Banks are financing their own multitrillion-dollar nightmare
Bloomberg
Live Events
Bloomberg
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this column are that of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of www.economictimes.com.)
(You can now subscribe to our
(You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel
If you come home early from vacation and find robbers ransacking your house, you could call the police and try to stop the crime. But the true alpha move would be to help the robbers load your valuables onto the truck and then tell them which of your neighbors are also on vacation in exchange for a cut of the profits.Banks are choosing the alpha option, basically abetting theft from themselves by backing new projects to extract and burn fossil fuels, thus stoking the planetary heating that stunts economic growth and their own insurance and mortgage businesses. Of course, these financial companies do get a cut of the short-term profits from this environmental sabotage. And by abandoning the pretense of siding with the climate, they avoid political blowback from a US government that has declared war on it. But the long-term result will be a global economy trillions of dollars poorer and far less stable, impoverishing just about everyone, including the banks.The world's 65 biggest banks delivered $869.4 billion in financing to fossil-fuel companies last year, up $162.5 billion from 2023, according to a new report by the Rainforest Action Network, the Sierra Club, and several other nonprofit groups. Banks have funneled $7.9 trillion in loans and underwriting to these polluting industries since the Paris climate accords took effect in 2016, by the report's measure. This doesn't include any investments by banks' asset-management units, which amount to hundreds of billions of dollars more.Last year's financing surge reversed two years of declines and coincided with a turn of political sentiment against 'woke' environmental, social and governance considerations in business. Climate actions drew some of the harshest attacks, with President Donald Trump and other conservatives blaming them for rising energy prices. Such claims helped Trump win a second term. On his first day in office, he declared that his predecessor's foolish concern for the climate had created a 'national energy emergency' that hurt Americans' finances. His prescription has been to attack any public or private activity meant to slow the burning of fossil fuels.Banks saw the direction that the wind was blowing and quickly changed tack. The biggest immediately quit the Net Zero Banking Alliance, a group that vows to help eliminate greenhouse-gas emissions by 2050. They claim to still have their own goals for curbing emissions, but they've apparently given up trying to make their actions match their words.To meet the Paris Agreement 's rapidly fading stretch goal of holding global heating to 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial averages, energy financing should favor green projects over fossil fuels by a 4-to-1 ratio, according to BloombergNEF. In 2023, the latest data available, the ratio was just 0.89-to-1. Boosting fossil-fuel financing last year probably didn't move that ratio in the right direction.Meanwhile, the economic damage caused by a heating planet keeps mounting. Global climate-related costs — including insured and uninsured losses, government relief spending and higher insurance premiums — have topped $18.5 trillion since January 2000, Bloomberg Intelligence estimated recently. The US alone accounted for $7.7 trillion of the damage, or 36% of its growth in gross domestic product over that stretch. In just the 12 months through April, US climate-related costs totaled nearly $1 trillion, BI said, roughly matching bank financing for fossil fuels during that time.You might argue economic activity is economic activity, that building a house is basically the same as rebuilding a house, that government disaster relief is no different from any other flavor of government spending. But simply responding to disasters again and again is no way to grow an economy. Money spent to rebuild houses, bridges and roads is money not spent on college educations, better infrastructure or other productivity-boosting measures. It steals growth from the future.A National Bureau of Economic Research paper last fall estimated that a planet hotter by 3C — its current trajectory — would have a GDP that was smaller by more than a third. A study last week from the University of Maryland's School of Public Policy found that a complete rollback of the Inflation Reduction Act's climate measures, something Trump and congressional Republicans have been working hard to do, would shave $1.1 trillion from US GDP alone over the next decade. It would also kill 22,800 Americans, take $160 billion from American incomes and cause the average home's energy bill to be $206 higher. Talk about an emergency.But if you need a more immediate climate threat to finance profits to be convinced, you can already see one in the growing crisis in home insurance. Every new wildfire, flood, tornado and hurricane exposes just how underinsured and underprepared Americans are for such disasters, putting possibly $2 trillion in home valuations at risk.Given the political reality, it's understandable for banks to speak softly about protecting the planet and their own future profits. Helping fossil fuels build an even bigger stick with which to beat them makes much less sense.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
30 minutes ago
- News18
Grounded In Kerala, British Fighter Jet For ‘Sale On OLX': ‘Automatic Parking, Gun To Destroy...'
