268
Bank of America Reverses Its Pledge Not to Finance Fossil Fuels
(www.nytimes.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Feb 2024
268 points (98.9% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5183 readers
829 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Article: The changes come as Republican lawmakers step up efforts to punish businesses that consider climate change and the environment in their operations.
TL;DR: RepubliQans fucking everything up to destroy the planet, yet again
Comments: Dang Bank of America! oooo that bank! banks, right?! Let's all make sure not to vote for the current Democrat
While true, it's guilt by omission not to remind people that Biden has thoroughly broken his campaign promise of "no more drilling on federal lands", and in fact granted even more drilling permits then Trump did before him.
It is not guilt by anything, you are not obligated to derail other discussions with information linked to the topic tenuously at best.
OP is about climate change and funding petroleum. Parent comment was about US party politics. My comment brought up petroleum drilling permissions in a US party political setting. Why don't you think that is related?
It's a commercial enterprise, not a government one
But governments passed the bills against sensible business practices, by preventing lending money to fossil fuel companies, which are obviously in significant danger due to additional government regulation in other areas. Bloody Communists! Sorry Republicans.
The biggest problem is that this is global, so we are going to see large international banks also dropping similar language, due to the US market being massive and it being hard not to get sued over this.
Even still, surely the laws preventing them from refusing to invest in coal and other fossil fuels are uncosntitutional?