Climate love
Image of World Bank

World Bank

Climate love

World Banks Targets Fossil Fuel Subsidies To Fund Climate action

The World Bank is advocating for governments to shift their financial resources from subsidizing fossil fuels, which currently amount to over $500 billion annually, towards addressing climate change and environmental concerns. This shift in focus is in response to appeals from the bank's wealthy government backers and aligns with the institution's dual mission of reducing global poverty and combating climate change. The bank's president, Ajay Banga, has suggested financial adjustments, like altering the equity-to-loan ratio, to enable the bank to lend more for climate-related initiatives. However, he acknowledged that these changes alone won't suffice for the monumental challenges ahead and called for the exploration of alternative funding sources, such as redirecting subsidies in industries like fuel and agriculture that contribute to environmental issues and encouraging voluntary carbon markets. While the World Bank doesn't have the authority to enforce subsidy removal, it can exert influence and provide advice to governments. A 2021 IMF report estimated that governments globally spend around $577 billion each year to make fossil fuels more affordable. The bank's recent "detox development" report further emphasizes the need to repurpose these environmentally harmful subsidies and redirect the funds towards addressing pressing global challenges. Such subsidies not only promote fossil fuel usage but also hinder the development of renewable energy sources. Major fossil fuel subsidy providers include countries heavily reliant on fossil fuel production like Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Venezuela, as well as Western producers like the US, UK, and Canada, along with emerging economies such as India, China, and Indonesia. Fuel subsidies can result in artificially low prices, discouraging energy conservation and clean energy adoption. The G20 has pledged to phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies since 2009, though substantial progress in this regard has been elusive. The World Bank emphasizes that these subsidies often benefit the wealthy more than the poor, but their removal can spark political controversies and protests, as it leads to increased living costs. Furthermore, the bank also calls for the elimination of fishing subsidies and the redirection of $500 billion per year in environmentally damaging agricultural subsidies.




Do you agree?

14 more agrees trigger social media ads

  • Rashid Kamau

    35 w

    Fossil-fuel subsidies are environmentally harmful, costly and distortive.

    7
    • johnte ndeto

      35 w

      Subsidising fossil fuels should be discouraged as it'll encourage the use of the same

      2
      • Ann Nyambura

        35 w

        This transition won't be without challenges, the redirection of funds can play a crucial role in combating climate change and promoting cleaner energy alternatives

        3
        • walter lungayi

          35 w

          Shifting financial resources from fossil fuel subsidies to climate action is a necessary step in addressing environmental concerns. The World Bank's focus on combating climate change aligns with the urgent need to reduce global poverty and protect the planet for future generations. By advocating for this shift, the bank is taking a proactive stance in promoting sustainable development.

          3
          • We Don't Have Time

            35 w

            Dear George Kariuki Your climate love has received over 50 agrees! We have reached out to World Bank by email and requested a response. I will keep you updated on any progress! To reach more people and increase the chance of a response, click the Share button above to share the review on your social accounts. For every new member that joins We Don't Have Time from your network, we will plant a tree and attribute it to you! /Adam, We Don't Have Time

            2
            • Grace Njeri

              35 w

              Fossil fuel subsidies are the worst,for they hinder our efforts to tackle climate change.

              5
              • mercy nduta

                35 w

                @grace_njeri_804 The subsidies work against efforts to limit climate change

                2
              • rosebellendiritu

                35 w

                May those findings be directed to clean energy instead

                15
                • CHRIS NGATIA

                  35 w

                  This is a commendable move ... Shifting of resources from subsidising fossil fuels towards addressing climate change will not only help in reducing emissions but also help in fighting climate crisis hence achieving a clean future

                  16
                  • Jane Wangui

                    33 w

                    @chris_ngatia more funds to facilitate climate friendly projects could not hurt.

                    2
                  • [Deleted comment]

                    35 w

                    [Deleted comment]

                      1 more replies
                  • Joseph Githinji

                    35 w

                    This is the right way to go in the fight against dependency on use of fossil fuels. Authorities must go all in in this war against climate change effects and funding is the right way to caution nations from the shocks.

                    3

                    Write a comment...

                    Write a climate review

                    Voice your opinion on how businesses and organizations impact the climate.
                    0 trees planted

                    One tree is planted for every climate review written to an organization that is Open for Climate Dialogue™.

                    Download the app

                    We plant a tree for every new user.

                    AppleAndroid