Last Updated: The ad also shows that the listing has been posted by "Donaldu Trumpan", accompanied by a picture of US President and photos of the jet. After a British Royal Navy F-35 fighter jet made an unexpected landing at Kerala's Thiruvananthapuram International Airport last week, an unusual OLX ad featuring the jet has gone viral online. The satirical listing, priced at $4 million, humorously claims the jet includes features like automatic parking, brand-new tyres, a new battery and even an 'automatic gun to destroy traffic violators." Posted under the name 'Donaldu Trumpan", alongside a photo of former U.S. President Donald Trump, the ad also includes multiple images of the fighter jet. The video quickly went viral, with many users flooding the comments section with memes and hilarious jokes. One person wrote, 'India is not for Beginners. Indians put the Royal Navy's F35B stealth fighter jet for sale on OLX, which has been grounded in Kerala's Thiruvananthapuram airport for 6 days." India is not for Beginners Another wrote, 'Indian Humour is on another level. Someone listed the British F35B, which is grounded in Trivandrum, on OLX for sale." Indian Humor is on another level Someone listed the British F35 which is grounded in Trivandrum on olx for sale Someone put the fighter Jet of British Airforce -F-35 on OLX ??? Mr @POTUS your fighter jet F 35 B is for sale in OlX. Someone posted this after a crash landing in Trivandrum international Airport India. #OlX #fighterjets #f35A — Mubarak Ravuthar (@MubarakRavuthar) June 19, 2025 However, it was later found that the posting is fake and no such listing exists on OLX's social media website. The online exchange marketplace replied to one of the social media users, saying, 'Dear OLX User, We regret the inconvenience caused to you. We would quickly like to resolve this for you. Please send us an email to support@ with the complete details so that we can check further." On June 14, 2025, a British Royal Navy F-35B fighter jet, one of the world's most advanced and expensive combat aircraft, made an emergency landing in Kerala due to a technical snag in its hydraulic systems. Currently stationed in the Indo-Pacific area, the royal fighter jet is being protected by the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF). It is a part of the UK's HMS Prince of Wales Carrier Strike Group. First Published:
Mint
30 minutes ago
- Mint
Russia's Top Oil Executive Says OPEC Was Astute to Boost Output
(Bloomberg) -- Steps taken by the OPEC group to boost oil supplies have proved astute, given developments in the Middle East conflict, according to Rosneft PJSC Chief Executive Officer Igor Sechin. 'The decision by OPEC leaders to raise production at accelerated rates appears highly far-sighted today, and from a market perspective, justified, considering consumer interests amid uncertainty about the scale of the conflict between Iran and Israel,' Sechin said at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum on Saturday. Eight OPEC nations have expanded output by more than expected for three consecutive months. They are set to convene on July 6 to consider adding more barrels in August. Saudi Arabia favors further large increases in order to recoup market share as quickly as possible, people familiar with the matter said earlier this month. Sechin, a key ally of President Vladimir Putin, has previously criticized Russia's cooperation with the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. According to Sechin, Russia was losing market share, while US shale producers were increasing theirs. Rosneft, Russia's biggest oil producer, has based its 2025 business plan on an oil price of $45 per barrel, while the projection for next year is $42 to $43, Sechin said at the forum. The estimates are conservative as the company 'doesn't want to depend on the volatility' that's evident in the oil market currently, he said. It's been a turbulent week in the global oil market, with futures swinging in a range of around $8. Volatility has spiked to the highest since 2022 as Israel and Iran exchanged multiple strikes. More stories like this are available on
Time of India
33 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump's Tulsi problem: Wanted a minion, picked a maverick
After Elon Musk, Tulsi Gabbard has found that US President Donald Trump may pick a maverick when he actually wants a minion. When Gabbard was named Director of National Intelligence by Trump in November 2024, it symbolized one of the most dramatic ideological journeys in recent American politics. A former Democrat who once vocally opposed Trump's foreign policy, Gabbard's trajectory from progressive dissident to a Republican-aligned intelligence chief highlighted not only her political adaptability but also Trump's penchant for tapping unconventional allies. Yet less than a year into her tenure, the alliance appears to be fraying. Trump's public rebuke of Gabbard on Friday, accusing her of being "wrong" about Iran's nuclear ambitions, has cast doubt on her future in the administration and underscored the volatile dynamics within Trump's camp as he navigates his comeback bid. What first riled Trump was a video Gabbard posted on X on June 10 in which she warned that "political elite and warmongers" are "carelessly fomenting fear and tensions between nuclear powers," putting the world "on the brink of nuclear annihilation." A person close to the president told Politico that he viewed the video as Gabbard warning him not to greenlight Israel attacking Iran. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 발톱무좀 고민이신분! 제발 이 글 필독하세요! 