Singapore’s Green Finance Drive

Nov 2, 2021

Reading Time : 10+ min

Green finance products can take a variety of forms but are broadly classified as follows:

  • green” loans and bonds, the principal feature of which is that the proceeds of the loan or bond are used for “green purposes”; and
  • sustainability-linked” loans and bonds, under which certain of the terms (typically pricing) applicable to the loan or bond are tied to the borrower’s performance against certain pre-determined sustainability-linked key performance indicators.

Other forms of green finance products include green asset finance, sustainable securitizations and green credit cards. Green finance is certainly not a new phenomenon, with the World Bank issuing its first green bond in November 2008, creating the blueprint for sustainable investing in capital markets3. However, it was not until 2015, with the launch of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement (or Paris Climate Accords), that green finance began to gain prominence. Today, the Global Sustainable Investment Alliance reports that the global sustainable investment industry has grown to an estimated US$35.3 trillion4 and financing will be a key topic for discussion at the 26thUnited Nations Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26) in Glasgow.

In Asia, the prevalence of green financing products and services has increased significantly in recent years, following the global trend. The focus on this sector is expected to increase as more Asian nations commit to “net zero” goals and increase their efforts to decarbonize economies which are often heavily linked to pollution. The United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific estimates that the Asia Pacific region alone requires annual investment of US$1.5 trillion in order to achieve the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals by 2030, with clean energy and climate action accounting for almost a third of this figure5. Much of the growth in Asia’s green finance sector is being driven by the economic powerhouses of China and Japan. In Japan, the issuance of green and sustainability bonds almost doubled over the course of 2019 to 20206. Chinese issuers sold US$15.7 billion of bonds during the period of January to March 2021, with the proceeds intended to fund “green projects” such as clean and renewable energy7. Investment bank China International Capital Corp estimates that China requires 140 trillion yuan (US$21.33 trillion) of debt financing over the next forty years to achieve its target of carbon neutrality by 20608.

In Singapore, where most of the country lies less than 15 meters above sea level and over 30 percent less than five meters, the government is focused on the risk presented by climate change and is actively engaged in finding innovative solutions to mitigate this, with much of the effort centered around green finance9. In this article, we will examine some of the key aspects of green finance and consider how the development of this sector is expected to play out in Singapore.

Singapore’s green finance ambitions

The recent announcement by Mr. Lawrence Wong, Singapore’s Minister of Finance, during the country’s inaugural Singapore Sustainability Investing and Financing Conference sent a clear message to the world – Singapore is serious about becoming a world leader in green finance. Mr. Wong announced that the Green Bonds Programme Office (which falls under the Ministry of Finance) had been established to work with statutory boards and develop a framework for green bond programmes, as well as engaging with industry and managing investor relations10.

Mr. Wong’s announcement comes hot on the heels of Singapore’s National Environment Agency (NEA) raising S$1.65 billion (US$1.23 billion) from its inaugural green bond issuance. The proceeds of the bonds (which were issued in two tranches of S$350 million (US$261 million) 10-year fixed rate notes with an annual coupon rate of 1.67 percent and S$1.3 billion (US$968 million) 30-year fixed rate notes with an annual coupon rate of 2.5 percent11) will be utilized to fund new, or existing, sustainable waste management projects. The green bond issuance falls under the NEA’s S$3 billion (US$2 billion) multicurrency medium term note program and Green Bond Framework which were established in August12.  

The Green Bond Framework has been drafted to align with the Green Bond Principles formulated by the International Capital Market Association, comprising four key components:

  1. Use of Proceeds
  2. Process for Project Evaluation and Selection
  3. Management of Proceeds
  4. Reporting13

The Green Bond Framework sets out specific criteria which projects must satisfy in order to qualify for allocation of the net proceeds from NEA’s bonds. Projects must comprise “sustainable waste management” and include design, construction, operation, management and capacity building, and/or upgrade of infrastructure, assets and/or plant relating to activities such as:

  • Waste-to-energy with 26 percent gross waste-to-energy efficiency.
  • Food Waste Treatment that treats food waste into high-quality bio-pulp.
  • Sludge Incineration with 70 percent thermal efficiency.
  • Material Recovery of Recyclables including waste collection and sorting (including pre-sorting).
  • Waste Processing and Recycling (for non-hazardous waste only)14.

