Dear Mr. Brassac, Mr. Musca,\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Our 18 civil society organizations across France, Pacific and beyond call on Cr\u00e9dit Agricole CIB to withdraw from the Papua Liquefied Natural Gas Project (Papua LNG). \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div> Indeed, we have recently found out that, according to IJGlobal (1), Cr\u00e9dit Agricole is acting as a financial advisor for this US$10 billion LNG project, led by TotalEnergies (37.55%) along with ExxonMobil (37.04%), Santos (22.83%) and JX Nippon (2.58%).<\/p>\n Independent information about the project\u2019s climate emissions does not appear to have been communicated to affected communities or other stakeholders. (2) We believe that Cr\u00e9dit Agricole, as a signatory of the Equator principles, cannot move forward without guaranteeing their right for Free, Prior and Informed Consent and would otherwise face significant reputational and legal risk.<\/p>\n Furthermore, support to this project (made of 9 offshore wells, a gas processing plant, 4 electric liquefaction trains and a 320km pipeline) undermines Cr\u00e9dit Agricole\u2019s commitments to protect the climate and biodiversity. It would also further jeopardize international climate goals, risk billions USD in stranded assets, (3) and put Pacific frontline communities at further environmental, social, and economic risk.<\/p>\n Recent research by the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) highlights that this project would increase PNG\u2019s energy and industry emissions by more than 7% (4) . The total scope 3 emissions of this project are estimated at 220 million tons of CO2 equivalent (MTCO2e). In layperson\u2019s In other words, this project would go against the international objective of limiting global warming\u00a0 1.5\u00b0C, which requires our GHG emissions to be reduced by close to 50% by 2030. While the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has warned against the development of any new emitting infrastructure, the International Energy Agency\u2019s Net Zero scenario projected an immediate end to investments in new gas fields and LNG infrastructure. (6) Please note that this scenario only gives a 50% chance to limit global warming to 1.5\u00b0C.<\/p>\n The project also risks severe environmental, social and potentially economic impacts within PNG. The project is proposed to take place in Gulf Province – a province whose coastal areas are already hard hit by climate change. Rising sea levels and storms on the ocean have forced some communities in Orokolo Bay to relocate their homes multiple times.7 An earlier project led by ExxonMobil – PNG LNG – has previously been associated with human rights abuses, escalating tensions, land-related issues and broken economic promises.8 Already in the preparation for Papua LNG irregularities are noted – such as lack of independent information about the climate emissions of the project, police being assigned to project researchers, or having the head of the PNG Catholic Church sitting on a company advisory panel. (9)<\/p>\n Alongside a disastrous climate impact, the project also presents considerable financial risks. Global gas demand is expected to decline by 72% by 2050 under the IEA\u2019s Net Zero by 2050 roadmap,10 with a 23% decline by 2030. Moreover, our understanding is that it has not secured any guaranteed sales \u2013 with no long-term sales and purchase agreements (SPAs) or non-binding heads of agreement supply deals. (11)<\/p>\n In addition to these climate, environmental, social and financial risks, Pacific civil society and governments have repeatedly called for the end of all fossil fuels to safeguard a habitable climate for the region, (12) as warming above 1.5\u00b0C puts the habitability of many Pacific Island communities at risk. PNG itself does not need fossil gas for its own energy needs – it could dramatically expand its energy usage and still provide 78% of its on-grid energy needs from renewable energy by 2030 were appropriate financing made available. (13)<\/p>\n During the last Cr\u00e9dit Agricole\u2019s AGM, you acknowledged that meeting the international objective of limiting global warming to 1.5\u00b0C and meeting Cr\u00e9dit Agricole\u2019s own climate commitment requires ending oil and gas expansion. You also acknowledged your responsibility to tackle this issue, through the adoption of measures at project level but also at corporate level.<\/p>\n For all these reasons, we as civil society organizations call on Cr\u00e9dit Agricole:<\/p>\n We thank you for your consideration on this important topic and would welcome a meeting with you and your team to discuss this further. An answer to this letter before the 15th of September would be highly appreciated.<\/p>\n Signed,<\/p>\n Hugo Viel, 350.org<\/strong>
\nterms, in its lifetime this single project will emit an equivalent amount as it takes the whole population of Bangladesh – 169 million people – to emit in an entire year. (5)<\/p>\n\n
\nPascal Vollenweider, Avaaz<\/strong>
\nEigil Johannisson, Action Aid Denmark<\/strong>
\nJohan Frijns, Banktrack<\/strong>
\nClaire Nouvian, Bloom<\/strong>
\nKlervi Le Guenic, Canop\u00e9e – F\u00f4rets vivantes<\/strong>
\nPeter Bosip, Center for Environmental Law and Communities Rights (CELCOR)<\/strong>
\nIldem Esin, Ek\u014d<\/strong>
\nMakoma Lekalakala, Earthlife Africa Jhb<\/strong>
\nNeville van Rooy, The Green Connection<\/strong>
\nThe Green Youth Movement<\/strong>
\nJeroen Wilting, Groen Pensioen<\/strong>
\nShona Hawkes, Jubilee Australia Research Center<\/strong>
\nWill van de Pol, Market Forces<\/strong>
\nRomain Ioualalen, Oil Change International<\/strong>
\nRuth Breech, Rainforest Action Network<\/strong>
\nLucie Pinson, Reclaim Finance<\/strong>
\nKatrin Ganswindt, Urgewald<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>