Banks and other/conventional oil and gas
By: BankTrack
Contact:

For any feedback or questions on this page please contact us at
climate@banktrack.org

Share this page:
Link to other/conventional oil and gas policy table
Link to other/conventional oil and gas exclusion table

Conventional oil and gas

Conventional oil and gas is loosely defined as oil and gas that is found in sandstone and that can be extracted via ‘traditional’ methods. The oil or gas is situated in the open spaces between the sand grains and can relatively easily flow through the rock. Therefore, often only a few wells per basin are needed. These wells are drilled through the impermeable rock formation above the sandstone and allow the oil or gas to be extracted. In contrast, unconventional oil and gas resources are found in a variety of (sedimentary) rocks such as shale rock or tar sands and need to be extracted via additional, more expensive and more harmful technologies. Unconventional oil and gas formations also need more surface infrastructure to refine or transport them.

For this reason, conventional oil and gas production is often much cheaper than unconventional oil and gas production. Saudi Aramco, for example, is said to have the lowest oil production cost in the world at approximately 10 US Dollars per barrel, while other conventional oil production typically costs 20-40 US Dollars per barrel. In comparison, production costs for fracked oil varies from 40-90 US Dollars per barrel. Conventional oil and gas production is, therefore, relatively insensitive to changes in the global oil price and can be considered the ‘backbone’ of the fossil fuel industry. It was, and to some extent still is, the low-risk, high-profit sector that has so far received relatively little attention from politicians and civil society organisations.

In the context of this page, 'other/conventional' refers to anything beyond the oil and gas sub sectors that are spotlighted on other pages, such as tar sands and fracked oil and gas. It therefore includes predominantly conventional oil and gas, but also near-shore offshore oil and gas.

Banks and conventional oil and gas

The severity of the climate crisis requires that banks must urgently take steps to disengage from financing all business activities and projects that continue the world's reliance on fossil fuels. Banks must therefore end support for all new other/conventional oil and gas projects and implement a full phase-out for financing other/conventional oil and gas projects in line with the Paris Climate Agreement. 

Bank policy scores on other/conventional oil and gas

BankLast update
Country
Score
Ranking
Details
Agricultural Bank of China
2021-03-24
CHN
0
Laggard
ANZ
2021-03-24
AUS
0.5
Laggard
Bank of America
2021-03-24
USA
0.5
Laggard
Bank of China
2021-03-24
CHN
0.5
Laggard
Bank of Communications
2021-03-24
CHN
0
Laggard
Bank of Montreal (BMO)
2021-03-24
CAN
0.5
Laggard
Barclays
2021-03-24
GBR
0.5
Laggard
BBVA
2021-03-24
ESP
0.5
Laggard
BNP Paribas
2021-03-24
FRA
2
Laggard
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC)
2021-03-24
CAN
0.5
Laggard
China CITIC Bank
2021-03-24
CHN
0.5
Laggard
China Construction Bank
2021-03-24
CHN
0.5
Laggard
China Everbright Bank
2021-03-24
CHN
0
Laggard
China Merchants Bank
2021-03-24
CHN
0.5
Laggard
China Minsheng Bank
2021-03-17
CHN
0
Laggard
Citi
2021-03-24
USA
0.5
Laggard
Commerzbank AG
2021-03-24
DEU
0.5
Laggard
Commonwealth Bank of Australia
2021-03-24
AUS
0.5
Laggard
Crédit Agricole
2021-03-24
FRA
0.5
Laggard
Crédit Mutuel
2021-03-17
FRA
0
Laggard
Credit Suisse Group
2021-03-24
CHE
2
Laggard
Danske Bank
2021-03-25
DNK
7.5
Laggard
DBS Bank
2020-03-01
SGP
0.5
Laggard
Deutsche Bank
2021-03-24
DEU
0.5
Laggard
DNB
2021-02-01
NOR
0.5
Laggard
DZ Bank
2021-03-24
DEU
0.5
Laggard
Goldman Sachs
2021-03-24
USA
0.5
Laggard
HSBC
2021-03-24
GBR
0.5
Laggard
Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC)
2021-03-24
CHN
0.5
Laggard
Industrial Bank of China
2021-03-24
CHN
0.5
Laggard
ING
2021-03-24
NLD
3.5
Laggard
Intesa Sanpaolo
2021-03-24
ITA
0.5
Laggard
JPMorgan Chase
2021-03-24
USA
0.5
Laggard
Jyske Bank
2021-02-01
DNK
0
Laggard
Lloyds Banking Group
2021-03-24
GBR
3
Laggard
Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group (MUFG)
2021-03-24
JPN
0.5
Laggard
Mizuho
2021-03-24
JPN
0.5
Laggard
Morgan Stanley
2021-03-24
USA
0.5
Laggard
National Australia Bank
2021-03-24
AUS
0.5
Laggard
Natixis
2021-03-24
FRA
0.5
Laggard
NatWest
2021-03-24
GBR
4.5
Laggard
Nedbank Group
2021-04-22
ZAF
11
Follower
Nordea
2021-03-24
FIN
0.5
Laggard
Nykredit
2021-02-01
DNK
0
Laggard
OCBC
2020-03-01
SGP
0
Laggard
Ping An Bank
2021-03-24
CHN
0.5
Laggard
Postal Savings Bank of China
2021-03-24
CHN
0.5
Laggard
Rabobank
2021-03-24
NLD
0.5
Laggard
Royal Bank of Canada (RBC)
2021-03-24
CAN
0.5
Laggard
Santander
2021-03-25
ESP
0.5
Laggard
Sberbank
2021-03-17
RUS
0
Laggard
Scotiabank
2021-03-24
CAN
0.5
Laggard
Shanghai Pudong Development Bank
2021-03-24
CHN
0
Laggard
Shinhan Financial Group
2021-03-24
KOR
0.5
Laggard
Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken (SEB)
2021-02-01
SWE
3.5
Laggard
Société Générale
2021-03-24
FRA
2
Laggard
Sparebank 1 SR-Bank
2021-02-01
NOR
0
Laggard
Standard Chartered
2021-03-24
GBR
0.5
Laggard
State Bank of India
2021-03-24
IND
0
Laggard
Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation (SMBC)
2021-03-24
JPN
0.5
Laggard
Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Holdings
2021-03-24
JPN
0.5
Laggard
Svenska Handelsbanken
2021-02-01
SWE
0.5
Laggard
Swedbank
2021-02-01
SWE
2
Laggard
Sydbank
2021-02-01
DNK
0
Laggard
TD
2021-03-24
CAN
0.5
Laggard
Truist Financial Corporation
2021-03-24
USA
0
Laggard
UBS
2021-03-24
CHE
0
Laggard
UniCredit Group
2021-03-24
ITA
0.5
Laggard
United Overseas Bank
2021-03-24
SGP
0.5
Laggard
US Bancorp
2021-03-24
USA
2
Laggard
Wells Fargo
2021-03-24
USA
0.5
Laggard
Westpac
2021-03-24
AUS
0.5
Laggard
Explanation

