Campaigns
ANZ
Australia’s climate laggard
$19.8 billion
Loaned to dirty fossil fuels globally since 2016
Australia’s biggest fossil fuel lender since Paris
ANZ is Australia’s biggest funder of dirty fossil fuels, providing a total of $19.8 billion to the coal, oil and gas industries in the eight years since the Paris Agreement was signed.
ANZ went on a climate wrecking company lending spree in early 2024, loaning hundreds of millions to companies with some of the biggest coal and gas power expansion plans globally – GE Vernova, Siemens Energy, and San Miguel Corporation. Factoring this in, ANZ has blown past $20 billion in fossil fuel lending since Paris, the first Australian bank to do so.
Last updated: July 2024
Take action
Tell ANZ that its Paris Agreement pledge means no new fossil fuels!
ANZ is funding gas expansion in Asia Pacific
The last few years have shown that ANZ is willing to fund companies responsible for a massive buildout of new gas projects in Asia. ANZ is financing companies extracting the gas and building the pipelines in Australia, and those building the gas-fired power plants in Asia.
Asia is being pursued as a growth market for gas power projects and infrastructure. A staggering 63% of the world’s proposed new gas power is in Asia. Despite opposition from local communities, the fossil fuel industry is pushing costly and climate destroying projects in this region, and it’s being enabled by ANZ.
In just the last three years, ANZ has loaned hundreds of millions to some of Australia’s biggest expansion projects – Woodside’s Scarborough, and Santos’ Barossa gas project. But it’s also funded companies responsible for part of these massive gas buildout plans throughout Asia.
ANZ has funded:
- APA Group, Australia’s largest pipeline company which is planning to construct pipelines that could light the fuse on the Beetaloo carbon bomb.
- JERA, one of Japan’s biggest power producers, is involved in a staggering amount of new gas power projects in Bangladesh and Vietnam.
- GE Vernova, one of the largest power companies in the world, is proposing to build an enormous amount of new fossil gas power plants in Bangladesh and Vietnam.
- San Miguel Corporation, proposing to build almost as much new gas power as the entire Australian National Electricity Market currently has.
- Baker Hughes, an engineering company supplying the equipment needed for Woodside’s Pluto 2 LNG project which will process gas from Scarborough.
This kind of financing activity calls into question not only ANZ’s commitments, but the kind of world and economies they want to be shaping. These companies are ensuring that the ‘Asian growth market’ is locked into depending on outdated and harmful gas technologies instead of enabling clean, renewable energy. ANZ is enabling climate havoc across Asia.
Australia’s biggest backer of dirty coal and gas
This chart shows ANZ’s year-on-year lending to different fossil fuel sectors since January 2016. The charts shown below include lending to expansion projects and lending to companies with fossil fuel expansion plans.
We have included ANZ’s own reported exposures to fossil fuels as a further demonstration of the bank’s trends.
ANZ has loaned $19.8 billion to fossil fuels between 2016 and 2023, this includes:
- $3.8 billion to coal,
- $6 billion to gas (exc. LNG)
- $4.1 billion to LNG
- $5.9 billion to oil
ANZ has forked out $3.8 billion to the coal industry since 2016, including over $500 million in the last two years (2022-2023) – comfortably taking the unenviable top spot for coal financing among Australia’s big four banks.
ANZ has also been Australia’s largest lender to gas (including LNG) since 2016, having loaned $10.1 billion over this period. ANZ’s current oil and gas clients include Santos, Woodside, China Gas, APA Group, JERA, Beach Energy, Siemens Energy, and San Miguel Corporation.
ANZ was once again the largest lender to companies expanding coal, oil and gas last year, having loaned over $900 million in 2023 alone.
Funding for expansionary fossil fuel projects
In late 2015, ANZ publicly committed to taking action to support the Paris Agreement, which includes the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. The science is clear: if we are to meet that goal, there can be no further expansion of the coal, oil or gas sectors.
Yet ANZ loaned $3 billion for projects that expand the scale of the fossil fuel industry from 2016 to 2022. These projects will enable the release of over 5.3 billion tonnes of CO2, equivalent to almost eleven times Australia’s total 2021 greenhouse gas emissions. Encouraginly, 2023 was the first year since the Paris Agreement that ANZ did not directly fund a new or expanded coal, oil or gas project.