The first eligible project to meet the criteria set out above is the Tuas Nexus Integrated Waste Management Facility. Comprising two facilities – the Tuas Water Reclamation Plant (managed by national water agency the Public Utilities Board (PUB)) and the Integrated Waste Management Facility (operated by the NEA) – Tuas Nexus is Singapore’s first integrated water and solid waste treatment project, with commercial operation set to commence in 2025.

NEA’s green bond issuance follows a similar offering by Sembcorp Industries (through its subsidiary Sembcorp Financial Services Pte. Ltd.) (Sembcorp) in June this year, the first certified green bond, issued under the Climate Bonds Initiative’s (CBI) “Climate Bonds Standard”, by a Singapore-based energy company. Proceeds from the SGD$400 million bond will be used to finance or refinance new or existing projects which fall within the list of “Eligible Green Projects” in Sembcorp’s own “Sustainable Financing Framework15” and that satisfy the sector-specific technical criteria. The CBI is an international, not-for-profit, organization that works to “mobilise the largest capital market of all, the $100 trillion bond market, for climate solutions.16” The CBI seeks to achieve this through three workstreams, namely:

  1. Market intelligence
  2. Developing a trusted standard (i.e., the Climate Bonds Standard and certification scheme)
  3. Providing policy models and advice

The Climate Bonds Standard allows certification of a bond prior to its issuance, enabling the issuer to use the “Climate Bonds Certification Mark” in marketing efforts and investor roadshows. In order to obtain the certification, a prospective issuer of a green or climate bond must appoint a third party “Approved Verifier17” who then provides a verification statement confirming that the bond satisfies the Climate Bonds Standard18.

Sembcorp followed up on its inaugural green bond issuance with a further offering in October 2021, a SGD$675 million sustainability-linked bond (SLB). The SLB was anchored by an investment of SGD$150 million by the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the World Bank Group’s private sector investment body19. The key difference between traditional green bonds and SLBs is that the latter is not subject to restrictions as to how the proceeds may be utilized, with the increased flexibility enabling a wider variety of issuers to obtain access to sustainable financing20. The first SLB was issued by ENEL, the Italian energy utility group, in 201921.  

The recent developments in Singapore’s green bond market are a clear indication of Singapore’s desire to become a world leader in the green finance space. Approximately US$5.21 billion in green bonds was issued in Singapore alone in the first half of 202122, and with statutory authorities (e.g. the NEA) and entities in which the Singapore state holds a significant ownership interest (e.g. Sembcorp) leading the way, the market is expected to continue to grow.

The role of green finance in Singapore’s Green Plan 2030

Singapore’s commitment to green finance is enshrined in the Green Plan 2030 (Green Plan), falling under the “Green Economy” pillar. The Green Plan is considered a “whole-of-nation sustainability movement to advance Singapore’s national agenda on sustainable development23” and the Singaporean government has identified four key targets in its drive to further the development of its “Green Economy,” namely:

  1. Introduce an Enterprise Sustainability Programme, to help enterprises, especially SMEs, embrace sustainability and develop capabilities in this area.
  2. Create business and job opportunities in sectors such as green finance, sustainability consultancy, verification, credits trading and risk management.
  3. Be a leading center for Green Finance in Asia and globally, by building up the financial sector’s resilience to environmental risks, developing green financial solutions, build knowledge and capabilities, and leveraging innovation and technology.
  4. Promote homegrown innovation under the Research, Innovation and Enterprise Plan 2025, and attract companies to anchor their R&D activities in Singapore to develop new sustainability solutions24.

A number of initiatives are proposed in order help achieve the targets above, one of which is the creation of a “Green Finance Action Plan.” The plan (announced in November 2019 predating the release of the Green Plan earlier this year) has been developed by the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS), with the stated goal of growing Singapore into a regional and global center for green finance. Part of the rationale for this is the financial sector’s role in “addressing the impact of environmental risk, and mobilising global capital for the green economy”25. The MAS has committed to “drive efforts to build resilience to environmental risks, develop green finance markets and solutions, build the requisite capabilities and encourage green FinTech innovation.

Based on three core pillars - building resilience, developing markets, and leveraging technology - the Green Finance Action Plan will be implemented through actions in six areas:

  1. Environmental Risk Management Guidelines across the banking, insurance and asset management sectors.
  2. Grant schemes to support mainstreaming of green and sustainability linked loans.
  3. Establishing a US$2 billion Green Investments Programme with asset managers committed to driving regional green efforts out of Singapore and support the MAS Green Finance Action Plan.
  4. Support expansion plans of external reviewers and rating agencies in Singapore to deepen technical capabilities and grow the green ecosystem in Asia.
  5. Anchor “Centres of Excellence” with world-class research institutions and leading universities to contribute Asia-focused climate research and training programs.
  6. Green finance being a key theme in the 2020 Fintech Hackcelerator26.

