echemi logo
Product
  • Product
  • Supplier
  • Inquiry
    Home > Chemicals Industry > International Chemical > G20 countries provide $77 billion annually in public finance for fossil fuel projects

    G20 countries provide $77 billion annually in public finance for fossil fuel projects

    • Last Update: 2023-01-03
    • Source: Internet
    • Author: User
    Search more information of high quality chemicals, good prices and reliable suppliers, visit www.echemi.com

    New reports released by Friends of the Earth and Oil Change International show that G20 countries have provided at least $77 billion a year in public funding
    for oil, gas and coal projects since the Paris climate agreement was reached.

    The report argues that G20 government-backed export credit agencies, development finance institutions and multilateral development banks support fossil fuels more than three times as much as they provide to clean energy, although some financial institutions in G20 countries are phasing out fossil fuel investments, but this is far from enough
    .

    As G20 governments prepare trillions of dollars in stimulus spending in response to COVID-19, the new report shows that their public finances have so far been very different from the money needed to limit warming to 1.
    5°C
    .
    The report urges governments to stop using public funds to prop up the fossil fuel sector and instead invest in a sustainable recovery
    .

    Kate DeAngelis, senior international policy analyst at Friends of the Earth, said: "G20 countries are still subsidizing
    the fossil fuel industry.

    "Fossil fuel companies know their days are over
    .
    Their lobbyists are using the COVID-19 crisis as a cover to try to secure the flood of new government aid they depend on for survival," said
    Bronwen Tucker, research analyst at Oil Change International.
    "Government funding must support a just transition from fossil fuels to protect workers, communities and the climate, both within and outside their borders
    .
    Instead of financing another major crisis (climate change), our governments should invest in a resilient future
    .

    Anabela Lemos, director of Justicia Ambiental, said: "Such a high investment would generate billions of dollars in profits for foreign companies like Total, which is already causing poverty and oppression to already vulnerable local communities, which is unacceptable
    .

    Using data from the International Petroleum Change Organization's database, the report analyzes public energy finance from G20 export credit agencies (ECAs) and development finance
    institutions (DFIs) and G20 countries-controlled multilateral development banks (MDBs).
    It does not include direct subsidies provided to the industry through taxes and fiscal subsidies
    .

    The analysis found that support for fossil fuels has not diminished
    since the Paris Agreement was signed.
    Efforts to reduce coal financing suffered a major setback, with G20 countries increasing their annual support for coal by an average of $1.
    3 billion
    between 2016-2018 compared to 2013-2015.
    Support for oil and gas has held steady at $64 billion a year, suggesting that public financial institutions are far from aligning their financing with the adjustments needed to limit warming to the internationally agreed limit of 1.
    5°C
    .

    Export credit agencies (ECAs) are the worst-performing public finance agencies, supporting fossil fuels nearly 14 times more than clean energy, with fossil fuels at $40.
    1 billion a year and clean $2.
    9 billion
    .



    New reports released by Friends of the Earth and Oil Change International show that G20 countries have provided at least $77 billion a year in public funding
    for oil, gas and coal projects since the Paris climate agreement was reached.

    G20

    The report argues that G20 government-backed export credit agencies, development finance institutions and multilateral development banks support fossil fuels more than three times as much as they provide to clean energy, although some financial institutions in G20 countries are phasing out fossil fuel investments, but this is far from enough
    .

    As G20 governments prepare trillions of dollars in stimulus spending in response to COVID-19, the new report shows that their public finances have so far been very different from the money needed to limit warming to 1.
    5°C
    .
    The report urges governments to stop using public funds to prop up the fossil fuel sector and instead invest in a sustainable recovery
    .

    Kate DeAngelis, senior international policy analyst at Friends of the Earth, said: "G20 countries are still subsidizing
    the fossil fuel industry.

    "Fossil fuel companies know their days are over
    .
    Their lobbyists are using the COVID-19 crisis as a cover to try to secure the flood of new government aid they depend on for survival," said
    Bronwen Tucker, research analyst at Oil Change International.
    "Government funding must support a just transition from fossil fuels to protect workers, communities and the climate, both within and outside their borders
    .
    Instead of financing another major crisis (climate change), our governments should invest in a resilient future
    .

    Anabela Lemos, director of Justicia Ambiental, said: "Such a high investment would generate billions of dollars in profits for foreign companies like Total, which is already causing poverty and oppression to already vulnerable local communities, which is unacceptable
    .

    Using data from the International Petroleum Change Organization's database, the report analyzes public energy finance from G20 export credit agencies (ECAs) and development finance
    institutions (DFIs) and G20 countries-controlled multilateral development banks (MDBs).
    It does not include direct subsidies provided to the industry through taxes and fiscal subsidies
    .

    The analysis found that support for fossil fuels has not diminished
    since the Paris Agreement was signed.
    Efforts to reduce coal financing suffered a major setback, with G20 countries increasing their annual support for coal by an average of $1.
    3 billion
    between 2016-2018 compared to 2013-2015.
    Support for oil and gas has held steady at $64 billion a year, suggesting that public financial institutions are far from aligning their financing with the adjustments needed to limit warming to the internationally agreed limit of 1.
    5°C
    .

    Export credit agencies (ECAs) are the worst-performing public finance agencies, supporting fossil fuels nearly 14 times more than clean energy, with fossil fuels at $40.
    1 billion a year and clean $2.
    9 billion
    .


    This article is an English version of an article which is originally in the Chinese language on echemi.com and is provided for information purposes only. This website makes no representation or warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness ownership or reliability of the article or any translations thereof. If you have any concerns or complaints relating to the article, please send an email, providing a detailed description of the concern or complaint, to service@echemi.com. A staff member will contact you within 5 working days. Once verified, infringing content will be removed immediately.

    Contact Us

    The source of this page with content of products and services is from Internet, which doesn't represent ECHEMI's opinion. If you have any queries, please write to service@echemi.com. It will be replied within 5 days.

    Moreover, if you find any instances of plagiarism from the page, please send email to service@echemi.com with relevant evidence.