The $3 billion ANZ has loaned to new and expanded fossil fuel projects since 2016 includes:
- $144 million to new coal projects,
- $1 billion to new gas projects (exc. LNG)
- $1.4 billion to new LNG projects
- $441 million to new oil projects
In total, these projects would result in 5.3 billion tonnes of CO2-equivalent. Below are some examples of new and expanded projects ANZ has funded:
- Pluto 2 LNG (Scarborough)
- Ichthys LNG
- Barossa gas project
- Elk-Antelope gas fields
- New Acland Stage 3 coal mine
- Block A Aceh gas field
- Black Point Power Station
Funding for companies with expansion plans
ANZ provided a further $9 billion in finance to companies expanding coal, oil and gas between 2016-2023, making it the biggest funder of fossil fuel expansion among Australia’s major banks.
ANZ’s hypocrisy and policy shortfalls
ANZ’s exclusion of direct financing to new thermal coal mines and coal-fired power plants is undermined by not restricting corporate finance to the companies developing them. ANZ also does not exclude financing new and expanded metallurgical coal mines, despite the fact that due to its reliance on metallurgical coal, the steel industry accounts for 7% of global emissions.
For years, ANZ was the only big four Australian bank not to have ruled out directly financing new oil and gas fields, lagging behind its peers. After significant pressure from customers, shareholders and civil society organisations from Papua New Guinea (CELCOR) and across the world, ANZ finally ruled out direct financing to new or expanded oil and gas fields, new liquefied natural gas (LNG) export plants, and announced it won’t bank any oil and gas company not already on its books.
While ANZ walking away from directly funding oil and gas extraction is a welcome development, the reality is that project finance only covers a small portion of its overall lending to the fossil fuel industry. Corporate finance accounted for 73% of ANZ’s lending to fossil fuels from 2016-2023, and the bank has poured $9 billion into companies with fossil fuel expansion plans during that time. With bonds also playing an increasingly important role in funding fossil fuel companies, it’s absolutely essential that ANZ rules out corporate finance and bonds to companies with expansion plans.
ANZ has set a target to have zero exposure to thermal coal by 2030, and to reduce its exposure to the oil and gas sector by 40% by October 2025. However, ANZ’s policy does not account for the importance of individual transactions. While ANZ will need to drop 40% of its oil and gas exposure by October 2025, the remaining 60% of exposure could still be to current clients like Santos, Woodside, JERA, APA Group, and GE Vernova which have massive oil and gas expansion plans. ANZ must ensure its clients are actually transitioning away from fossil fuels in order for these targets to have any merit.
ANZ will require its fossil fuel sector customers to have transition plans in place by October 2025, but appallingly it does not require these clients to have Paris-aligned scope 3 emissions reductions targets as part of their transition plans.
It’s hard to overstate how big of a flaw that is, considering that scope 3 emissions often account for 90% of upstream fossil fuel companies’ emissions. In other words, ANZ may well be happy to sign off on transition plans as ‘credible’ so long as they address 10% of a client’s emissions. This makes a mockery of transition plan assessments and is more or less licence to keep producing more oil and gas with no financial consequences from the bank.
See ANZ’s most recent Climate Change Commitment and Climate-Related Financial Disclosures Report for more information.
Case study
People-powered campaign pushes ANZ to rule out Papua LNG
In July 2023, it was reported that an enormous new gas project in Papua New Guinea – the Papua Liquefied Natural Gas (Papua LNG) project was seeking project finance from international lenders. The proposed project consists of entirely new onshore gas fields, four liquefied natural gas (LNG) trains, and a 320 km pipeline, developed by French oil and gas giant, TotalEnergies (37.55% stake), in partnership with notorious climate-wreckers ExxonMobil (37.04%), Santos (22.83%), and JX Nippon (2.58%).
ANZ was spotlighted as a prospective lender, had previously provided financial support for the project in its earlier stages of development, and had an ongoing relationship with one of Papua LNG’s key developers, Santos.
ANZ was on the receiving end of months of pressure from customers, shareholders and civil society organisations from Papua New Guinea (CELCOR) and across the world, all concerned that this climate laggard bank would once again directly fund a new fossil gas project.
