LONDON / QUITO (Reuters) – European banks determined to take action on climate replacement face double-standard claims from indigenous teams in Ecuador after a report named them major players in the Amazon rainforest oil trade.
Stand.earth and Amazon Watch said ING, Credit Suisse, Natixis, BNP Paribas, UBS and Rabobank were the largest lenders to send about $10 billion of Ecuadorian crude to U.S. refineries over the past decade.
Each of the identified banks, after reviewing the https://www.stand.earth/publication/Amazon-Banks-report-EN report, referred to the environmental commitments it had made, such as support for the 2015 Paris meteorological agreement, protective forests and support for the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.
But indigenous communities that resist the oil industry’s plans to penetrate deeper into their territories said that any bank that supports the Amazon industry is complicit in the threats to the world’s largest jungle.
“Banks have a double standard,” Marlon Vargas, president of the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of the Ecuadorian Amazon, told Reuters Marlon Vargas. “Devastating the Amazon is ravaging itself.”
The Amazon rainforest, which encompasses nine countries in South America, faces increased fires and cleanup for agriculture and mining. About 15-17% of the original forest has been destroyed, basically since the 1970s, according to scientists.
Rainforest plays an important role in regulating Earth’s climate by absorbing carbon dioxide, which is one of the main greenhouse fuels to blame for global warming. Scientists warn that additional damage can push the Amazon beyond a tipping point at what would be a primary fuel emitter.
French bank Natixis and Dutch bank ING have committed to address the considerations raised in the report. Swiss bank UBS said it had already rejected some crude oil agreements in the region due to considerations of indigenous territorial rights.
French bank BNP Paribas said the report’s method was “opaque” and asked how the authors had come to the banks’ estimates of currency exposures.
The report also indicates that Deutsche Bank played a minor role, in particular in financing a shipment of crude oil from Ecuador in April. The bank, which said last month that hardened its fossil fuel loan policy, declined to comment.
‘REPUTATION RISK’
But offering specialized financing for a global oil, herbal and coal fuel industry, known as industry financing, is under additional scrutiny.
Much of Amazon’s oil industry passes through banks or its subsidiaries in Switzerland, which is a major hub for the global oil industry, according to the report.
In Ecuador, which relies on oil exports basically pumped through the state-owned Petroamazonas for a third of public sector revenue, indigenous teams claim that concessions have been granted without their consent.
Fears about the effect of oil extraction in the Amazon intensified in April when a pipeline broke, depriving 27,000 indigenous people of their main water source.
“Let these banks contribute to the conservation and coverage of Mother Earth,” said Sandra Tukup of the Shuar network in the Amazon.
The Ministry of Energy and Petroamazonas did respond to requests for comment.
“Our priority is to take care of the environment and a harmonious relationship with the communities in our operational areas,” executive chairman Carlos Bermeo wrote in a Petroamazonas magazine last month.
MIXED ANSWERS
Natixis said he understands that financing oil exports can inspire the planned expansion of Yasuní National Park.
While ING questioned his exposure calculations and said two oil investors named in the report were no longer customers, he also said he was discussing tactics for his review of Amazon-related transactions.
“Percentage of many of the considerations defined in the report and we are serious about the factor internally,” he said.
However, the bank stated that the lack of certification systems comparable to those used to determine the origin of many tropical agricultural products made it difficult for the oil and fuel industry to “trace” the “traceability”.
UBS told Reuters that it had refused to secure transactions when the origin of oil was “verifiable” in violation of its standards, adding those that protect indigenous territorial rights and United Nations heritage sites, and that it was “committed to maintaining the highest level of environmental and social standards.” Array
Credit Suisse reported that the report referred to its oil and fuel policy, which restricts the financing of projects that may threaten conservation or indigenous rights, but those policies were applied to “commercial financing services”.
BNP Paribas stated that Amazon Watch and Stand.earth had not given him the kind of opportunity to interact in the preparation of the report to which he was accustomed.
He said the report’s approach was “vague and opaque” and made it “very difficult to comment, even in general terms, on the alleged activities of BNP Paribas.”
Moira Birss of Amazon Watch said BNP Paribas had won a draft report more than two weeks before its publication and may have only asked for more details.
“Banks now have the opportunity to fill the gaps in industry financing and give a genuine sense of what they say about the climate and rights of indigenous peoples,” he said.
(Additional report through Brenna Hughes Neghaiwi at ZURICH, Julia Payne in LONDON and Melanie Burton in MELBOURNE; edited through Alexander Smith)
Subscribe
Sign up for our news explosion.