Nordea, the largest Nordic bank, has introduced a new restriction targeting liquefied natural gas (LNG) expansion, saying it will no longer provide project financing for any new LNG import or export terminal. This makes Nordea one of the few European banks to adopt such a measure on project finance. Generally, European banks remain strong supporters of LNG expansion, particularly in the United States. At a time when the energy crisis has shown the urgent need to reduce dependence on LNG — a fossil fuel which has severe impacts on climate, communities and biodiversity — European banks must end their support for LNG expansion by adopting policies that cover both project and corporate financing.
The current energy crisis is hitting gas and LNG markets hard. Regions heavily reliant on imported LNG, such as Asia and Europe, have been particularly exposed to price spikes (1). Once again, this crisis demonstrates that LNG prices are structurally volatile (2) and highly sensitive to geopolitical shocks (3). In response, governments and representatives in Asia (4) and Europe (5) are signaling their intention to accelerate the deployment of renewable energy and reduce their reliance on imported LNG. Nordea’s new exclusion of financing for LNG terminals reflects this emerging shift (6). Yet, most European banks continue to support LNG expansion regardless of its consequences.
Nordea joins a small group of banks with exclusions on LNG expansion
In its most recent fossil fuels policy (7), Nordea committed to end all direct financing for LNG terminals — both export and import — without exception. This policy marks a first step in acknowledging the consequences of LNG expansion, which not only drives up energy prices for consumers and industry, but also imposes a heavy toll on the climate, on communities and on biodiversity (8).
In taking this measure, the largest Nordic bank has joined a small group of European and Australian banks that have adopted exclusions on LNG expansion (9). Among the world’s 65 largest banks, only La Banque Postale had previously adopted a policy excluding the financing of all new LNG terminals, import and export, and halting corporate financing to LNG developers. However, Nordea’s measure applies only to project financing — not to the companies developing these terminals. As a result, a significant share of LNG expansion, financed through corporate loans and underwriting, remains outside the scope of the policy.
Flawed European bank policies enable unrestricted support to LNG expansion
The absence of robust LNG policies — and the weaknesses of existing LNG policies — is particularly concerning given the scale of financial support for LNG expansion. Financing from the world’s 65 largest banks reached an all‑time high last year, with US$607 billion provided to companies involved in LNG expansion between 2021 and 2025, including US$157 billion in 2025 alone — above a quarter (26%) of all financing over the five‑year period (10).
Five European banks – Barclays, Santander, Deutsche Bank, Crédit Agricole and Société Générale – rank among the top 20 financiers. These banks are particularly involved in supporting LNG expansion in the United States, backing some of the world’s largest LNG developers. In June 2026, Crédit Agricole, Société Générale and Santander – along with other major banks such as Natixis from Groupe BPCE – provided a US$1 billion loan to Cheniere Corpus Christi Holdings – the subsidiary that own a terminal which has been repeatedly criticized for environmental damage, regulatory violations, and community impacts (11) – and one US$1.75 billion loan to Cheniere Energy itself.
Crédit Agricole and Société Générale are involved despite having adopted exclusions on financing LNG export terminals, but these policies only exclude project finance and include significant exceptions. This underscores the need for robust policies that also cover corporate financing.
Some deals even contradict the spirit of existing policies: Crédit Agricole’s involvement in the Cheniere Corpus Christi Holdings loan raises questions, given that the bank excludes financing LNG terminals directly associated with new upstream projects. Yet Cheniere Corpus Christi Holdings operates essentially as a dedicated SPV for the terminal (12), and the terminal will allow increased US LNG exports which are directly linked to more production of fracked gas from the Permian Basin (13).
| Ranking | Bank | Financing to companies involved in LNG expansion between 2021 and 2025 (in US$ million) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Mizuho Financial | 38,158 |
| 2 | JPMorgan Chase | 34,249 |
| 3 | Mitsubishi UFJ Financial | 34,013 |
| 4 | Bank of America | 25,826 |
| 5 | Citigroup | 24,185 |
| 6 | Industrial and Commercial Bank of China | 23,311 |
| 7 | SMBC Group | 22,669 |
| 8 | Royal Bank of Canada | 22,109 |
| 9 | Morgan Stanley | 18,703 |
| 10 | Barclays | 18,339 |
| 11 | Santander | 17,678 |
| 12 | Scotiabank | 17,444 |
| 13 | Deutsche Bank | 16,632 |
| 14 | Goldman Sachs | 15,835 |
| 15 | Bank of China | 15,491 |
| 16 | Wells Fargo | 15,268 |
| 17 | CITIC | 14,541 |
| 18 | Crédit Agricole | 13,547 |
| 19 | Agricultural Bank of China | 13,088 |
| 20 | Société Générale | 12,832 |
Financing by the world’s 20 largest banks to companies involved in LNG expansion between 2021 and 2025 (in US$ million) – source: Banking on Climate Chaos 2026.
By adopting a full exclusion on financing for new LNG terminals, Nordea has distinguished itself from most of its peers. While this is a step forward, it should not obscure the fact that European banks remain among the main supporters of LNG expansion – despite having adopted partial policies. Reclaim Finance urges banks to strengthen their policies and end all financial services to LNG developers and their projects, in order to support Europe’s strategic autonomy and uphold their climate commitments.