Then in May 2024 ANZ announced that it would no longer provide direct financing to new or expanded oil and gas fields, new liquefied natural gas (LNG) export plants, and won’t bank any oil and gas company not already on their books, committing to not financing the Papua LNG project.
This commitment from ANZ was a testament to all of our collective pressure, and another clear demonstration that together we have what it takes to make our banks live up to their climate commitments.
We’ve seen the impact our campaigns have had on projects like Papua LNG, which has seen a final investment decision (approval) significantly delayed because of a lack of willing bankers. PNG’s Petroleum & Energy Minister, Kerenga Kua, remarked in December 2023 that the fossil fuel finance space has changed significantly in the last decade. “There was a time not long ago when investment undertaken by ExxonMobil or TotalEnergies in a new petroleum project has always been regarded as a blue-chip investment”, but sustained, people-powered campaigning for climate action has “impacted on the ability of the banks to finance a project like this.”
As a sign of the changing times, Papua New Guinea’s first gas export project, PNG LNG, secured the largest project finance deal in history in 2010. Its successor project, Papua LNG, is now having immense difficulty getting commitments from major international banks.
ANZ’s customers – case studies
Woodside
In March 2022, ANZ loaned $290 million to Global Infrastructure Partners as part of a $4.6 billion loan to facilitate an acquisition of a 49 per cent stake in the Pluto 2 LNG project, a loan that was critical to Woodside deciding to go ahead with its disastrous giant new gas project, Scarborough.
In July 2022, ANZ loaned $126 million to Woodside as part of a $1.76 billion general corporate loan.
Woodside is Australia’s largest producer of gas, and is pursuing massive expansion plans completely out of line with global climate agreements. Woodside’s business plans would see it bring on five new oil and gas projects currently in its pipeline. By 2028, the company is aiming to increase production by 24 per cent, and if it gets its way, its proposed projects would see an estimated 2 billion tonnes of harmful CO2 entering the atmosphere.
In May 2021, the International Energy Agency released the first Net Zero by 2050 Scenario and concluded that no new oil and gas fields could be developed in a world hoping to limit global warming to 1.5°C. Since then, Woodside has sanctioned a giant new gas project, the climate-wrecking Scarborough/Pluto 2 LNG project in November 2021, and followed this up in June 2023 by sanctioning the new Trion oil field in the Gulf of Mexico.
In April 2024, Woodside set a world record when 58% of its shareholders voted down its poor excuse for a climate transition plan, clearly showing that the company’s shareholders don’t buy the claim that Woodside’s oil and gas expansion is aligned with the Paris Agreement.
Santos
In August 2022, ANZ loaned $144 million to Santos as part of a $1.8 billion loan. This loan was related to the highly controversial Barossa gas field Santos is currently developing. The Barossa project faces opposition from some Tiwi Islands Traditional Owner communities, as Santos plans to drill for gas in Tiwi Islands Sea Country.
In September 2022, Tiwi Islands Traditional Owners won a federal court challenge against NOPSEMA with respect to Santos’ Barossa project. The court ruled that Santos had failed to adequately consult Tiwi Islands Traditional Owners about the project. Santos challenged the ruling, but its appeal was rejected by the Full Federal Court in December.
This loan in particular was mired in controversy due to the fact that it occurred whilst the Barossa gas project was being disputed by Tiwi Islands Traditional Owners. In April 2023, ANZ received a human rights complaint for its involvement in the loan from six Traditional Owners and Elders from the Munupi, Malawu and Jikilaruwu clans on the Tiwi Islands, and one Elder from Larrakia country in Darwin, assisted by Equity Generation Lawyers. The complaint demanded that ANZ withdraw from its current loan to Santos and not finance the associated Darwin LNG project, which would process Barossa gas. Read all about this loan in our blog post.
In September 2023, ANZ had a hand in arranging even more money for Santos, acting as a co-placement agent for a $1.3 billion bond. At its December 2023 AGM, in response to questioning about the loan, ANZ CEO, Shayne Elliot, committed to visit the Tiwi Islands to discuss the human rights complaint and what is at stake from Barossa. Shamefully, in June 2024, ANZ rejected the human rights complaint on the basis that Santos ‘had not consented to participate in the process’.