The Enterprise Sustainability Programme (highlighted above) is an interesting initiative which is designed to support Singaporean companies, particularly SMEs, in their sustainability efforts.27 A key aspect of this program is the “Enterprise Financing Scheme – Green” (EFSG), which has been established to enable better access to green financing for Project Developers, System Integrators and Technology & Solution Enablers which develop enabling technologies and solutions to reduce waste, resource use, or greenhouse gas emissions.The EFSG provides a range of financing options to prospective applicants ranging from loans for developmental capital to specific project finance. The EFSG opened for applications on October 1, 2021 and will run until March 31, 202428. In establishing the EFSG, the Singaporean government is recognizing the significant roles that SMEs can play in driving sustainability efforts in Singapore.

There has been a marked increase in green finance activity in Singapore over the course of the past year, largely linked to the initiatives being implemented by the government, and it is set to continue. Indeed, Singapore’s national budget for 2021 states that the government will issue green bonds to a range of public infrastructure projects, with up to SGD$19 billion worth of green projects already identified, in order to “catalyse the flow of capital towards sustainable development in Singapore and Asia.29” It is hoped that the issuance of green bonds by the government, coupled with the efforts undertaken by the MAS in devising the Green Finance Action Plan, will deepen market liquidity for green bonds, attract green issuers, capital and investors, and, ultimately, anchor Singapore as a global green finance hub.

Dealing with green washing

Despite the undoubted potential of green finance, there are pitfalls associated with the sector, the most prominent of which is the concept of “green washing”. The term was coined by U.S. environmental activist Jay Westerveld in a critical essay, published in 1986, regarding the hotel industry’s practice of encouraging the reuse of towels with the apparent motive of “saving the environment.” Westerveld argued that the actual goal of this practice was to increase profitability, not environmental conservation. Today, greenwashing is referred to as a practice whereby a company, or organization, expends more effort (and cost) on marketing itself as being environmentally friendly than it does on minimizing the environmental impact of its activities. By providing misleading information regarding the environmental impact of an organization’s activities, or products, the public can be deceived into believing that the business is environmentally friendly when the reality is somewhat different.

Greenwashing can take a number of different forms, commonly categorized as the “seven sins30”:

  1. Worshipping false labels - Where products are labeled with certifications that are not legitimate to mislead consumers into believing that the product has been vetted through a green certification process. Examples are products which are labelled as “eco-safe” or “eco preferred.” Earlier this year, the International Consumer Protection Enforcement Network found, during an annual review of websites, that as much as 40 percent of the sustainability claims made online could be misleading.31
  2. Hidden trade-offs – Companies can often create the impression of being environmentally friendly and sustainable while, at the same time, making a non-environmentally friendly trade-off. There are a wide variety of hidden trade-offs including, for example, labelling a product as “green” or “environmentally friendly” based on a narrow set of attributes, without paying regard to other key environmental issues (e.g., greenhouse gas emissions used in a manufacturing process).
  3. Irrelevant claims – Claims which, although perhaps truthful, are unimportant, or unhelpful, for consumers seeking products which are environmentally friendly. For example, claiming that a product is “CFC free” is irrelevant in the countries that have banned their use (almost 200 in total).
  4. Lesser of two evils – This form of greenwashing occurs when an environmental claim made by a company is actually true but is designed to distract the consumer from the fact that the product itself is inherently harmful, either to the consumer or the environment. The use of “green” or “organic” environmental labelling on products that have questionable environmental, or health, value can be considered as greenwashing with the lesser of two evils (e.g., a company selling “organic” cigarettes (i.e., using organically grown tobacco)).
  5. No proof - An environmental claim that cannot be substantiated by easily accessible supporting information (e.g., on either the product label or company’s website) or by third-party certification. An example of this form of greenwashing is a claim that a lightbulb is energy efficient without any supporting data being provided.
  6. Vagueness – Claims which are either poorly defined, or too broad, meaning that their real meaning is likely to be misunderstood by consumers. For example, claiming a product is “all natural” can be misleading given that certain naturally occurring elements (e.g., mercury and uranium) are in fact poisonous.
  7. False claims - Environmental claims that are simply false.32

