Copublished with CELCOR, Jubilee Australia Research Center, JACSES, SFOC and Friends of the Earth United-States.
4 June 2025 – Today, six organisations from four continents are highlighting that recent developments in Australia rule out another potential financier to the controversial Papua LNG project. Already, 13 major commercial or development financial institutions have ruled out Papua LNG – including the project’s former financial advisor Credit Agricole, and all major Australian, French and Italian banks. Recent developments render the country’s export credit agency – Export Finance Australia (EFA) – the 14th.
In late 2024, Australia passed the Future Made in Australia Act cementing its commitments to the international Clean Energy Transition Partnership (CETP). The Act includes fossil fuel exclusion clauses that specifically prohibit EFA from lending money to international coal, oil and gas projects. The recent re-election of the Albanese government in May – with a landslide majority – reaffirms Australia’s CETP commitments. This brings EFA in line with Australia’s major commercial banks, who also rule out Papua LNG financing.
Papua New Guinea already has a set of pre-identified renewable energy projects that could dramatically expand energy access and see up to 78% of on-grid energy by renewables by 2030. The main gap is identifying international grant-based funding.
The predecessor to EFA was a key financier to ExxonMobil’s PNG LNG project over fifteen years ago and still has over AUD$100 million owing. The project has faced serious allegations of environmental and human rights concerns – including exacerbating local conflict, prolonged delays in payment to landowners and exaggerated economic claims.
The controversial Papua LNG project – led by TotalEnergies – has been critiqued by the Centre for Environmental Law and Community Rights (CELCOR) for undermining climate justice in PNG – one of the most climate-affected countries on the planet. Concerns have also been raised about failure to adhere to a range of international standards. With ninety-five percent of the project’s gas intended for export to Asia, the Asian People’s Movement on Debt and Development has also criticised the project – noting that Asian communities are also contending with climate impacts and vehemently reject any more gas or other fossil fuels.
People’s lives matter…no financial institutions should support Papua LNG Project as the detrimental impacts of the project far outweighs the benefits.
Peter Bosip, Executive Director at the Centre for Environmental Law and Community Rights in PNG
We welcome Australia’s commitment to the Clean Energy Transition Partnership and that Export Finance Australia’s policy would rule out financing to Papua LNG. Papua LNG is bad for the climate, terrible for biodiversity and there’s little evidence that it’s properly communicated its real risks to local people. In 2020, Cambodian farmers were the first to secure a significant financial settlement from a commercial bank because it ignored extensive evidence of human rights risks before financing. Similarly, any bank or export credit agency foolish enough to support Papua LNG faces the very real possibility that it too could become an international test case for how to hold financial institutions to account for what they finance.
Shona Hawkes, Director, Land and Environmental Justice at Jubilee Australia Research Centre
Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC), a Japanese export credit agency, is also one of potential banks, and JBIC had meetings with PNG Government on the Papua LNG project. As a G7 member, Japan also committed to end its financing for new fossil fuel projects. Thus, JBIC should rule out the Papua LNG project, following Australia’s leadership.
Yuki Tanabe, Program Director for Japan Center for a Sustainable Environment and Society (JACSES)
Any bank committed to a clean energy transition has no place supporting TotalEnergies’ damaging Papua LNG project. Export Finance Australia should take pride in stepping away from this project, alongside Australian banks. The project would be a disaster for local communities, biodiversity and the global climate. Other banks must take note – the only acceptable response to rising global temperatures is to stop investing in new fossil fuel projects, including Papua LNG.
Antoine Bouhey, campaign coordinator at Reclaim Finance
While Australia is stepping up – adopting climate policies that rule out financing for fossil fuel projects such as Papua LNG, South Korea is falling behind. Despite being a member of the Paris Agreement, Korea continues to enable fossil fuel expansion abroad. Potential financial support from KEXIM and KSURE to the Papua LNG project, and where Korean companies such as Daewoo Engineering & Construction and Hyundai Engineering & Construction are involved will contribute towards terrible climate consequences globally. This not only undermines our international commitment on the world stage but also puts vulnerable communities in PNG at greater risk from the worsening impacts of the climate crisis. At a time where renewable energy potential in Asia is vast and untapped, Asia doesn’t need any more LNG. By looking to finance this project, Korea is undermining its climate commitments and puts PNG at greater risk. Instead of financing fossil fuel expansion abroad, South Korean public financiers should be putting their money and efforts towards the transition to clean energy.
Daniella Cha, Consultant in Public Finance at South Korean CSO, Solutions For Our Climate (SFOC)
At the same time that Australia is taking their climate commitments seriously, the United States is abandoning its promise to phase out international fossil fuel finance. The U.S Export-Import Bank and other export credit agencies should follow the lead of Australia and develop policies that would rule out support for Papua LNG.
Kate DeAngelis, Economic Policy Deputy Director, Friendsof the Earth United States states
