palm tree silhouette lights

Top insurers pull billions from coal – lawyers say there are “serious questions” for those still invested in it

A new report reveals which insurers are pulling back from coal and which are still heavily invested.

Unfriend Coal’s Insuring Coal No More: An Insurance Scorecard on Coal and Climate Change tracks the attitudes and actions of 25 major insurers in the global market.

This week, insurance giant Zurich announced that it would both divest from and stop insuring coal-dependent businesses. Several other majors are due to announce new policies. But many are lagging behind. No US company has taken such steps, and many European companies are also notable for their inaction.

ClientEarth corporate lawyer Alice Garton said: “Investing in coal is short-sighted and laden with risk – it’s the dirtiest source of energy and its days are numbered. Certain insurers seem to have cottoned on to this but too many seem to be blind to the issues.

“It’s time for those still funnelling money into coal to ask themselves some serious questions. Is coal politically and environmentally tenable? Are investments in coal in line with the insurance industry’s aim of managing risk?

“Given coal’s immense climate and health impact, the answers to both must be ‘no’. We need the insurance industry to step up and play its part in preventing dangerous climate change.”

 

Alice is an Australian-qualified lawyer.

Share this...
Share on Facebook! Tweet this! Share on LinkedIn! Email!

Pixnio

Related articles

More from or or

  • orange glow misty mountain upwards

    Coal investors stand to lose billions within a decade – unless utilities act now

    As coal runs at a loss, power companies are running out of excuses to invest in it. A new report by Carbon Tracker charts a route to minimising the impact to shareholders as coal loses out to cheaper, cleaner ways of making and using energy.

  • Hinkley Point power station

    Case C-640/16 P, Greenpeace Energy v Commission, Judgment of 10 October 2017, ECLI:EU:C:2017:752

    The European Court of Justice has confirmed the inadmissibility of Greenpeace Energy’s application for annulment of the Commission’s decision approving State aid for the nuclear power plant, Hinkley Point C.

  • silesia

    Lawyers seek evidence from residents affected by hazardous industrial pollution

    A new legal campaign gives people the chance to share their own local industrial emissions insights, enabling lawyers to launch more actions to protect people from harmful chemicals.

  • natural gas field

    ClientEarth objects to gas pipeline Nord Stream 2

    ClientEarth has filed an appeal to the Finnish authorities, asking them to deny Gazprom the permits they need to start constructing gas pipeline Nord Stream 2.

  • Follow us

    You can help

    Your support helps us use the law to protect your environment.