JP Morgan Chase to stop lending for Arctic oil


The Washington Post reported that JP Morgan Chase will stop lending to companies doing oil exploration or drilling above the Arctic Circle. That would include all companies that work in Alaska’s oil patch.

The decision is due to pressure from climate change organizations and because the bank leadership believes that the Arctic is particularly vulnerable to climate change.

The bank is also phasing out investment in coal, it announced Monday.

The move follows the lead of Goldman Sachs, which announced it will not lend to companies engaged in oil extraction in the Arctic.

An analyst at the investment firm Raymond James told the newspaper that loans to Arctic projects are rare, and the move has little practical value.

“Oil and gas activity in the Arctic is so slim anyway that lending for such activity is essentially meaningless,” analyst Pavel Molchanov told the newspaper.

Reuters reports that details of the oil-and-coal phase out plan will be rolled out on Tuesday at an investor conference along with a climate change initiative that sets up a $200 billion fund to finance sustainable projects.


  1. Stop renewing any leases on buildings in Alaska. Time for me to ensure any credit cards I have backed by JP Morgan Chase are shredded.

  2. That’s the nice thing about the Arctic is that you can pretty much make up anything you want. The last pristine wilderness is a great example.

  3. Oh, this is ripe. Let’s not forget the bailout money J.P. Morgan received on the backs of US taxpayers, as well as their actions after the crash “Both JP Morgan Chase and Goldman Sachs worked with hedge funds to bet against the toxic mortgages after the crash had started. They made money by selling short on the financial catastrophe they had created. JP Morgan was fined $296.9 million and Goldman Sachs was fined $550 million for actions.”

    The Big Bank Bailout

    Everything you need to know about JPMorgan’s $13 billion settlement

    J.P. Morgan, excuse me as I roll my eyes. Talk to the hand.

  4. I don’t buy their explanation. Bogus. The real reason is because it’s too risky to lend money to oil companies who continue to do business in Alaska, when cheaper oil can be found in non-arctic climates. Alaska oil is now too expensive and risky to produce.

    • Alaskan oil is a minor % of America’s output, but it’s a big % of West coast refineries feed-stock. Even with fracking, Alaska’s oil is that straw which tips the scales for America’s energy independence.
      Even if cost of production were to exceed revenue, the US government would no doubt subsidize it to keep any of the West coast refiners from shutting down.

  5. It seems plausible to me that the Permanent Fund, Retirement Systems and Department of Revenue could (should?) become equally as punitive when it comes to investments and managers for our money. It might get someone’s attention.

  6. Maybe another explanation should be considered. Green energy mandates allows America to be less energy sufficient, which drives up fossil fuel prices. In a “world view” this is a good thing because a weaker America means the rest of the world can catch up economically and militarily, allowing for Morgan Chase to lend to other countries as they expand and build. Chase Manhatten Bank was run by John Rockefeller, a globalist who saw banking as a way to control the entire world. Just a thought.

  7. They had no problem taking bail out money. Both of these companies should be on the trash heap after the toxic mortgage stupidity.

Comments are closed.