In December 2023, the Barossa gas project was cleared to proceed by regulators, sixteen months after the September 2022 Federal Court decision to suspend drilling.
Santos is now proceeding with Barossa with the financial backing of ANZ.
JERA
In October 2023, ANZ and Westpac loaned $125 million and $101 million, respectively, to JERA Global Markets as part of a $2.3 billion loan related to the company’s LNG business. JERA has some of the biggest gas expansion plans in the Asia-Pacific region. Some of its dirtiest new proposed LNG projects include:
- Barossa: JERA owns a 12.5% stake in Santos’ destructive Barossa gas project, as well as a 6.1% stake in its associated gas processing plant, Darwin LNG. The issues with Barossa have been well-documented – in 2023 ANZ and Westpac faced formal human rights complaints from Tiwi and Larrakia Traditional Owners over their involvement in a loan related to the project.
- Scarborough: In February 2024, JERA bought a 15.1% stake in Woodside’s climate-wrecking Scarbrough gas field off the coast of North-Western Australia. The gas produced from Scarborough would, when burned, see nearly 700 million tonnes of CO2 enter the atmosphere, almost 1.5 times Australia’s annual emissions.
- Freeport LNG Expansion: JERA owns a 25.7% stake in the Freeport LNG project in Texas, USA. Freeport LNG is expanding its capacity, which would make the facility at least the fourth biggest LNG project in the world.
JERA is a major player in the Japan-led fossil gas expansion in Asia, pursuing five LNG import terminals and LNG to power projects with nameplate capacity of 11.6GW in Bangladesh and Vietnam, effectively trying to lock these countries into dirty and expensive fossil fuels instead of renewable energy. Perhaps most egregious of these examples is the pursuit of carbon bomb LNG projects in the Chattogram region of Bangladesh.
GE Vernova
In March 2024 ANZ was involved in a whopping $9.2 billion loan to GE Vernova. This loan coincided with General Electric spinning off GE Vernova, a company specialising in the energy sector.
Despite the company’s name meaning “new green”, it has vast fossil fuel interests and its business strategy includes building out an enormous amount of new LNG power plants in Bangladesh and Vietnam. In the Chattogram region of Bangladesh alone, gas or LNG projects with GE involvement would add approximately 430 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e) to the atmosphere throughout the plants’ operational lives, over four times the country’s total emissions in 2022.
Because GE Vernova is involved in gas-fired power generation and supplying equipment to gas power stations (rather than the extraction of the gas itself), it is exempt from ANZ’s requirement that certain fossil fuel customers have a Paris-aligned transition plan to continue receiving finance. That means ANZ could carry on funding GE Vernova indefinitely despite its prolific role in the massive gas expansion planned in the Asia Pacific region. This clearly shows that ANZ’s existing policies are not good enough.
Glencore
In March 2021, ANZ took part in a giant $16.7 billion loan to coal giant, Glencore. ANZ arranged a whopping $784 million for the company as part of a $3.9 billion bond in September 2023.
Glencore is “one of the world’s largest producers and exporters of seaborne traded thermal and coking coal.” The company is also pursuing an extension for the Hunter Valley Continued Operations project, which is the largest coal mining proposal ever put forward in NSW. The proposed continuation of the mine would see mining continue until 2050, with emissions estimates of up to 1.2 billion tonnes of CO2-e, more than 2.5 times Australia’s current annual emissions.
At a 2024 Australian Senate Inquiry into Greenwashing, a representative of Glencore openly admitted that “we do not make any claim to be aligned with the Paris Agreement”. Based on Glencore’s plans to keep mining coal for decades, anyone could see that was the case. But it’s an indictment on ANZ that it will still fund a coal-mining company that openly admits it’s not aligned with global climate goals that ANZ claims commitment to.
ANZ has no restrictions on financing metallurgical coal mining, and only weak requirements for thermal coal mining companies.
San Miguel Corporation
In early 2024 ANZ loaned $172 million to San Miguel Corporation as part of a $3.1 billion loan with other banks. The Institute of Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) has raised massive red flags associated with San Miguel’s fossil fuel-oriented growth strategy.
