• About
    • Which Energy Mix is this?
  • Climate News Network Archive
  • Contact
The climate news that makes a difference.
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
  FEATURED
BP Predicts Faster Oil and Gas Decline as Clean Energy Spending Hits $1.1T in 2022 January 31, 2023
Canada Needs Oil and Gas Emissions Cap to Hit 2030 Goal: NZAB January 31, 2023
Ecuador’s Amazon Drilling Plan Shows Need for Fossil Non-Proliferation Treaty January 31, 2023
Rainforest Carbon Credits from World’s Biggest Provider are ‘Largely Worthless’, Investigation Finds January 31, 2023
Danske Bank Quits New Fossil Fuel Financing January 23, 2023
Next
Prev

G20 Financing Future Coal Projects at Twice the Level of Renewable Energy

December 5, 2017
Reading time: 3 minutes

stevepb / Pixabay

stevepb / Pixabay

 

Eradicating coal in favour of renewable energy is gaining support around the world, but G20 governments are still directing 52% more development and export financing to the dirtiest fossil fuel than they do to clean alternatives, the Natural Resources Defence Council (NRDC) reports.

NRDC examined G20 countries’ public financing of developing countries’ energy projects. It found that while financing for renewable energy projects has grown, it is still overshadowed by the support those countries are pouring into coal infrastructure. (Disclosure: The Energy Mix curator Mitchell Beer works is a consultant with NRDC’s Canada Project, but was not involved with the organization’s coal finance study.)

  • The climate news you need. Subscribe now to our engaging new weekly digest.
  • You’ll receive exclusive, never-before-seen-content, distilled and delivered to your inbox every weekend.
  • The Weekender: Succinct, solutions-focused, and designed with the discerning reader in mind.
New!
Subscribe

Collectively, the G20 group of countries financed US$38 billion in coal projects abroad between 2013 and 2016, NRDC found, compared to $25 billion in renewables projects.

More troubling still, the gap is widening, with coal financing expected to be twice the total for renewables for some time to come. “There’s a pipeline for over $28 billion in future coal projects, compared to only $14 billion for future renewables projects, that G20 nations are financing beyond their borders,” the study finds.

The main vehicles of support are export credits and financing programs. Across the G20, those instruments directed roughly $25 billion to coal, out of a total energy portfolio of $28 billion. With the exception of the African Development Bank, the World Bank and other regional development banks studied directed between 70 and 100% of their lending to renewable energy projects, according to the NRDC study.

Nearly 90% of coal financing came from just five countries—at least two of which are making strenuous efforts to wind down their use of coal at home. During the study period, NRDC reports, “the five biggest G20 coal financers were China ($15 billion), Japan ($10 billion), Germany ($4 billion), Russia ($3 billion), and South Korea ($2 billion). These five countries supplied 89% of G20 coal financing.”

Germany led renewables financing, with $4 billion committed during the study period. It was followed by the United States ($3 billion), Japan ($3 billion), France ($1 billion), and China ($0.6 billion). Together, the five countries and multilateral development banks provided 96% of G20 renewables financing.

Only Canada, the UK, and United States were found to have no coal investments abroad

The biggest recipients of coal financing were Vietnam, Indonesia, and India, where G20 lenders are supporting the development of 24 gigawatts of high-polluting power generation.

“Given the falling costs of renewable energy and the dire health and environmental impacts associated with coal,” the NRDC authors wrote, “governments should not be using their funds to invest in more coal projects abroad. The Paris agreement called on nations to support a low-carbon future. G20 financial institutions could lead the clean energy transition, but not all of them have made that commitment.”  

Disturbing as they are, the NRDC’s conclusions are actually less alarming than some reached earlier this year. Oil Change International, Friends of the Earth U.S., the U.S. Sierra Club, and the WWF European Policy Office calculated that G20 public finance institutions and multilateral development banks had poured US$71.8 billion per year into fossil projects between 2013 and 2015, four times the amount they devoted to renewable energy.



in Coal, Energy Politics, Energy Subsidies, General Renewables, International

The latest climate news and analysis, direct to your inbox

Subscribe

Related Posts

Mike Mozart/Flickr
Ending Emissions

BP Predicts Faster Oil and Gas Decline as Clean Energy Spending Hits $1.1T in 2022

January 31, 2023
314
CONFENIAE
Ending Emissions

Ecuador’s Amazon Drilling Plan Shows Need for Fossil Non-Proliferation Treaty

January 31, 2023
59
Ken Teegardin www.SeniorLiving.Org/flickr
Clean Electricity Grid

Virtual Power Plants Hit an ‘Inflection Point’

January 31, 2023
115

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

Trending Stories

Mike Mozart/Flickr

BP Predicts Faster Oil and Gas Decline as Clean Energy Spending Hits $1.1T in 2022

January 31, 2023
314
Gina Dittmer/PublicDomainPictures

Canada Needs Oil and Gas Emissions Cap to Hit 2030 Goal: NZAB

January 31, 2023
192
Doc Searls/Twitter

Guilbeault Could Intervene on Ontario Greenbelt Development

January 31, 2023
125
Ken Teegardin www.SeniorLiving.Org/flickr

Virtual Power Plants Hit an ‘Inflection Point’

January 31, 2023
115
RL0919/wikimedia commons

Danske Bank Quits New Fossil Fuel Financing

January 23, 2023
2.4k
/snappy goat

Rainforest Carbon Credits from World’s Biggest Provider are ‘Largely Worthless’, Investigation Finds

January 31, 2023
92

Recent Posts

CONFENIAE

Ecuador’s Amazon Drilling Plan Shows Need for Fossil Non-Proliferation Treaty

January 31, 2023
59
Victorgrigas/wikimedia commons

World Bank Climate Reforms Too ‘Timid and Slow,’ Critics Warn

January 31, 2023
41
United Nations

Salvage of $20B ‘Floating Time Bomb’ Delayed by Rising Cost of Oil Tankers

January 27, 2023
120
@tongbingxue/Twitter

Extreme Warming Ahead Even as Worst-Case Scenarios Grow ‘Obsolete’

January 23, 2023
340
Rachel Notley/Facebook

Notley Scorches Federal Just Transition Bill as Fossil CEO Calls for Oilsands Boom

January 23, 2023
312
EcoAnalytics

Albertans Want a Just Transition, Despite Premier’s Grumbling

January 23, 2023
321
Next Post
shannonpatrick17/flickr

Latest Keystone Spill Linked to Common Pipeline Construction Technique: PHMSA

The Energy Mix - The climate news you need

Copyright 2023 © Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

  • About
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy and Copyright
  • Cookie Policy

Proudly partnering with…

scf_withtagline
No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities

Copyright 2022 © Smarter Shift Inc. and Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

Manage Cookie Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}