At present, we are a group of volunteers united by the belief that our banks must change – quickly. People across the world are working on solutions to the planet’s environmental problems, while their personal money is quietly being poured into industries that damage the environment. We believe that the banking industry is not being significantly challenged by its customers, but that if it were, banks would begin to divest from the projects that are harming us – if not start investing in environmentally-sound projects.

Our team has a range of backgrounds, skills, and experience, but we are all motivated by a desire to secure a safe and healthy future for the planet.

At the moment, we do not have funding.

Bank.Green is currently run by a group of enthusiastic volunteers with a shared belief that the banking industry can be changed using people power. You can volunteer too.

No, none of us has any financial interests in the banks we recommend.

You can email us at hello@bank.green or fill in our contact form.

When you entrust your money to a bank, it can be used to make loans to, or investments in, individuals or businesses. An individual might harness that money to buy a house, while a business might use the money to build an oil pipeline.

Without your money, banks cannot make these loans and investments. It is up to you to choose – safeguard your money with banks that support fossil fuels, or those that do not.

We don’t pretend to know everything that your personal bank funds, but the information on our website is all gathered from several organizations that painstakingly collect large quantities of funding data. For example

• Thanks to the annual Banking on Climate Chaos report worked on by six environmental organizations, we know that the world’s top 60 private-sector banks pumped $5.5 trillion into fossil fuels from 2016-2022.
• Thanks to BankTrack’s ‘Dodgy Deals’ database, we know that the UK’s HSBC and Japan’s Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation (SMBC) agreed to help Saudi Aramco (the world’s largest oil producer) secure a $10 billion loan in 2020.
• Thanks to Fair Finance International’s collaborative local guides we know that, in the Netherlands, banking group ING invested €7 billion in fossil energy companies from 2016-2017, while during the same period, Triodos Bank did not make any loans that could be attributed to fossil fuels.

There is no simple answer to this, but when a bank is asked about fossil fuel financing, it often describes itself as “sustainable.” The bank might explain that it aims for all of its business activities to be carbon-neutral in the near future, which usually includes offices, employee travel, and other day-to-day carbon emissions that come with any business. Talking about sustainability is a useful way for a bank to appear ‘green’ itself, while avoiding the fact that it is also, for example, investing your money in a new oil pipeline.

If you ask your bank if it is funding fossil fuels with your money, but it avoids answering the question and instead talks about sustainability, then your bank is probably funding fossil fuels.

Our rating methodology has a dedicated page. You can learn more here.

In addition to our own research, we draw on the work of several organizations that investigate the funding activities of the world’s biggest banks on a regular basis.

• Rainforest Action Network RAN leads the publication of Banking on Climate Chaos, which analyses the funding activities of 60 of the world’s largest commercial and investment banks, in order to provide a clear picture of global fossil finance.
• BankTrack As well as being a major contributor to Banking on Climate Chaos, BankTrack maintains a searchable database of banks around the world that are having “a negative impact on people and planet.”
• Reclaim Finance Another key contributor to Banking on Climate Chaos, Reclaim Finance has been instrumental, through its research and advocacy work, in holding European financial institutions to account for their environmental harm.
• Market Forces For over 8 years, Market Forces has been exposing Australian banks and superannuation funds who have been funding runaway climate chaos, helping consumers to make better choices with their money.
• Fair Finance International Initiated by Oxfam, this network of organizations collaborate on research into the funding activities of banks around the world, then campaigns in order to improve the situation.
• Global Alliance of Banking Values GABV is an alliance of leaders in the banking industry who are all striving ‘to deliver sustainable economic, social and environmental development.’
• B Impact Assessment This community of business leaders is working towards a future in which all businesses will be valued by their impact on society, not just by their profits.

No. Just like most other administrative tasks, it may take a few hours and you will need to make a few decisions. In comparison to, for example, switching to a plant-based diet, or lobbying your local politician to prioritize the environment, changing your bank account is less work and has a smaller impact on your day-to-day life. Even better, changing your bank account will make a significant contribution towards a better future every single day.

This is a difficult question to answer, with many variables to consider.

You may discover that some of the alternative banks you are considering charge a monthly account fee, which would vary, but might amount to the cost of a coffee once a month.

Each bank that does this will have its own reasons. For example, the European bank Triodos explains that it costs money to run a bank account, but adds that most banks cover this cost dishonestly “with high penalty charges and hidden fees.” Triodos says that its monthly account fee is therefore a more honest way of fairly spreading the cost of banking.

Meanwhile, Bank Australia charges a small monthly account fee, but only if you are over 25 years old, the total money you have with the bank is below a certain threshold, or if you do not receive government benefits (such as a pension).

But this is not always the case, and we attempt to indicate where a sustainable bank has free accounts available.