Singapore appears to have recognized the threat that greenwashing poses to the green finance sector and the government has started to take some preliminary steps aimed at combating it. In his opening remarks at the recent Sustainable Investing and Financing Conference, Mr. Lawrence Wong, highlighted the importance of a implementing a consistent set of “global standards for disclosures and reporting” in order to combat greenwashing:

“We need to implement a consistent set of global standards for disclosures and reporting. The good news, of course, as all of you know, is that more global monies are going into ESG investments – on average, two new ESG funds are launched every day. Unfortunately, this has been accompanied by rampant “greenwashing.” Two years ago, the Wall Street Journal reported that 8 out of 10 of the biggest “sustainable” funds in the US were in fact invested in oil companies. There is less greenwashing these days, but it still happened. So, we need greater consistency and reliability of disclosures. This will then help investors put their money into truly green firms, ensure a better allocation of capital, and a faster energy transition.”33

There are three key areas where Singapore is taking action with a view to combating greenwashing and, in turn, improving the credibility of the green finance sector, namely:

  1. Taxonomy - the Green Finance Industry Taskforce (GFIT), established by the MAS, is currently developing a taxonomy for Singapore-based financial institutions. The MAS is also actively participating in regional efforts to develop a taxonomy for ASEAN which aims to take international goals into account while, at the same time, factoring in the ASEAN region’s specific “context and circumstances.” In his speech, Mr. Wong highlighted that the ASEAN region alone will need an estimated USD$200 billion in green investments annually through 2030 – the development of a regional taxonomy will be a significant factor in facilitating these investments. Singapore’s effort to formalize a taxonomy echoes similar work undertaken in the European Union (EU), where a taxonomy regulation came into force in July 2020. The EU taxonomy sets out specific conditions that an economic activity is required to satisfy in order to qualify as environmentally sustainable34.
  2. Data – the quality and availability of data is seen as a critical element in enabling companies, financial institutions and investors to measure progress towards sustainability goals, as well as the environmental impact of operations. Recognizing the importance of data in the fight against greenwashing, the MAS recently launched Project Greenprint35, which aims to “harness technology and data to mobilise capital for ESG projects, monitor their commitments and measure their impact.” The MAS has also earmarked S$50 million to support Green FinTech innovations to address challenges in the green finance space.
  3. Disclosures – The MAS and SGX are currently preparing roadmaps for mandatory climate-related financial disclosures by financial institutions and listed companies and these are expected to be released in early 2022. The new disclosure regime will build on SGX’s existing sustainability reporting requirements which came into effect in 201636.

Action in terms of data and disclosures will go some way to alleviating concerns regarding greenwashing in Singapore. However, we expect that the Singapore Government will announce further measures to help tackle this issue, particularly as green finance continues to gain prominence.

Looking forward

The green finance drive in Singapore continues to gather pace and we anticipate an array of new developments in this sector over the coming months. While growth in other sectors may have been hampered as a result of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, this does not appear to be the case where green finance is concerned. Singapore is positioning itself to become a global leader in this space and, as we have seen above, is taking significant steps towards achieving this. Key to the success of green finance is the elimination of greenwashing and this poses perhaps the greatest challenge for Singapore. However, having already established itself as a global financial center and being viewed as a transparent jurisdiction with robust regulatory structures, Singapore is well positioned to overcome these challenges to become a hub for green finance, not just in ASEAN but also at a global level. We are of the view that green finance will play a significant role in Singapore’s economy going forward, particularly given its prominence in the Green Plan 2030, and will be monitoring developments with interest.

Please also see the links below for other thought leadership pieces that our firm has prepared on the green finance sector.

Green and Sustainability-Linked Private Placements by EU and UK Issuers

How ESG is Impacting the European Leveraged Finance Markets


1 https://development.asia/explainer/green-finance-explained

2 https://www.unep.org/regions/asia-and-pacific/regional-initiatives/supporting-resource-efficiency/green-financing

3 https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/immersive-story/2019/03/18/10-years-of-green-bonds-creating-the-blueprint-for-sustainability-across-capital-markets

4 http://www.gsi-alliance.org/

5 https://www.unescap.org/publications/economic-and-social-survey-asia-and-pacific-2019-ambitions-beyond-growth

6 https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Market-Spotlight/Green-bonds-grow-on-Asia-s-investors