The company is building new coal-fired power plants and aims to add 1.9GW of coal-fired power capacity and 1.3GW of gas-fired capacity by the end of 2025. In addition, San Miguel has over 10GW of gas power projects proposed in the medium to long-term. That’s almost the same amount of gas-fired capacity currently installed in the entire Australian National Electricity Market.
San Miguel is developing nearly 7.5 times more fossil fuel power capacity than its peer company, Aboitiz Power, in the Philippines, and renewable energy will only account for 15% of the company’s generation capacity in 2025. For comparison, in 2025 renewables account for over 40% of electricity supply in the IEA’s Net-Zero by 2050 Scenario.
Baker Hughes
In November 2023, ANZ participated in a $4.6 billion loan to Baker Hughes, a company supplying equipment to several massive fossil gas expansion projects such as the LNG processing plant for Woodside’s Scarborough gas field and Venture Global LNG’s Plaquemines project.
The Plaquemines LNG project would be the second largest LNG export facility in the United States. In 2023, Venture Global LNG announced its plans to increase its LNG export capacity by adding 30 million tonnes per annum, more than the largest LNG export terminal in the world. Baker Hughes has signed an agreement with Venture Global to supply the equipment needed for this enormous fossil gas expansion.
Under ANZ’s policy, engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contract companies like Baker Hughes will not be required to produce a transition plan to continue receiving finance, despite their pivotal role in constructing new fossil fuel projects that unleash decades of harmful emissions. If this gap isn’t closed, ANZ could continue to fund the expansion of the fossil fuel industry.
ANZ Policy Scorecard
New and expanded fossil fuels
ANZ Policy Source: ANZ Extractives Info Statement April 2024
Coal mines
The science
- IEA Net Zero Emissions by 2050 scenario (NZE): No new thermal or metallurgical coal mines or extensions
- IPCC (AR6): Emissions from existing fossil fuel infrastructure without additional abatement would exceed the total limit of emissions in 1.5°C pathways with no or limited overshoot
Thermal coal:
Project-level finance policy: Rules out project-level finance to new and expansion of existing thermal coal mines (defined as mines with production or reserves greater than 35% thermal coal), expansion of existing mines or extensions to operating life.
Corporate finance policy: Doesn’t rule out corporate lending to companies building new and expanded thermal coal mines (even though most finance to the sector is corporate finance).
Bonds policy: Doesn’t rule out arranging bonds for companies building new and expanded thermal coal mines.
Clients pursuing new, expanded, or thermal coal mine lifetime extensions: Glencore
Which banks are they lagging behind?
Lots of banks, including:
Corporate finance and bonds:
Westpac will also no longer provide corporate finance or ‘bond facilitation’ to companies earning more than 15% of their revenue from thermal coal mining, exiting any relationship with existing clients by 2025.
Barclays no longer provides general corporate purposes financing to clients engaged in opening new thermal coal mines or material expansion of existing thermal coal mines.
Metallurgical coal:
Project-level finance policy: Doesn’t rule out project finance for new and expanded metallurgical coal mines, or mine lifetime extensions.
Corporate finance policy: Doesn’t rule out corporate lending to companies building new and expanded metallurgical coal mines, or mine lifetime extensions.
Bonds policy: Doesn’t rule out arranging bonds for companies building new and expanded metallurgical coal mines, or mine lifetime extensions.
Clients pursuing new, expanded, or metallurgical coal mine lifetime extensions: BHP
Which banks are they lagging behind?
Lots of banks including:
Project finance:
HSBC will not provide new finance to any client for the specific purposes of, or new advisory services in connection with, activities that include new metallurgical coal mines.
Westpac will not provide project finance for greenfield (new) metallurgical coal mines.
Société Générale will not provide dedicated financial transactions, products and services when the underlying activities are: Metallurgical coal extraction activities.
Corporate finance and bonds:
La Banque Postale has committed to not provide finance to coal companies that are developing new coal-related projects.
Coal power plants
The science
- IEA NZE: No new coal power projects
- IPCC (AR6) limited overshoot 1.5°C pathways: No new fossil fuel infrastructure (See above)
Project-level finance policy: Rules out project-level finance to new thermal coal-fired power plants.
Corporate finance policy: Doesn’t rule out corporate lending to companies building or expanding coal power.
