Banking on Climate Chaos: Fossil Fuel Finance Report 2023
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report analyzes fossil fuel financing and policies from the world's 60 largest commercial and investment banks. We reveal that fossil fuel financing from the world's 60 largest banks has reached nearly USD 5.5 trillion in the seven years since the adoption of the Paris Agreement, with $673 billion in 2022 alone. It also reveals that the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 gave fossil fuel companies a chance to rake in record profits totaling USD 4 trillion.In the nearly two years since the International Energy Agency announced that developing new oil and gas fields would restrict the chances of limiting global warming below 1.5°C, most banks have failed to adopt stringent exclusion policies for companies expanding fossil fuels. All Canadian and U.S. banks are still at square one when it comes to oil and gas expansion policies. Under their current policies, they can continue to support companies developing new oil and/or gas projects and also provide project and dedicated finance to most new extraction.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.145 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it