The point-based policy ranking assesses bank policies in four ways:

1) Restriction on direct financing for other/conventional oil and gas projects.

  • None (0), weak exclusion (1.5), strong exclusion (5)

2) Restriction on financing for companies that expand other/conventional oil and gas. 

  • None (0), weak exclusion (3), strong exclusion (7)

3) The bank’s commitment to phase-out financing for other/conventional oil and gas.

  • None (0), financing reduction (1.5), weak phase-out (6), strong phase-out (8)

4) The bank’s commitment to exclude companies active in other/conventional oil and gas above a certain threshold.

  • None (0), enhanced due diligence/Equator Principles commitment (0.5), weak exclusion threshold (3), strong exclusion threshold (7), full exclusion (10)

A bank can obtain a total of 30 policy points for its other/conventional oil and gas policy. Based on this score banks are then classified as laggards, followers, front runners or leaders.

Laggard
Follower
Front runner
Leader
0 - 7.5 points
8 - 15 points
15.5 - 22.5 points
23 - 30 points

 

Banks excluding finance for conventional oil and gas

A number of banks have already taken steps to fully or partially exclude other/conventional oil and gas infrastructure or companies involved in other/conventional oil and gas infrastructure operations from their investments. The table below lists banks that have taken such steps. 

Exclusion table other/conventional oil and gas

BankLast update
Country
Project
Company
Details
BNP Paribas
2021-03-24
FRA
Credit Suisse Group
2021-03-24
CHE
Danske Bank
2021-03-25
DNK
ING
2021-03-24
NLD
Lloyds Banking Group
2021-03-24
GBR
NatWest
2021-03-24
GBR
Nedbank Group
2021-04-22
ZAF
Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken (SEB)
2021-02-01
SWE
Swedbank
2021-02-01
SWE
US Bancorp
2021-03-24
USA
Explanation

This table lists banks that have adopted a full ( ) or partial ( ) exclusion policy for other/conventional oil and gas projects and/or companies. Click on 'Details' for the rationale of this assessment for each bank.

Feedback welcome

Our policy assessments are always a work in progress and we very much welcome any feedback, especially from banks included in them. You can of course also contact us for more information on specific scores and the latest policy changes. Please get in touch at climate@banktrack.org.

News

| |
Type:
Year:
blog
external news
our news

Eacop’s financing blues as lenders desert $3.5b project

2021-05-04 | The East African
blog
external news
our news

Banking on Climate Chaos 2021: World’s 60 largest banks have poured USD 3.8 trillion into fossil fuels since Paris Agreement

Even amidst the global economic downturn, fossil fuel financing numbers were higher in 2020 than 2016
2021-03-24 | Nijmegen | BankTrack, Indigenous Environmental Network, Oil Change International, Rainforest Action Network, Reclaim Finance, Sierra Club
blog
external news
our news

Banking on Climate Change – Fossil Fuel Finance Report Card 2019

World's top banks have poured $1.9 trillion into fossil fuel financing since the Paris Agreement was adopted, with financing on the rise each year
2019-03-20 | Nijmegen, the Netherlands | BankTrack, Honor the Earth, Indigenous Environmental Network, Oil Change International, Rainforest Action Network, Sierra Club

Documents