Reactive

Response: G7 ministers pledge to end public finance for fossil fuels by the end of this year, prioritizing clean energy support instead

May 27, 2022

Today G7 climate, energy and environment ministers issued a communique committing to end public finance for fossil fuels by the end of this year.

MAY 27, 2022

Contact:

Nicole Rodel – nicole [at] priceofoil.org

Laurie van der Burg — laurie [at] priceofoil.org

BERLIN – Today G7 climate, energy and environment ministers issued a communique committing to end public finance for fossil fuels by the end of this year. The statement echoes the joint commitment made by 39 countries and institutions at the November 2021 climate negotiations and states that G7 governments will “end new direct public support for the international unabated fossil fuel energy sector by the end of 2022”. The G7 make this commitment to advance national security interests and accelerate the international clean energy transition, which they recognize requires phasing out investment in the unabated fossil fuel sector.

In response, experts at Oil Change International and Friends of the Earth Japan issued the following statement:

Laurie van der Burg, Public Finance Campaign Co-Manager at Oil Change International said: “The G7 commiting to end public finance for fossil fuels and shift it to clean is a massive win. In the context of Russia’s fossil-fueled war and signs that some of the G7 members who agreed to end their public fossil finance last November may backslide by pursuing new gas investments, this statement is a timely reconfirmation that the most viable pathway to energy security is prioritizing public finance for clean energy. These promises should now urgently be turned into action. Strong implementation is needed — both for the G7 to shift their $33 billion a year in fossil fuel finance and for them to be able to encourage even more countries to join them.”

Susanne Wong, Asia Program Manager at Oil Change International said: “Japan joining this G7 commitment is a significant step forward for people and our planet. Japan is the second largest provider of international public finance for fossil fuels and the only G7 member that did not sign a commitment to end public finance for fossil fuels at the COP26 climate talks last year. If Japan implements this commitment with integrity, it will directly shift $11 billion a year from fossil fuels to clean energy and have a much larger indirect impact given Japan’s influence on other financiers in Asia and around the world. This requires that Japan stop financing the expansion of gas infrastructure across Asia and globally and stop promoting technologies that would extend the lifetime of dirty coal plants. If Japan follows through and truly shifts its fossil finance to clean energy, this will help to speed the just energy transition we so desperately need.”

Ayumi Fukakusa, Climate and energy campaigner from Friends of the Earth Japan “Japan is the second largest provider of public finance to fossil fuels so this is a significant step. However, Japan has a bad track record of implementing its commitments. Last year, the G7 committed to end new direct government support for international coal power projects by the end of 2021, but Japan still intends to support two new coal projects in Indonesia and Bangladesh. Japan must implement its commitments with integrity to shift the actual flow of money. Also, Japan has not committed to a full coal phase-out domestically and is still constructing new coal power plants. Now Japan must accelerate the decarbonization of its electricity sector without relying on destructive energy such as nuclear as well as prioritizing energy saving and energy efficiency.”

###
Notes:

The $33 billion per year quoted above is from a recent G7 factsheet from Oil Change International, Friends of the Earth U.S., Asian People’s Movement on Debt and Development, Friends of the Earth Japan, and International Institute for Sustainable Development based on data from the open-access Public Finance for Energy Database (energyfinance.org), a project tracking financial flows to fossil fuels and clean energy from G20 bilateral development finance institutions (DFIs), export finance agencies (ECAs), and the multilateral development banks (MDBs). From 2018-2020, G7 governments spent over $100 billion on public finance for fossil fuels.

The countries and the institutions that previously signed the joint Glasgow statement on public finance in November 2021 include: Agence Française de Développement (AFD), Albania, Canada, Costa Rica, Denmark, Banco de Desenvolvimento de Minas Gerais (BDMG), The East African Development Bank (EADB), El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Netherlands Development Finance Company (FMO), France, Germany, Mali, Marshall Islands, New Zealand, Moldova, Portugal, Slovenia, South Sudan, Spain, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, the European Investment Bank, The Gambia, The United Kingdom, the United States and Zambia.

Last week, 120+ CSOs released letters to 11 Glasgow Statement signatory countries with specific recommendations for implementation on their fossil free public finance commitments: Canada, Germany, Netherlands, Italy, France, Portugal, United Kingdom, United States, Costa Rica, El Salvador, and New Zealand

An April 2022 briefing from Oil Change International on recent trends in international public finance for fossil fuels, and how these financial flows could be used instead to unlock a globally just transition.

Oil Change International data on energyfinance.org shows that most international public finance for energy has flowed between wealthy countries rather than supporting development in the Global South. Poor contract terms, debt traps, and disproportionate ownership by foreign multinationals have meant fossil finance has usually undermined, not supported development when it does flow to low-income countries.

A legal opinion by Professor Jorge E Viñuales from the University of Cambridge and Barrister Kate Cook of Matrix Chambers argues that governments and public finance institutions that continue to finance fossil fuel infrastructure are potentially at risk of climate litigation.