The top three “climate killers” will not come as much of a surprise: JP Morgan Chase, Citi, and none other than Bank of America top the list with $22 billion, $18.27 billion, an $16.79 billion invested in coal since 2005, respectively.

As officials from around the world are assembling in Durban, South Africa to discuss ways to combat climate change, banks around the world are busy trying to figure out how they can profit off of making the climate crisis worse.

In fact, between 2005 — the year the Kyoto Protocol went into effect — and 2010, funding for coal nearly doubled. Yes, you read that right: As the world’s leaders have been trying to get their act together and deal with the most urgent existential crisis humanity has ever faced, the biggest banks in the world have been busy sinking as much money as they can into the single largest cause of that crisis (emissions from coal-fired power plants are the biggest source of man-made carbon pollution).

As the report notes, these banks are not unaware of the climate crisis. It’s just that they see it more as an opportunity for some great PR than a problem they have a stake in solving even if it means leaving money on the table. All of the top 20 coal bankrollers have made climate commitments that are drastically contradicted by where they’re actually investing their money.

JP Morgan Chase claims it’s “Helping the world transition to a low-carbon economy”, for instance. Citi holds itself out as the “Most innovative bank in climate change” — which sounds more like Citi is gunning for Chase’s number one spot than trying to help solve the climate crisis, but who am I to quibble with how Citi chooses to word its greenwash.

Bank of America has declared that “The most formidable challenge we face is global climate change.” A fittingly purposeless statement, given that BoA has invested $4.3 billion in the US coal industry, making it the single largest underwriter of America’s coal problem.

Here is a chart showing which banks made the top 20, and the amount they’ve invested in companies that are polluting our communities and wrecking our climate:

An international coalition of NGOs came together to release this groundbreaking report, including urgewald, a German environmental organization; groundWork and Earthlife Africa Johannesburg, two South African social and environmental justice organizations; and BankTrack, an international network. RAN contributed research to the report.

A full copy of the study with a ranking of all the researched banks can be downloaded here. The underlying data for this research were provided by Profundo economic research. They can be found here.

Image via PNC Financial Services Group

PNC recently released their 2011 Corporate Responsibility Report. Documents like this  provide a window into how a bank thinks about its environmental and social impact. RAN has been paying close attention to PNC Bank and its approach to the energy industry for a couple of years, so I was eager to get my hands on the new report and see whether PNC is strengthening its commitment to communities and the environment.

The most eye-catching announcement in the introduction is the announcement that PNC will be building the “World’s Greenest Skyscraper” right in the heart of Pittsburgh. Avid readers of the Understory might recall that, in 2009, PNC built the “largest green wall in North America.” This is a commendable step-up in ambition. Extrapolating this trend, I look forward to PNC building the greenest city in the U.S. in 2013 and, before the decade concludes, PNC might just transform this nation to become the greenest on the planet.

But seriously, RAN has been saying for years that, while we like to see corporations green-up their buildings and their operational practices, the true test of a “sustainable” bank is where it puts its money.

If you compare this report to PNC’s first, released in 2010, there is a striking shift in the language used. Whereas previously PNC spoke of “Lending in support of economic growth,” now the message is “Lending to drive growth responsibly.” I’m hearing an acknowledgement of both the tough times we are living in and the role that the unchecked pursuit of profit has played to get us into this unsustainable economic crisis.

On page two, PNC gives an interesting trend analysis of energy sources. While the report doesn’t specifically say that PNC will be moving away from financing coal and oil, it does note that fossil fuels (except natural gas of course) are becoming less attractive as energy sources. I would like to see PNC disclose how its portfolio of energy investments compares to the national energy trends. The bank sounds enthusiastic about “deepening and broadening relationships” with those seeking to develop solar and other energy-efficient projects. However, there is no target stated indicating the level of financing that PNC is aspiring to provide.

Photo by Doug Bardwell

On page three, a new “supplemental due diligence criteria” is outlined that appears to apply to all companies in extractive industries. There is specific mention of “horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing methods.” I suspect these are being addressed because of the bank head office being located in Pittsburgh, where hydrofracking has been banned. I like the broad category of “extractive industries,” but there isn’t much here about what this criteria looks like, and no mention of reporting.

