Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
2 min of reading 
0 comments 
Investigation Reveals That European Sustainable Funds Allocated Billions to Oil Giants, But These Companies Are Among the Most Polluting in the World
A new international investigation has raised doubts about the credibility of investments considered sustainable in Europe. Conducted by the British newspaper The Guardian, in partnership with the European consortium Voxeurop, the study revealed that billions of dollars allocated to combat the climate crisis have ended up in companies responsible for a large portion of greenhouse gas emissions in the world.
Green Money, Polluting Destination
According to the investigation, over 33 billion dollars were invested by sustainable funds in companies such as Shell, BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil, and TotalEnergies. These five companies lead the ranking of the largest polluters on the planet, according to data from the Carbon Majors organization.
The investments were made by European funds regulated by the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR), a legislation created to ensure transparency in the sustainable financial market.
-
Norwegian company 1X opened the first vertically integrated humanoid robot factory in the US in California, while China in Guangdong produces 10,000 units per year.
-
CATL manufactures more batteries for electric cars than all its competitors worldwide combined, and the company founded 14 years ago in a coastal city in China that no one knew delivered 661 GWh in 2025, commands 39.2% of the global market and supplies batteries to Tesla, BMW, Toyota, and Volkswagen.
-
BYD produces up to 4,400 cars per day and one vehicle every 20 seconds at its largest factory in Xi’an, surpasses Tesla in industrial pace, leaves Volkswagen far behind in pure electric vehicles, and consolidates China as the birthplace of the world’s largest electric car manufacturer.
-
While cities suffocate with smoke and fields burn worthless straw, India transforms sugarcane bagasse, non-recyclable plastic, and agricultural residue into bricks to build cheaper rural housing.
Funds classified under Articles 8 and 9 of the SFDR are theoretically required to promote environmental and social objectives, focusing on combating the climate crisis.
However, the investigation showed that even with this label, managers continue to finance fossil fuel companies. The case has generated criticism and concerns about the real effectiveness of so-called sustainable investments.
Justifications and Controversies
Companies like BlackRock, JP Morgan, and DWS, which manage some of these funds, argue that the strategy aims to maintain influence over the companies to push for internal changes. However, climate experts do not agree with this argument.
Reports from Carbon Tracker indicate that none of the major oil companies have plans compatible with the Paris Agreement. Many have even reportedly reduced their decarbonization targets in the past year.
In addition to the five oil giants, other companies like American Devon Energy and Canadian Suncor have also benefited from investments from funds classified as sustainable.
Greenwashing and Risk for the Transition
For environmental entities, this practice is a clear example of greenwashing, where actions that seem sustainable are used to cover up environmental harm.
The organization Transport & Environment condemned the investments and highlighted the risk of jeopardizing global efforts to combat the climate crisis.
According to activists, allowing funds with a “green” label to continue financing fossil fuels diverts resources from projects that could truly accelerate the energy transition.
The complaint raises an alert about the urgency for greater oversight and consistency in sustainable financing policies.
With information from Tribuna de Minas.
Be the first to react!