The global banking sector failed to make any progress in financing the clean energy transition last year, with capital allocations to oil, gas and coal continuing to outpace money spent on renewables.
The world’s leading banks spent just 89 cents on low-carbon energy companies and projects such as wind, solar and grids for every dollar they allocated to fossil fuels, according to an analysis by BloombergNEF. The figure is virtually unchanged from 2023, BNEF said.
For the world to have a chance of limiting global warming to the critical threshold of 1.5 C, capital allocations to green projects need to be four times the amount spent on fossil fuels, BNEF has calculated. Its so-called Energy Supply Banking Ratio, which includes debt and equity underwriting, has barely budged since 2021, when it was 0.75.
The analysis reveals a level of “inertia in industry and institutional financing strategies,” BNEF said in its report.
The figures predate Donald Trump’s return to the White House for a second term. Among his first acts as U.S. president was the signing in January of an executive order intended to revive America’s fossil fuel industry, dubbed “Unleashing American Energy.”
Even before Trump was reelected, banks in the U.S. were under pressure to sever ties with climate alliances and to prove to Republican lawmakers and attorneys general that they were supportive of the fossil fuel sector.
This year, however, excess supply of oil has led to lower prices. Against that backdrop, the biggest U.S. banks have seen their financing of the sector decline.
So far in 2025, the six largest U.S. banks have experienced a 15% drop in loans and bond underwriting for oil, gas and coal, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Bank of America had the biggest decline, at 36%; JPMorgan Chase saw the smallest retreat, at 4.8%, the data show.
Even so, BNEF warns of “growing skepticism within banks about the industry’s ability and willingness of governments to reach the 1.5 C goal.”