7 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-bond-green-idUSKBN2BO4FP

8 Ibid.

9 https://www.nccs.gov.sg/singapores-climate-action/coastal-protection/

10 https://www.straitstimes.com/business/banking/new-office-set-up-to-accelerate-green-bond-efforts-lawrence-wong

11https://www.dbs.com/newsroom/Media_update_NEA_raises_SGD1_65_billion_in_maiden_issuance_largest_inaugural_bond_issuance_by_a_Singapore_statutory_board

12 https://www.nea.gov.sg/media/news/news/index/nea-to-establish-3-billion-multicurrency-medium-term-note-programme-and-green-bond-framework

13 https://www.icmagroup.org/sustainable-finance/the-principles-guidelines-and-handbooks/green-bond-principles-gbp

14 https://www.nea.gov.sg/media/news/news/index/nea-to-establish-3-billion-multicurrency-medium-term-note-programme-and-green-bond-framework

15 https://www.sembcorp.com/en/media/741985/sembcorp-sustainable-financing-framework.pdf

16 https://www.climatebonds.net/about

17 https://www.climatebonds.net/certification/approved-verifiers

18 https://www.climatebonds.net/standard

19 https://www.sembcorp.com/en/media/media-releases/corporate/2021/september/ifc-marks-first-ever-investment-in-a-sustainability-linked-bond-globally-with-s-675-million-offering-by-pan-asian-energy-and-sustainable-solutions-provider-sembcorp-industries/

20 https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/latest-news-headlines/sustainability-linked-bonds-in-rapid-growth-as-more-firms-tap-esg-debt-market-65049789#:~:text=Unlike%20traditional%20green%20and%20social,the%20proceeds%20can%20be%20used.&text=Issuers%20of%20sustainability%2Dlinked%20bonds,the%20coupon%20paid%20to%20investors.

21 https://www.enel.pe/en/about-enel/media/news/d201910-enel-places-its-first--general-purpose-sdg-linked-bond-.html

22 https://www.statista.com/statistics/512030/share-of-green-bond-market-value-globally-by-major-country/

23 https://www.greenplan.gov.sg/

24 https://www.greenplan.gov.sg/key-focus-areas/green-economy/

25 https://www.mas.gov.sg/who-we-are/annual-reports/annual-report-2019-2020/greening-the-financial-system

 

26 https://www.mas.gov.sg/-/media/MAS/News/Media-Releases/2019/Infographic-on-MAS-Green-Finance-initiatives.pdf

27 https://www.enterprisesg.gov.sg/ESP

28 https://www.enterprisesg.gov.sg/financial-assistance/loans-and-insurance/loans-and-insurance/enterprise-financing-scheme/green/overview

29 https://www.gov.sg/article/budget-2021-building-a-sustainable-singapore

30 https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/other/greenwashing/

31 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-28/nearly-half-of-eco-friendly-product-claims-could-be-breaking-law

32 Ibid.

33 https://www.mas.gov.sg/news/speeches/2021/opening-remarks-by-mr-lawrence-wong-minister-for-finance-and-deputy-chairman-mas-at-the-singapore-sustainable-investing-and-financing-conference-on-30-september-2021

34 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/sustainable-finance-taxonomy-regulation-eu-2020-852_en.

35 https://www.mas.gov.sg/development/fintech/Green-FinTech

36 https://www.sgx.com/regulation/sustainability-reporting

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Speaking Sustainability

October 3, 2024

NYC Climate Week included over 900 events with an estimated 100,000 participants swarming the City. While indicative of growing interest in climate action, some note that the record turnout foreshadows a smaller presence at COP 29 in Azerbaijan.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

September 19, 2024

Recent legislative and regulatory developments reflect ongoing tensions between environmental policies and economic priorities in the U.S. energy landscape. The House Energy and Commerce Committee’s advancement of three resolutions targeting Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules on power plants, vehicle emissions and air quality standards marks a broader Republican effort to counter President Biden’s environmental agenda, though these resolutions face likely vetoes. In contrast, House Speaker Mike Johnson has signaled openness to retaining certain green energy tax credits, reflecting a pragmatic approach as some Republican districts benefit from these investments. Simultaneously, bipartisan efforts to boost critical mineral production, led by Senators Hickenlooper and Tillis, aim to reduce U.S. reliance on Chinese imports, while the White House has raised tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles and solar products, a move seen as both protective of domestic industries and potentially disruptive to supply chains. Legal battles continue, as seen in the judicial blocking of the Interior Department’s methane rule in five states and ongoing litigation over EPA’s cross-state pollution rule, which the agency has been allowed to revise. Meanwhile, grid operators have expressed concerns that the EPA’s carbon emissions rule could threaten power plant operations, pushing for legal revisions to protect grid reliability. Together, these developments reflect the broader debate over balancing environmental regulations with economic and energy security concerns.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