PNC has restated its policy on mountaintop removal (MTR) mining. There is no change here and I have the same criticism as before: This policy has an identified performance standard — “coal producers who receive a majority of their production from MTR mining” — and it is unclear whether this refers to a company’s performance in Appalachia or across the United States. Prior to adopting this policy, PNC had substantial exposure to MTR companies and I would like to see PNC publicly report on the impact of the policy, as its competitors Citi and Morgan Stanley are now doing.

In summary, the 2011 PNC Corporate Responsibility Report demonstrates that this bank’s approach to energy is evolving. But there is still plenty of room to improve transparency around targets and reporting on implementation, and for PNC to be as ambitious with energy underwriting as it is with building green skyscrapers.

Senator Carter Glass (D—Va.) and Congressman Henry B. Steagall (D—Ala.). Image via Wikipedia.

A great article from Forbes appeared in my Google alerts last week and I had to share.

The article begins as yet another article describing the sad state of affairs at big US banks, namely Bank of America and Citi. The article goes on, however, to give a refreshingly short and simple explanation of how the banks got to the terrible position we find them in today:

Should either Bank of America or Citigroup fail, there will no doubt be much finger pointing. But, rather than ask who caused it, we should be asking what caused it. In 2001, the great complaint from US banks was that the European and Asia banks had competitive advantages over US banks in that they could engage in retail banking, commercial banking, investment banking, brokerage, insurance, hedge funds, private equity, and the like. Whereas, the Glass-Steagall Act unfairly limited them to retail and commercial banking.

Mama always said to be careful of what you ask for because you just might get it. The lack of a Glass-Steagall Act in Europe has led European banks to wobble under the weight of their underwriting of European government debt and other investment banking challenges. US banks got just what they asked for.

And, as we all know all to well, less regulation for the banks has meant a much less stable industry that almost took down the entire global economy. In this recession-weary country, we are all still feeling the consequences of big bank wobbles, stumbles and crashes.

What this article doesn’t address, though, is how the banks can take on a MUCH more responsible role in the world economy. Hopefully questions like the one that RAN asked BoA’s CEO Brian Moynihan on Monday can help lead the banks toward more responsible investing that will be better for the economy, and the planet.

Earlier this month, AEP announced that upcoming EPA clean air regulations (which have now been announced) may mean that the company will need to close 25% of their coal fleet. This proclamation was of course meant to scare legislators into taking the EPA’s power to enforce the Clean Air Act away. Then news broke that AEP is putting its money where its mouth is — lots of money.  AEP spent a reported $2 million lobbying in the 1st quarter of 2011. $2 million in just 3 months!!!

The New York Times responded to AEP  in an editorial blasting the company for misleading the public about impacts of EPA regulations, bullying the agency, and failing to address real concerns about its aging coal fleet. The EPA also responded during a US Senate hearing by clarifying that most of AEP’s plant closures won’t be because of the EPA, they will be because AEP’s fleet is too old to compete in energy markets.

Over the past month, AEP has demonstrated that it is a coal company that is willing to lie to the public and spend millions to influence politicians and erode the ability of democratic institutions such as the EPA that were created to ensure clean air and water for all Americans. Which leads me to wonder, which banks are behind AEP?

A quick look at AEP’s financing shows that in the past 2 years (since June 2009) several banks have provided large sums of money in the form of bond underwriting to AEP. Some of the most interesting include*:

• Barclays Bank provided $300 million
• UBS provided $190 million
• Morgan Stanley provided $175 million
• Citi and JP Morgan Chase each provided $87.5 million
• Wells Fargo and Credit Suisse each provided $75 million

All of these banks should cut ties with AEP. Financing a company like AEP that undermines democracy and burns climate-killing coal is irresponsible at best.

* All research is sourced from Bloomberg

Last week at Power Shift 2011, Rainforest Action Network teamed up with over a hundred youth to take the streets of Washington D.C. and speak a little truth to Wall Street’s power.