홈시네라이프 더 알아보기 Undo Also Read: Nuclear war! US intel chief warns world is on the edge of annihilation From DNC pariah to MAGA ally Live Events You Might Also Like: Trump vs Tulsi Gabbard: Is US President planning to fire US spy chief over provocative anti-war video? Gabbard's departure from the Democratic Party in October 2022 did not come as a shock. Her criticism of the party's 'warmongering elite' and her staunch opposition to interventionist foreign policy had long made her an outsider. Yet few anticipated how quickly she would pivot toward Trump's orbit. By mid-2023, Gabbard was appearing frequently on conservative media, praising Trump-era foreign policy and criticizing President Biden's approach to Ukraine and Iran. Her endorsement of Trump in August 2024 was a significant political moment—particularly as it came while Trump was consolidating his position in the Republican primary. Gabbard's appeal to Trump was multi-dimensional: her military service lent credibility to Trump's America First messaging; her defection from the Democrats reinforced his narrative of a party in disarray; and her rising profile in conservative circles offered a fresh face to appeal to independent voters. Trump's decision to nominate her as DNI in November 2024 surprised many but aligned with his history of installing loyalists in key positions, often outside traditional establishment picks. Trump values loyalty but is also attracted to figures who carry an aura of independence, so long as it doesn't directly challenge his authority. Gabbard was useful to Trump because she legitimized his anti-establishment credentials while also appealing to veterans and libertarian-leaning conservatives. Her appointment as DNI was also tactical: Trump sought to shake up the intelligence community, which he has long viewed with suspicion. She, as an outsider with military gravitas and a maverick reputation, fit the bill. Her initial cooperation and alignment with Trump's broad foreign policy themes -- anti-interventionism, skepticism of the intelligence "deep state," and a focus on China -- made her a valuable asset. But Trump's pattern of burning bridges with appointees who assert independence has a long precedent, and Gabbard may now be next in line. You Might Also Like: Trump says Tulsi Gabbard was 'wrong' about Iran, Israeli strikes could be 'very hard to stop' Is Trump preparing to fire Gabbard? Earlier, a Politico report had said that Trump had increasingly mused about nixing Gabbard's office completely. Trump thought Gabbard did not add anything to "any conversation", the report said citing insiders. A few days ago, reports claimed that he is relying on a high-profile group of Cabinet picks and not those who are supposed to be advising him by the virtue of their posts: Gabbard and Defense secretary Pete Hegseth. The rupture had begun with Gabbard's testimony to Congress in March 2025. She stated that the U.S. intelligence community 'continued to assess that Tehran is not currently pursuing a nuclear weapon,' echoing long-standing assessments from both the Biden and previous Trump-era intelligence reports. Trump, however, has taken a harder line in recent months, arguing that Iran is 'weeks away' from acquiring a nuclear bomb -- statements likely influenced by his desire to project strength in the lead-up to the 2026 midterms and potentially 2028. When Gabbard's testimony was raised in a press gaggle on Monday evening, Trump dismissed her comments, saying, 'I don't care what she says.' By Friday, the rebuke was more explicit. Trump's public rebuke of Gabbard suggests a brewing frustration with her unwillingness to bend the intelligence narrative to align with his political messaging, a pattern seen in past Trump appointments, from James Comey to John Bolton. The public criticism, particularly over an issue as significant as Iran's nuclear program, is a red flag. For Trump, public disagreements with his appointees often precede dismissal. Gabbard's claim that her March testimony was 'taken out of context' suggests she is attempting damage control, but it may not be enough. Behind the scenes, Trump loyalists have reportedly grown uneasy with Gabbard's growing media presence and her continued framing of intelligence assessments in ways that don't always align with Trump's messaging. If Trump believes Gabbard is undermining his narrative, especially on a high-profile national security issue, her tenure may be on borrowed time. A dismissal, however, could come with risks. Firing Gabbard could alienate independent voters and veterans who see her as a voice of reason within the Trump movement. It may also reignite debates over Trump's handling of intelligence during his prior presidency. If removed, Gabbard has a number of options. Her reputation as a principled non-interventionist still holds sway with a segment of the right—and even some independents. She could pivot to a media career, possibly on platforms like Fox News, Newsmax, or a new independent outlet. Politically, she could mount a Senate run or become a prominent surrogate for another faction within the GOP, possibly even challenging Trumpism from within if his grip on the party begins to loosen. Alternatively, she may bide her time, reemerging post-Trump with renewed relevance in a reshaped Republican landscape. The Trump-Gabbard saga encapsulates the volatility of MAGA politics. Their alliance was one of strategic convenience more than ideological cohesion. Trump elevated Gabbard because she was useful; now, as she asserts independence on sensitive intelligence matters, she risks becoming expendable.
