Several of the UK's largest high street banks are running the risk of a green
consumer boycott after a
new
report revealed that despite high profile advertising campaigns touting
their green credentials, they are consistently funding carbon intensive
coal-related projects.
The report from Friends of the Earth Scotland, green group Platform and
student network People & Planet claims that Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS),
HSBC and Barclays have all issued large loans to coal and carbon intensive
energy companies in recent years, while simultaneously highlighting their
investment in renewables.
Advertisement
The study details how RBS has invested almost $16bn in coal-related firms in
the last two years, while HSBC has ploughed $10bn into the sector and Barclays
has invested $5.79bn. It also claims that together the three banks have loaned
energy company $70bn last year, despite its plans to build the UK's first new
coal-fired power station in 30 years at Kingsnorth in Kent.
Bronwen Smith-Thomas, campaigns officer at People & Planet said that the
student group was prepared to organise a boycott of RBS if the bank failed to "
pull out of fossil fuels and focus their investments and experience into
supporting renewable energy development".
A spokeswoman for RBS insisted that the company remains "committed to
supporting the transition to a low carbon economy", and is one the largest
financiers of renewable energy globally, with over $1.5bn committed to such
projects.
She also argued that by investing in coal-related projects the company could
help ensure that such projects adhere to environmental best practices. She added
that RBS is signed up to the
Equator Principles,
which obliges the company consider the environmental risks associated with
infrastructure projects when making investment decisions.
These investment principles, which are endorsed by more than 50 banks
globally, require investors to ensure that "the projects we finance are
developed in a manner that is socially responsible and reflect sound
environmental management practices". They also oblige investors to ensure that
"negative effects on project-affected ecosystems and communities should be
avoided where possible, and if these effects are unavoidable, they should be
reduced, mitigated and/or compensated for appropriately".
A spokeswoman for HSBC similarly highlighted the bank's support for the
Equator Principles, adding that while it would continue to work with fossil
fuel-based companies they had to meet the strict criteria set out in its Energy
Sector Policy.
However, a spokesman for Friends of the Earth Scotland dismissed the argument
that investing in coal projects allowed banks to help push mining and energy
companies towards embracing greener technologies and practices. "The idea that
by investing you can help encourage clean coal doesn't wash," he said. "There is
no such clean coal, only coal that is a bit more efficient. Arguing that you are
pushing for firms to embrace carbon capture is not enough – either make it a
mandatory condition of investment or don't invest."
But the spokeswoman for HSBC countered that while banks were rapidly
increasing investment in renewables, it was economically unrealistic for them to
ditch traditional forms of energy altogether. "Many of the potential solutions
to the problems of climate change are medium or long-term, and not short-term,"
she said. "Whilst the technologies which will support the move to a low carbon
future exist, it is still too early in their development to be commercially
deployed at the necessary scale to fully replace our traditional sources of
heat, power and transport, without undermining economic growth."
Comments
Have your say on this article