Banks like Citi and PNC remain some of the biggest funders of mountaintop removal coal mining and tar sand extraction and pipeline projects in North America.

The march weaved through D.C.’s Chinatown business district to branches of Citi (coal & tar sands funder) and PNC (mountaintop removal coal mining funder) near the DC Convention Center.

The march was so large, we took over two lanes of traffic.

At Citi, we decorated their offices and ATMs with “global warming crime scene” tape and stickers about funding coal and tar sands. At PNC, we tried to deliver a petition but they got wind of our approach and closed their offices with a sign “Closed due to an emergency situation.”

Yeah, PNC, there is an “emergency situation:” It’s called climate change and you’re bankrolling it.

Billionaire real estate investor and legendary tax evader Leona Helmsley famously said: “Only the little people pay taxes.” It turns out Helmsley was all too right.

Last month’s discovery that GE paid zero in taxes in 2010 has exploded across the news. But GE is not alone. Rainforest Action Network reviewed the top four banks, oil and coal companies in the country, and found that all of them are gaming the system. In fact, Bank of America, Citi, Massey Energy and Chevron have also all paid zero in federal income taxes this year or in year’s past.

We reviewed 12 of the dirtiest corporate tax dodgers: Bank of America, Citi, JPMorgan, Wells Fargo, Chevron, BP, Shell, Exxon, Massey Energy, Alpha Natural Resources, Peabody Energy and Arch Coal. These 12 banks, oil and coal companies are responsible for foreclosing on millions of people’s homes and polluting our air, water and climate. At the same time, we found that they pay next to nothing into a tax system that provides the very services that protect the homeless, the sick and our environment.

As the graphic below shows, banks, oil and coal companies are making billions in profits annually and paying much less than their fair share in taxes. In fact, the top four oil companies in the country made $1.26 trillion in gross revenues and paid a shocking 2.04% average tax rate.

Click here to see graphic at full size

If just the top banks, oil and coal companies actually paid the IRS corporate tax rate of 35%, they would be giving back $62 billion this tax season. That is almost double the current $38 billion proposed federal budget cuts.

To add insult to injury, while these multi-billion dollar industries are raking in the profits and evading their taxes they were also paying millions in CEO compensation and lobby dollars. These corporations are happy to pay large sums to manipulate our democracy but aren’t so interested in paying to support that democracy.

So, let’s get one thing straight: America is not broke, and these dirty corporations don’t need any more handouts, bailouts, or subsidies. We don’t have a money problem, we have a priorities problem. We’re slashing billions from our budget, much of which will come out of social services and environmental protections, while allowing corporate giants to slip ever-increasing profits into offshore accounts.

By reversing years of tax giveaways to the largest corporations, Congress could raise trillions in revenue not only covering our budget deficit but also enhancing education, health and environmental programs that safeguard our families and our future.

Pissed off? You should be. It’s time corporate tax dodgers pay their fair share.

Rainforest Action Network and the Sierra Club released the 2011 Mountaintop Removal Report Card today. The report card exposes relationships between 10 of the biggest banks in the world and the top companies practicing mountaintop removal mining in central Appalachia.

Some of the findings:

• Since January 2010, Bank of America, Citi, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank, GE Capital, JP Morgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, PNC, UBS and Wells Fargo together provided more than $2.5 billion in loans and bonds to MTR companies.
• The top three financiers of MTR are PNC, Citi and UBS.
• Of the 10 banks in the report, Wells Fargo and Credit Suisse have the strongest MTR policies.

Since 2010′s MTR report card was released last spring, five banks released policies addressing mountaintop removal: JP Morgan Chase, Wells Fargo, PNC, UBS and Credit Suisse. The MTR report card has served as an excellent tool for RAN to engage with executives at the biggest banks and help them move away from financing the devastating practice of mountaintop removal.

We hope that this year’s report will continue to pressure the biggest financiers of mountaintop removal to develop meaningful policies limiting their exposure to MTR mining companies, and to push banks with existing policies to make them stronger. You can send a wake-up call to banks and call on them to stop funding the horrendously destructive practice of mountaintop removal by sending them our new video, “Mountaintop Removal: An American Tragedy,” which shows exactly what they’re bankrolling.