Bonds policy: Doesn’t rule out arranging bonds for companies building or expanding coal power.
Clients pursuing new and expanded coal-fired power: San Miguel Corporation
Which banks are they lagging behind?
CommBank: which has ruled out providing corporate finance or ‘bond facilitation’ to companies that are proposing to expand or are expanding their coal-fired power generation capacity.
Oil and gas fields
The science
- IEA NZE: No new long lead time conventional oil and gas projects
- IPCC (AR6) limited overshoot 1.5°C pathways: No new fossil fuel infrastructure (See above)
Project-level finance policy: Rules out project finance to new or expanded oil and gas fields.
Corporate finance policy: No policy to rule out corporate lending to companies pursuing new and expanded oil and gas fields.
Bonds policy: No policy to rule out arranging bonds for companies pursuing new and expanded oil and gas fields.
Clients pursuing new and expanded oil and gas fields: Santos, Woodside, Senex, Beach Energy, Medco Energi Internasional, Reliance Industries.
Which banks are they lagging behind?
Corporate finance:
Danske Bank has decided not to offer long-term financing or refinancing to E&P oil and gas companies that intend to expand supply of oil and gas beyond what was approved for development by 31st of December 2021.
NatWest has committed to stop lending to and underwriting bonds for major oil and gas producers unless they have a Credible Transition Plan aligned with the 2015 Paris Agreement.
Crédit Mutuel has committed to not financing any oil and gas company that does not have a planned year-on-year oil and gas reduction trajectory.
LNG infrastructure
The science
- IEA NZE: “a global [LNG] supply glut forms in the mid-2020s and under construction projects are no longer necessary.” (p. 139)
- IPCC (AR6) limited overshoot 1.5°C pathways: No new fossil fuel infrastructure (See above)
Project-level finance policy: Rules out project finance to LNG projects that service new or expansionary oil and gas fields
Corporate finance policy: No policy to rule out financing to companies pursuing new and expansionary LNG projects
Bonds policy: No policy to rule out arranging bonds for companies pursuing new and expansionary LNG projects
Clients pursuing new and expanded LNG projects: JERA, GE Vernova, Woodside, Global Infrastructure Partners/Woodside (Pluto 2 LNG Train), Siemens Energy, Baker Hughes.
Pipelines
- IEA NZE: No new long lead time conventional oil and gas projects
- IPCC (AR6) limited overshoot 1.5°C pathways: No new fossil fuel infrastructure (See above)
Project-level finance policy: No policy to rule out project finance to pipelines servicing new or expanded oil and gas fields.
Corporate finance policy: No policy to rule out corporate lending companies developing pipelines for new and expanded oil and gas fields.
Bonds policy: No policy to rule out arranging bonds for companies developing pipelines for new and expanded oil and gas fields.
Clients pursuing pipelines for new and expanded oil and gas fields: APA Group
Which banks are they lagging behind?
Project finance:
Lots of banks, including:
Commbank: “Provide no project finance to (i) new Floating Production Storage and Offloading infrastructure dedicated solely to new oil extraction projects; (ii) new transmission pipelines dedicated solely to new oil or new gas extraction projects; or (iii) new oil ships or new gas vessels.”
Westpac: Westpac has committed to not providing project finance or bond facilitation for new or expansionary oil and gas fields, including associated dedicated infrastructure like pipelines.
ANZ Climate Scorecard
since January 2016
since January 2016
Total lending to fossil fuels
Lending to companies with expansion plans
$8,959 million
Lending to expansionary projects
$3,012 million
Total emissions enabled from expansionary projects
(tonnes CO2)
5.3 billion
The data in this section covers the timeframe 1 Jan 2016 – 31 Dec 2023
Appendix
ANZ's reported fossil fuel exposure
ANZ’s reported exposure includes:
“Coal mining includes exposures to metallurgical (coking) coal used for steel making and thermal coal used for energy generation”
“Exposure to oil and gas includes all of the oil and gas value chain such as exploration, extraction, transport, refining and retail”
2023 Annual General Meeting (AGM) season
ANZ, NAB and Westpac continue to undermine their commitments to the Paris Agreement by financing companies that are expanding the fossil fuel industry.
Campaign news
Join us
Subscribe for email updates: be part of the movement taking action to protect our climate.