In the UK:

Switching accounts in the UK is an easy process as most banks are signed up to the Current Account Switch Service (CASS). Using this process means that your old account will be closed by your old provider, your list of payees will be transferred and any payments made to your old account will automatically be redirected to your new account. Simply using the Current Account Switch Service to switch to a new current account provider will not affect your credit rating. If you do not use this service and choose to switch manually, then your credit score will not be affected as long as you make sure that your overdraft has been paid off.  Your new bank may choose to run a credit score check which could have a small impact on your rating, however this will recover shortly after you have successfully switched.

In the US:

Closing a current account will not affect your credit score as long as there are no issues with your account. If your old account is in overdraft, then your credit score may be affected. Therefore, it is necessary to ensure that your old account is cleared of a negative balance before switching, or you communicate with your bank to make payment arrangements if you cannot afford to pay off your negative balance straight away.

Elsewhere:

If you live outside of the US or the UK, your circumstances may vary from the above and we encourage you to do your own research.

Broadly, a sustainable bank is a bank that prioritises people and planet over profit. Our goal is to end fossil fuel financing - therefore we focus on banks that are sustainable because they refuse to provide financial assistance to the fossil fuels industry.

This depends on your current bank, but fracking, oil and gas pipelines and fossil fuel power stations are all still being supported by most banks.

You can get a general overview of what your current bank is investing in by using our bank rating tool.

If you would like to discover more for yourself, we encourage you to make direct contact with your bank and find out what your money is being used for. Once you have the facts, you will know exactly what you are divesting from - but not only that, you will be able to tell your bank which of its investments you are not happy about.

Nice work! As well as encouraging those who wish to change banks to do so, we are also building a movement to raise awareness of fossil fuel financing. You can volunteer to help out, follow #moneymovement on your social media platforms to get involved, and connect directly with us on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Reddit, and LinkedIn, or subscribe to receive our email updates.

Please help us to raise awareness: many people do not realize that their money is being used to finance the fossil fuel industry, but together we can change that. We urge you to talk to the people in your life who do have bank accounts.

You can also become a part of our supportive community: volunteer to help out, follow #moneymovement on your social media platforms to get involved; connect directly with us on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Reddit, and LinkedIn or subscribe to receive our email updates.

Shareholder engagement is when shareholders in a company use their voting power to pressure management to make changes in the company, such as divesting from fossil fuels.

While we recognize the awareness that engagement can bring to the issue of fossil fuels finance, we do not believe it is the most effective tactic for achieving divestment.

On the individual level, most shareholders hold their shares through mutual and index funds. This means that most people are not able to directly vote, and makes it nearly impossible to win votes without the backing of large institutional investors like Vanguard and Black Rock. Unfortunately, institutional investors typically coordinate with company management to block change.

While there has been recent positive progress in the area of shareholder engagement, this often leads public companies to sell their assets to private companies that are immune to engagement. In other words, successful engagement often leads coal, oil, and gas to still be extracted and burned, just by different companies.

It is our belief at Bank.Green that our best financial strategy is to raise the fossil fuel industry’s cost of doing business, by starving it of the financial backing that it needs to continue extracting, transporting, processing, and consuming coal, oil, and gas.

When a bank divests from fossil fuels, it raises costs for all fossil fuel infrastructure, both public and private. And, unlike shareholder voting rights, most people have bank accounts with they can pressure their banks to divest.

That’s why we focus on banks.

The funding of this industry enables it to continue extracting fossil fuels from beneath the ground, which are burned to produce energy. Whether it’s natural gas, oil, or coal, burning fossil fuels releases greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide and methane, into the Earth’s atmosphere. These gases remain there, causing any energy rays they meet to bounce away in all directions. For example, heat energy (thermal infrared radiation) that rises from our lands and seas meets these gases, which causes some of that heat energy to bounce back down again. This causes Earth’s surface and lower atmosphere to heat. This result is often called the “greenhouse effect.” The more greenhouse gases that are in the atmosphere, the hotter our planet becomes.

This heating is changing our climate. Scientists around the world have been studying global heating for many years. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the United Nation’s body for assessing the science related to climate change. Founded in 1988, the IPCC is considered to be an authoritative voice on the subject of climate change. It routinely releases reports about the impacts of global heating on our environment. These impacts vary depending on how much the Earth heats, but here are some examples:

• Public unrest increases due to deadly heatwaves in Chicago, Kolkata, Beijing, Karachi, and Sao Paulo
• Droughts in southern Europe, southern Africa, and the Amazon, flooding in Asia
• Major increases in food prices and eroding food security increase the risk and incidence of starvation

For more information on the potential impacts of global heating, divided into three different temperature scenarios, check out the IPCC's Worlds Apart infographic.