The practice destroys hundreds of Appalachian mountains, contaminates drinking water and sacrifices America’s communities for small seams of coal.

That’s exactly what actress and RAN ally Susan Sarandon has to say in our new video on mountaintop removal coal mining:

This week, hundreds have convened in our nation’s capitol for “Week in Washington” to call on Congress to end mountaintop removal coal mining. In RAN fashion, we are taking this message to the top financiers of the devastating mining practice with a video we think they can’t ignore.

A RAN report released today has found that Citi, PNC, Deutsche Bank and UBS are the leading financiers of mountaintop mining. They are the ATMs for coal operators and play a pivotal role in stopping the practice before it starts.

Click image to send this video to bank CEOs.

Watch this incredible video and send it to bank CEOs today. This firsthand footage will show banks exactly what they are funding when they choose to do business with MTR coal companies.

As Ms. Sarandon says, “Mountaintop removal is an American tragedy… An unnecessary, outdated practice with no place in our clean energy future.” It is time banks stop funding mountaintop removal mining and start funding our future.

We regret to inform you that this bank is being put on Notice. Effective immediately you must begin to cease all financing of coal-fired power-plants and related infrastructure.

The Rainforest Action Network, our supporters and allies, being inhabitants of this planet, do hereby give you notice to cease and desist all coal financing.

Furthermore, you are hereby required to protect public health, economic security and the climate. First and foremost by limiting your exposure to coal financing and, thereby, limiting our exposure to air, water and climate pollution.

Furthermore, you must cease and desist financial relations with the nation’s leading coal companies until they end their addiction to coal, including but not limited to: AES Corporation; Alcoa Inc; Allegheny Energy; ALLETE Inc; Alliant Energy; Ambre Energy; Ameren Corporation; American Electric Power (AEP); Arch Coal; Atlantic Power Corporation; Berkshire Hathaway; Black Hills; Corporation; CMS Energy; Constellation Energy Group; Dominion Resources; DTE Energy Company; Duke Energy Coporation; Dynegy Inc; Edison International; Empire District Electric Co; Entergy Power; Generation Corp; FirstEnergy Generation Corp; Great Plains Energy; MDU Resources Group; MGE Energy; NiSource Inc; NRG Energy Inc; NV Energy; Peabody Energy; PNM Resources; PPL Corporation; Progress Energy; RRI Energy; SCANA Corporation; Southern Company; SSA Marine; TECO Energy; Transalta Corporation; UGI Corporation; Unisource Energy Development Company; Waste Management Inc; Westar Energy Inc; Westmoreland Coal Company; and Xcel Energy Inc.

We hereby demand that you adopt firm policies to include the following criteria:

• No financing for companies pursuing new coal-fired power plants and life-extending retrofits of existing coal-fired power plants.
• No financing, for companies engaged in mountaintop removal coal mining.
• No financing for companies pursuing coal export infrastructure.
• Shift the balance of your energy financing to support power generation that is less threatening to our health and environment.

Consider this your first warning. You are on notice to shift the focus of your energy portfolio to support clean, renewable power generation in the United States.

Rainforest Action Network will be monitoring you. You have three months. After which, we are prepared to apply public pressure to evict your coal portfolio and move clean energy into its place.

You can tell the country’s biggest banks to stop funding dirty coal and start investing in clean energy alternatives!

Addiction – noun \ə-ˈdik-shən, a-\: persistent compulsive use of a substance known by the user to be harmful. (Merriam-Webster)

Citi has a problem. Despite renewing its vows in 2009 to tackle “Environmental and Social Risk Management,” including mountaintop removal coal mining, Citi is relapsing into fossil fuel addiction.

Last year, Citi raised more than $34 billion for the coal and oil industries, but raised less than two percent of that amount for companies developing renewable energy like wind and solar.

Dirty deals led by Citi last year included a $500 million bond issued by Transcanada, proponent of the Keystone XL pipeline. The $7 billion pipeline would carry crude oil strip-mined from Canada’s tar sands 1,800 miles south to the Gulf States for refining. The project would triple US oil imports from the tar sands and threaten the largest fresh-water aquifer in the world, while keeping the United States addicted to oil for many decades to come.

