The Dutch bank ING, one of the largest global backers of the expansion of liquefied natural gas (LNG) according to a <\/span><\/b>recent report from Reclaim Finance<\/b><\/a><\/span>, was the first major international bank to announce that it would stop project financing for new LNG export terminals starting in 2026. By doing so, ING acknowledges the problems posed by the expansion of LNG, both for the climate, the environment, and the affected communities. However, by limiting its exclusion to project financing and overlooking the financial services provided to the companies developing them, ING introduces a double standard in its approach to the sector. In other words, the bank will continue to indirectly support what it refuses to finance directly. Reclaim Finance calls on ING and its peers to adopt strong exclusion policies, including stopping new financing for companies that keep on with their expansion plans.<\/span><\/b>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div> Within hours of taking office,<\/span> Donald Trump ended the moratorium on new LNG exports, which have exploded in the United States in recent years (1). The United States is now the world\u2019s leading LNG exporter (2), and the European Union is its largest customer (3). Beyond the United States, the LNG boom is global: according to a <\/span>recent report from Reclaim Finance<\/a><\/span>, LNG developers are planning 156 new terminal projects. <\/span>Banks have supported this boom<\/a><\/span>, with $213 billion allocated between 2021 and 2023.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n In this context, the question arises as to where European banks stand on LNG expansion, which they must refrain from supporting to be consistent with their climate commitments (4). Reclaim Finance has assessed the commitments announced by ING, the second-largest European financier of LNG expansion and the first bank to announce <\/span>the end of project financing for LNG export terminals<\/a><\/span>.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div> LNG is booming, fueling greater use of gas with a risk of exacerbating the climate crisis. Out of the 156 terminal projects planned, the 63 export terminal projects are estimated to potentially contribute to the emission of more than 10 gigatons (Gt) of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) by 2030 (5). These emissions are close to the annual emissions of all coal-fired power plants in operation worldwide (6). This is partly because LNG is a fossil fuel made of methane, <\/span>a greenhouse gas over 80 times more potent than CO2 over 20 years<\/a><\/span>. Although LNG is often presented as an alternative to coal, it can actually be more polluting (7). The climate impact of LNG is even greater when it comes from the United States, where most of the gas is extracted through hydraulic fracturing (8).<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Contrary to their climate commitments, banks from France, Spain, the UK, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Switzerland have supported this expansion, with US$57 billion allocated between 2021 and 2023. This is particularly true for ING, which provided over US$5 billion to LNG expansion from 2021 to 2023. This makes the Dutch bank the 2<\/span>nd<\/span> largest European financier (behind Santander) and the fourteenth-largest globally of LNG expansion \u2013 see Table 1 (9).<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\nING, a major supporter of LNG despite its devastating impacts<\/h2><\/span>