Big banks provided more than twice as much finance for fossil fuels as for sustainable alternatives between 2021-2024, according to a new report published today by Reclaim Finance and partners (1), comparing for the first time finance for fossil fuels with finance for sustainable power. The analysis shows that the biggest 65 banks are not on track when it comes to financing the energy transition. NGOs are urging banks to reduce their financing for fossil fuels, with an immediate end to their expansion, while significantly increasing finance for energy transition.

The new report Banking on Business as Usual, shows that between 2021 and 2024 just US$1,368 billion was allocated to sustainable power such as solar, wind, and related infrastructure (2), while US$3,285 billion was allocated to fossil fuels. This generates a financing ratio of 0.42:1, which means for each dollar allocated to fossil fuels, just 42 cents went to sustainable alternatives.

At the bottom of the ranking, US and Canadian banks provide four times more finance for fossil fuels than for sustainable alternatives (with ratios of 0.25:1 and 0.22:1, respectively), outpaced by Japanese banks (0.35:1) and Chinese banks (0.52:1). European banks have the best ratio (0.70:1) but still fall well below what is needed to drive forward the energy transition.

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), annual investments in fossil fuels must fall by 60% by 2030, while investments in alternatives must more than double, reaching a ratio of 6:1 (for every $1 allocated to fossil fuels, $6 must be allocated to alternatives) (3).

"The energy transition is a major opportunity for banks, but they are still focusing in the wrong direction. The world’s biggest banks are not doing anywhere near enough to support the shift from fossil fuels to sustainable alternatives. While European banks are slightly ahead, they cannot claim to be backing the energy transition while still financing business as usual. Banks must walk the talk: step away from fossil fuels and increase their financing for sustainable alternatives." said Rémi Hermant, campaigner at Reclaim Finance.

Four banks have published their own figures for their energy transition ratio (4), including Citi bank which revealed details last month. Meanwhile, RBC backtracked on its commitment to publish its ratio and only disclosed its methodology.

Being transparent does not necessarily mean banks have a good financing ratio. JPMC was the first US bank to publish its ratio, but as the biggest financier of fossil fuels, it comes in at 54th in the ranking, providing on average five times more finance for fossil fuels than for sustainable alternatives.

Key questions also remain about the way in which banks calculate their energy supply financing ratio. Some banks are leaving out key sectors, such as LNG terminals (BNP Paribas, Crédit Agricole, and Citi) or gas power plants (BNP Paribas, Crédit Agricole). Alternatively, the “low carbon” financing can include unsustainable options, such as biomass. JPMorgan Chase even includes fossil power plants with carbon capture as “low carbon”.

Earlier this year, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres said “the transition is not yet fast enough or fair enough” (5). Our analysis shows that indeed, 93% of financing allocated to sustainable alternatives is concentrated in companies and projects in OECD countries and China, despite the urgent need for financing in the rest of the world.

Reclaim Finance and partners are calling on banks to reduce financing for fossil fuels, immediately end all support for fossil fuel expansion, and to significantly increase financing for sustainable alternatives, particularly in the power sector, by introducing sectoral targets, enabling a ratio of at least 6:1 to be achieved by 2030.

"This report demonstrates that most banks remain out of step with scientific recommendations. They will continue to be, unless they immediately halt financing for companies expanding fossil fuel operations. At the same time, banks must significantly increase investments in genuine renewable energy solutions—while avoiding false solutions like carbon capture and storage, biofuels, and solid biomass, which are incompatible with a just and sustainable energy transition." said Quentin Aubineau, policy analyst at BankTrack.

"It is damning that UK banks are performing the worst on average against their European peers. HSBC, Europe’s largest bank, has not increased its financing for sustainable alternatives at all on average since 2021, showing that the bank is headed in the wrong direction whilst devastating climate impacts like extreme heat and flooding are accelerating around the world. Given the bank’s size and exposure across Europe and Asia, it is even more vulnerable than some of its European peers to climate risks and must use its influence to help scale up sustainable power in the areas that need it most." said Billie Salkeld from ShareAction.

"While the world is burning, major German banks continue to pour gasoline on the fire. Deutsche Bank, in particular, is failing to transform its business model. Instead of promoting sustainable energies, it has actually cut back on financing them while simultaneously increasing its support for risky fossil fuels. This short-sighted strategy exacerbates the climate crisis and jeopardizes the financial sector’s stability." said Philipp Noack, Finance Campaigner at Urgewald.

"For years, the Banking on Climate Chaos report has tracked the hundreds of billions flowing from the world’s biggest banks to fossil fuels. Now, this new analysis shows banks are failing to deliver on both sides of the energy transition financing equation: not only clinging to financing fossil fuels but also neglecting to put money behind sustainable power, leaving the transition underfunded and off-track. Banks in North America and Japan stand out as the worst performers—with the highest rates of finance directed towards fossil fuels and the least contributed to renewables. To change course, banks must immediately halt finance for fossil fuel expansion and channel serious capital into the supply of credible clean energy." said Allison Fajans-Turner, Bank Engagement and Policy Lead at Rainforest Action Network.

"Yet again, U.S. banks are throwing dirty, expensive fossil fuels a lifeline in the midst of a climate and affordability crisis. This report reveals that banks like Citi and JPMorgan Chase will scrape the bottom of the oil barrel to prioritize profits for itself and its fossil fuel industry friends while the rest of us struggle." said Hannah Saggau, Climate Finance Campaigner for Stand.Earth.

"While Canada experiences one of the worst climate-fueled fire seasons on record, Canadian banks like RBC and Scotiabank continue to overfinance fossil fuel company laggards and underfund renewables, thereby hindering the energy transition and putting communities at risk." said Richard Brooks, Climate Finance Director at Stand.Earth.

"Financing solar and storage is not only an investment in sustainable energy, it’s an investment in new jobs, economic growth, and energy security. But this report shows that banks are still investing in our past, and not our future. This is especially urgent in emerging markets, where the cost of capital can be up to 7 times higher than OECD countries and a significant obstacle for tapping into their massive solar potential. Increasing commercial investment in these markets is key to derisking finance, and building thriving industries which can transform lives and economies." said Sonia Dunlop, CEO at Global Solar Council.

Notes:

1. Banking on Business as Usual, Reclaim Finance with the support of partners including BankTrack, Beyond Fossil Fuels, Rainforest Action Network, ShareAction, Stand.Earth, Urgewald and WWF, September 2025.
2. Reclaim Finance defines sustainable alternatives as power generation from wind, solar, marine, geothermal power, and some hydropower. It also includes enabling infrastructures such as power grids and batteries. See Reclaim Finance, The limits of (not so) clean energy
3. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), tripling global renewables capacity to 11000 gigawatts by 2030 is the most powerful lever for reducing fossil fuel demand and cutting greenhouse gas emissions. Such a transformation is essential to enable the massive electrification of our economies and further reduce fossil fuel use. Under the most ambitious scenarios, electricity’s share of final energy consumption must rise from 20% today to over 27% by 2030, and more than 60% by 2050.” See IEA, Net Zero Roadmap (update), November 2023
4. BNP Paribas, Citi, Crédit Agricole, and JPMorgan Chase
5. Antonio Guterres, UN Secretary-General (July 22, 2025)

This article was originally published on Reclaim Finance's website here.