Citi also led the combination of Massey Energy and Alpha Natural Resources. At over $7 billion, the acquisition creates the largest mountaintop removal coal mining company in the country. MTR has devastated the Appalachian landscape and displaced hundreds of families from the region.

Other low points from 2010 include raising $1.3 billion for BP and Transocean — the companies responsible for the Gulf oil spill.

Citi needs to stop making excuses and denying that it has a problem. That’s why RAN is staging an intervention. Today, people around the world are making a difference in all of our futures by picking up the phone and calling a banker at Citi. This is no email petition, we’re actually putting our supporters on the phone with the bankers that need to know about Citi’s financing of fossil fuels so that they can help their company change course.

If you are a Citi employee reading this and want get in touch with RAN, please email answers@ran.org.

Citi bank took the financial lead on this deal, a move that drew strong criticism. Here’s the transcript of a letter from 15 community organizations, environmental NGOs, science groups and faith groups, that was sent to the bank’s CEO, Vikram Pandit:

February 03, 2011

Dear Mr. Pandit:

We write to express concern at your decision to provide both financial advice and financing commitments to Alpha Natural Resources in its acquisition of Massey Energy.

As you know, mountaintop removal (MTR) coal mining is one of America’s worst environmental violations. Every day, across Appalachia, the coal industry literally blows the tops off mountains: clearcutting forests, wiping out natural habitats, poisoning rivers and drinking water and obliterating entire communities. Not only are these mountains lost forever, but also the heritage and the health of families across the region are being sacrificed.

In 2009, you announced a “robust MTR Environmental Due Diligence Process,” giving us hope that Citi was reducing its financial backing for this most destructive mining practice.

The announcement of the Alpha-Massey deal demonstrates that your policy is not producing results. Massey and Alpha are collectively responsible for more than 26 percent of all MTR mining in Central Appalachia. As a lead in this transaction as well as a longtime financier of Alpha Natural Resources, Citi has a responsibility to more effectively address its enormous exposure to mountaintop removal coal mining.

We call on you to strengthen your 2009 MTR Due Diligence Process with a clear exclusion on financing MTR, ending financing across the board for companies that use this egregious practice.

Sincerely,

Rebecca Tarbotton, Rainforest Action Network
Natural Resources Defense Council
Janet Keating, Ohio Valley Environment Council
Vernon Haltom, Coal River Mountain Watch
Michael Brune, Sierra Club
Teri Blanton, Kentuckians for the Commonwealth
Southern Appalachian Mountain Stewards
Larry Gibson, Keeper of the Mountains Foundation
Union of Concerned Scientists
Ingrid Lakey, Earth Quaker Action Team
The Alliance for Appalachia
Kentucky Mountain Justice
Waterkeeper Alliance
Johan Frijns, BankTrack
Statewide Organizing for Community eMpowerment

On Saturday Alpha Natural Resources announced that it had bought out the company in a deal worth $8.5 billion.

That’s a high price for the stock – metallurgical coal looks lucrative to short-sighted investors as the competing Australian coal industry took a huge hit from the recent flooding.

The paradox here is that the more coal that we burn, the more extreme weather events, such as floods, we’ll have to endure, and that’s a terrible long-term investment choice.

That’s why we’re calling on the finance industry to get out of the coal game. No reputable bank should have anything to do with a company like Massey, or a company like Alpha. Citi and Morgan Stanley, two banks that guaranteed money to Alpha for the deal, are failing their responsibility and need calling to account.

A Massey sell off has seemed inevitable for months, especially following the departure of the “Dark Lord of Coal Country” Don Blankenship in December.

It remains to be seen what this sale will mean for the people who live and work in the coal-producing communities, who for years have endured extreme environmental devastation and worker safety violations. At a glance, it’s not looking great: the Charleston Gazette’s Ken Ward has the lowdown about Alpha’s dubious safety record.