September 12, 2024

After a recent permitting reform bill was passed out of a Senate Committee, House Republicans took steps to draft their own permitting reform legislation. Rep. Westerman (R- AR) held a hearing to discuss his draft bill, which most notably places limitations on the environmental permitting process for energy projects. This comes as both parties position energy policy as a key election issue, with Vice President Harris recognizing a role for oil and gas production during the Presidential debate in response to Republican criticism of her climate policies. Meanwhile, former President Trump vowed to pull back unspent dollars approved for greenhouse gas reduction and energy transition projects under the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). The IRA has already spurred significant renewable energy investment, particularly in rural electric co-ops using the funds to replace coal generation with clean energy and battery storage.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

August 14, 2024

With U.S. elections rapidly approaching, presidential candidates are expected to foreshadow key aspects of their energy and environmental legislative and policy agendas. In particular, the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024 may prompt Vice President Kamala Harris to balance legislative progress with her environmental justice commitments. The proposed bill promises to expedite clean energy projects but also aids fossil fuel industries and potentially at odds with front-line environmental justice communities. While White House climate adviser John Podesta expresses cautious optimism about the bill’s post-election prospects, environmental groups are calling on Harris to oppose the bill. Similarly, Harris’ running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, takes a nuanced stance on mining projects near sensitive watersheds, balancing the difficult trade-offs in advancing clean energy mandates while maintaining resource development. This exhibits the complex negotiations required to align bipartisan support behind the democratic ticket’s climate goals ahead of the presidential election.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

August 8, 2024

On August 6, 2024, Vice President Kamala Harris selected Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as her running mate in the 2024 election. Walz, a little-known figure in national politics, serving in his second term as governor in Minnesota, has implemented far reaching energy policies after winning a democratic trifecta in 2023. Two bills establishing a mandate for carbon-free electricity in Minnesota by 2040 and simplifying the energy permitting process mirror current federal policy proposals. Expect to see Walz on the campaign trail linking his experience to the need for federal action.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

August 1, 2024

On Wednesday, July 31, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee approved a permitting and grid development package, spearheaded by Chair Joe Manchin (I-WV) and Ranking Member John Barrasso (R-WY). The bipartisan bill paves the way for renewable energy projects, oil and gas leases, and grid improvements, as well as reversing the Biden administration’s pause on liquefied natural gas export permits. This legislative progress aligns with the U.S. Department of Energy’s allocation of $30 million in initial funding to the Appalachian hydrogen hub, which aims to significantly reduce carbon dioxide emissions through hydrogen fueling stations and carbon storage sites. However, environmental groups are pushing back against the Manchin-Barrasso permitting bill as well as newly proposed exemptions to the 45V hydrogen tax credits by Senate Democrats, arguing that these changes would undermine carbon-reduction goals. Simultaneously, the Biden administration is investing $575 million in federal grants to enhance climate resilience in coastal communities, indicating a comprehensive approach to addressing both immediate and long-term climate challenges through legislative, financial and infrastructural measures.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

July 26, 2024

Key topics in Akin’s July 2024 Sustainability/ESG Policy and Regulatory Update include:

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

July 18, 2024

On Monday, July 15, at the opening day of the Republican National Convention, former President Donald Trump announced his selection of Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) as his vice-presidential candidate, signaling a firm commitment to fossil fuel advocacy and opposition to renewable energy. Vance is vocal against President Biden’s clean energy policies, which he critiqued openly at the Convention. While the selection aligns with the broader Republican agenda of championing fossil fuels and criticizing current administration’s energy strategies, the ticket has drawn its own share of industry concern. The oil and gas industry has expressed uneasiness over Trump’s protectionist trade policies, fearing inflation and trade retaliation. The American Petroleum Institute, advocating for free markets and free trade, stresses the necessity of reducing trade barriers and maintaining certain tax incentives, including those for carbon capture and clean energy, to mitigate potential adverse effects on domestic energy production.

...

Read More

© 2024 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.