceeded in the very near future: a series of temperature records in recent years is likely to be broken already this decade.
The situation is exacerbated by geopolitical events. Amid strikes by the US and Israel on Iran, global oil and gas prices have sharply increased, causing major commodity corporations to report explosive profit growth this year.
“Oil and gas corporations are not going to give up without a fight,” claims Nico Lusiani, a climate and energy expert who served as the editor of the report. “They are doubling down, continuing to expand an energy system that is becoming increasingly fragile, unreliable, and risky.”
Investments in fossil fuels are increasingly concentrated in the hands of a narrow circle of players. The so-called “dirty dozen” financial institutions now account for 40% of all funds allocated to the sector. Almost the entire volume of financing comes from six jurisdictions: the US, Canada, Japan, China, the UK, and the European Union.
Although 26 of the 65 largest banks reduced their lending volumes to the sector last year (with European BNP Paribas, UBS, and La Caixa cutting financing most actively), oil and gas giants do not feel a liquidity shortage. Banks allocated $508 billion solely for the expansion of existing fields, which is 27% more than the 2024 figures. The largest recipients of borrowed funds in 2025 were three American operators: Venture Global, Enbridge, and Energy Transfer.
Political U-turn
Previously, many financial giants loudly announced plans to reduce their carbon footprint and limit lending to the most environmentally “dirty” industries, including coal. However, amid the political triumph of Donald Trump, who calls the climate crisis “nonsense” and demands the removal of all restrictions on oil and gas extraction, banks have begun to massively abandon their environmental commitments.
Last year, the Net-Zero Banking Alliance ceased to exist — a UN-supported coalition aimed at aligning banks’ lending policies with a net-zero emissions scenario by 2050. The organization disbanded after several key participants left.
“We see many banks — some quietly, some publicly — backtracking under political pressure, especially in the US,” notes Lusiani.
He added: “The era of voluntary climate commitments has not worked on the scale we need. This is a signal that financial regulators, lawmakers, and politicians — especially in the six major financial centers of the world — must take a much tougher stance.”
The stance of other financial giants
A representative of Bank of America, responding to journalists’ inquiries, emphasized that the bank supports “the widest range of clients in both renewable and traditional energy sectors, providing them with capital and expert support to achieve their goals — including the development of clean technologies and ensuring energy availability and security in increasingly complex global conditions.”
In turn, Citigroup stated that the company “helps clients transition to low-carbon pathways, but also recognizes society’s acute need for safe and affordable energy right now. We remain committed to achieving net-zero carbon emissions from our investments by 2050 and intend to allocate $1 trillion for sustainable financing, striving to balance between the green transition and stability.