So, farewell, Massey, soon you’ll be gone, like the mountains and lives you’ve destroyed. And what a legacy you leave: from violently busting unions, to poisoning countless families’ drinking water, from blowing away Appalachia’s mountains, to the deadliest US coal mining disaster in 40 years. We’ll have no fond memories of you.

Last week, RAN’s coal finance campaign released its latest report, “The Principle Matter: Banks, Climate & The Carbon Principles.” The report shows that despite adopting the Carbon Principles — once a much heralded “new path” for the banking industry — what we’ve seen in practice is still just “business as usual.”

Along with releasing the report to the media, RAN activists decided to hand-deliver copies of the report to six of the big banks that have signed onto the Carbon Principles. (We also held an event outside of Duke Energy’s coal-fired power plant in Cliffside, NC to highlight the types of investments banks should NOT be making.)

Bankers at Citi, Chase, Wells Fargo, Credit Suisse and Morgan Stanley have now received copies of the report. They’ve officially been put on notice: It’s time that Wall Street quit playing nice with Big Coal.

Last year, Wall Street and international banks took the unprecedented step of shifting away from mountaintop removal coal mining. Now it’s time that they move away from dirty energy completely. Tell the Banks to Quit Funding Dirty Coal.

Here are some pics from our deliveries:

]]> http://understory.ran.org/2011/01/27/putting-wall-street-on-notice/feed/ 0 http://understory.ran.org/2011/01/20/cliffside-coal-plant-an-example-of-what-not-to-fund/ http://understory.ran.org/2011/01/20/cliffside-coal-plant-an-example-of-what-not-to-fund/#comments Thu, 20 Jan 2011 20:35:34 +0000 Annie Sartor http://understory.ran.org/?p=11051 Cliffside is a small town in southern North Carolina with a huge coal plant owned by utility giant Duke Energy at its center. Activists from around the southeast have organized and rallied and protested since a major expansion of the plant began in 2008. Unfortunately, despite the good work of climate activists to stop construction, the plant is expected to be operational in 2012.

In 2008, when controversy surrounding the Cliffside coal plant was at its height, six major banks developed and adopted a mechanism for addressing banks’ roles in financing high-carbon-emitting industrial projects. Deemed the Carbon Principles, environmentalists welcomed this bank-led commitment as a  means of accountability for financing high-carbon projects like new coal-fired power plants. We hoped that banks adopting the  Carbon Principles meant that they were getting serious about their role in financing global warming.

RAN’s new Carbon Principles report makes clear that we were too optimistic. Duke’s Cliffside plant serves as an example of exactly the kind of project that the banks should have been moving away from. Instead of taking the Carbon Principles seriously, however, five of the six Carbon Principles banks — Citi, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley, Credit Suisse and Wells Fargo — provided nearly $1 billion in financing to Duke Energy in 2 different bond offerings, both of which were within a year and a half of the adoption of the Carbon Principles by those banks.

Yesterday, I traveled with climate justice activists from Charlotte, North Carolina who worked to stop the Cliffside’s expansion to visit the plant. We held a banner in front of the plant to draw attention to the need for banks to develop meaningful climate policies that push them to stop investments in dirty coal and instead invest in the renewable energy of the future.

Its time that banks get the message and make real commitments to stop bankrolling plants like Cliffside that will spew global warming gasses into the atmosphere for decades to come.

Take action and demand that the Carbon Principles banks stop funding coal plants!

Two years ago no bank had a policy on coal mining, and Wall Street was providing finance and credit indiscriminately to the most destructive form of mining in the country. Bank of America, Citi, Morgan Stanley, Credit Suisse, JPMorgan Chase, and Wells Fargo have successively passed public policies limiting their financial relationships with coal operators that practice mountaintop removal (MTR) coal mining.

The move comes as a response to more than three years of national pressure. In 2007, we began with a campaign focused on Bank of America, the lead financier of MTR coal mining companies at the time. We have gone on to work with all of the largest banks in the country to encourage the entire industry to shift its policies. These policies signal a sector-wide shift away from a mining practice that has become increasingly controversial and a move toward more environmentally conscious fossil fuels financing.

One of the major impacts of these mountaintop mining policies is that the banks are no longer financing Massey Energy. In particular, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America and Wells Fargo, all of which have had substantial financing relationships with Massey Energy since January 2005, no longer finance the notorious company.

We took a tour of some local bank branches to say “Thank you!”,

Citi’s initial response, a statement on their website that the bank had “has implemented a robust MTR Environmental Due Diligence Process” was a disappointment to us. While Citi had at least acknowledged that MTR mining is a critical issue, we were not hearing any commitment from the bank to end their financing.

However one line, gave a glimmer of hope. “Based on implementation experience, we will review and revise our MTR Environmental Due Diligence process over time and as regulations change.”

We’ve been talking to Citi over the past year, urging the bank to strengthen this policy, to adopt a strong identifiable threshold for transactions that they will not accept and to publicly report on the policy’s implementation.

Yesterday, the bank released their 2009 Citizenship report and there is a significant section on their MTR policy.

Our assessment is that Citi is making some progress, but still has a way to go.

One of the things that I like is their reporting on the number of MTR company transactions that have been through Citi’s ‘enhanced due diligence process’ (3) and the number of transactions that were approved and closed (2). This tells us that there is some substance to the policy and that there is at least one MTR company Citi is not prepared to do business with.

I am not going to speculate on the identity of the company that Citi didn’t do business with, however a few hours of research on Bloomberg gives a picture of whom Citi will fund. Since August 2009, when Citi adopted their MTR policy, Citi has done business with at least two MTR mining companies: TECO Energy (the 7th largest producer of MTR coal in 2009) and CONSOL Energy (11th largest).

The Citi policy is an interesting contrast to one released by Bank of America, in December last year, which sets out a clear performance standard “We will phase out financing of companies whose predominant method of extracting coal is through mountain top removal.” This is easier at-a-glance to hold the bank to account over, however we’ve yet to see the level of transparent reporting that Citi are giving us.

A similar Bloomberg search on Bank of America transactions reveals financial transactions with TECO and CONSOL, since their policy was adopted, plus the information that Bank of America is listed as the largest stockholder of shares in Alpha Natural Resources (the 3rd biggest producer of MTR coal in Appalachia).

So Citi and Bank of America both have a way to go before they can say they are no longer financing Appalachian mountain destruction. Yet, for now, they can hold their heads up a little higher than Chase bank, the biggest US financier of MTR coal mining, who has no policy on mountaintop removal mining at all. It seems to me that Chase is missing an opportunity here.

Illustration by Stefan Lorant

As an ode to the  “rank ‘em and spank ‘em” strategy coined by our outgoing Executive Director Mike Brune, we proudly present the following roster of international banks backing expansion in the tar sands.

The table below is based on credit extended underwritten by each bank to companies operating in the tar sands since 2007 according to Bloomberg. Restrictions at Bloomberg now prevent us from publishing deal-by-deal details to the web, but are available upon request if you leave your email in the comments.

Each of these banks received letters from RAN, IEN and BankTrack late last year requesting information about how they are addressing the damage caused by tar sands development. Responses (or lack thereof) will help us identify which banks are serious about responsible banking, and which may need more convincing. Responses received to date are also linked in the table after the jump.

UPDATE: There’s been some questions about how these numbers are derived.  We have answers, following the table.

*Totals are based on underwriting league tables reported by Bloomberg. Totals are derived from loans to companies with significant operations in the tar sands. Specifically the companies listed below. Totals may not reflect actual lending. Totals represent the full value of loans where the bank acted as lead book-runner (also called managing underwriter, lead manager, etc…) . Where the bank was one of multiple lead book-runners, value is awarded pro-rata.  Here’s the details from Bloomberg (look under “fixed income eligibility criteria”).

Athabasca Oil Sands Corp
Baytex Energy Trust
Bonavista Energy Trust
BP plc
Bronco Energy Ltd
Canadian Natural Resources Ltd
Canadian Oil Sands Trust
CanWest Petroleum Corp
Cenovus Energy Inc
Chevron Corp
China National Petroleum Corp
Connacher Oil & Gas Ltd
ConocoPhillips
Devon Energy Corp
Enbridge Inc
EnCana Corp
Enerplus Resources Fund
Exxon Mobil Corp
Harvest Energy Trust
Husky Energy Inc
Imperial Oil Ltd
Inter Pipeline Fund
Kinder Morgan Energy Partners LP
Koch Resources LLC
Korea National Oil Corp
Marathon Oil Corp
MEG Energy Corp
Mocal Energy Ltd
Murphy Oil Corp
Nexen Inc
Nippon Oil Corp
Occidental Petroleum Corp
Oilsands Quest Inc
OPTI Canada Inc
Paramount Resources Ltd
Pembina Pipeline Income Fund
Pengrowth Energy Trust
Penn West Energy Trust
Petrobank Energy & Resources Ltd
Petro-Canada
Royal Dutch Shell plc
Sinopec Group
StatoilHydro ASA
Suncor Energy Inc
Syncrude Canada Ltd
Total SA
TransCanada Corp
UTS Energy Corp

We here at RAN are hoping that you can help us capitalize (no pun intended!) on the public focus on the banks this week to raise questions about another important and relevant consideration that hasn’t gotten much airtime in the current debate: What other risky behavior are the banks involved in, that threatens further economic calamity?

Many of the bailed-out banks are engaging in very risky investments, sinking billions of dollars in support of fossil-fuel intensive industries, such as coal and oil. Unlike Treasury Secretary Geithner, who reportedly resisted calls for more conditions on how banks spend the taxpayers’ money, we think that the release of additional public funds to these institutions should come with more strings attached. Or, at the very least, it should invite more public scrutiny of the banks’ other toxic investments.

The banks don’t really want to talk about their deep involvement in the climate crisis. But those risky and toxic investments (a) will undoubtedly face additional costs and regulation in the near future; and (b) are locking in an unsustainable infrastructure that will undermine the efforts to bring greenhouse gas emissions in line with scientific necessity. Furthermore, the banks, even while receiving a government hand-out, are taking actions that undermine the goals of a ‘green’ economic stimulus package. If Bank of America, Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, or any of these other banks provide financial support to mountain top removal coal companies, new coal-fired power plants, and tar sands pipelines, they are helping to lock in long-term dirty energy infrastructure, undermining other efforts to address the other pressing issue of our day: runaway greenhouse gas emissions and the threats to the global climate.

That’s why RAN’s Global Finance Campaign continues to press these banks to take responsibility for their role in fueling climate change, and to redirect their resources away from dirty energy sources and towards support for energy efficiency and clean, renewable energy resources such as solar and wind. It is unconscionable that wind and solar are taking a hit from the credit crisis, at precisely the time when we need to ramp up our national capacity to harness clean energy. We believe that the banks must account for and commit to reducing the carbon emissions that are embedded in their financial services portfolios, and help fund the future.

-Dana

“In an interview Sunday on “This Week” on ABC, the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, alluded to internal debate when she was asked whether nationalization, or partial nationalization, of the largest banks was a good idea. “Well, whatever you want to call it,” said Ms. Pelosi, Democrat of California. “If we are strengthening them, then the American people should get some of the upside of that strengthening. Some people call that nationalization.”

Yes, some people do. Namely, most of the other people in the world when faced with the government owning the majority share in a company. What does this mean for the banks? Citi and Bank of America lead the pack as poster children for the declining financial sector. Ken Lewis has some serious egg on his face as the train-wreck that is Merrill Lynch pulls up to the station, and Citi is hiving itself off into smaller and smaller chunks to keep it’s head above water. Both are desperately in need of more government intervention to avoid collapse. Whatever we call it, let’s spend some serious time thinking about what kind of conditions should be placed on any public money for the private banks.

On Nov 14, 2008, activists from the Coal River Valley, an area hard-hit by mountaintop removal coal extraction, took action against Citi in Beckley, WV.  They distributed fliers outside a Citi Financial office, informed Citi employees that their employer had a major role in destroying their communities, and handed fliers to customers entering the office.  Then they headed off to a meeting with an Appalachian region-wide effort to stop mountaintop removal.

Vernon Haltom, Coal River Mountain Watch