Speaking at COP29 in Azerbaijan about the impact of climate change on Africa, the executives of Afreximbank promised to double-down on their commitment to a just energy transition on the continent. But, four months later, the multilateral lender has confirmed its support for a controversial pipeline that would carry crude oil from Uganda to the Tanzanian coast for export overseas.
It was announced this week that the African Export-Import Bank – whose main shareholders are African governments – would be part of a syndicate of financial institutions committing a first tranche of external financing to the East Africa Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) project, which is majority-controlled by French energy giant TotalEnergies.
Other lenders include South Africa’s Standard Bank, Uganda’s Stanbic Bank and KBC Bank, and Saudi Arabia’s Islamic Corporation for the Development of the Private Sector, according to a statement published by EACOP’s developer, which called the financing deal “a significant milestone”.
The loan is in the range of $1 billion, with two further tranches expected, according to the government-owned Ugandan newspaper New Vision. Afreximbank earlier indicated it would provide $200 million to the project.
Samuel Okulony, CEO of the Environment Governance Institute, a Ugandan NGO, told Climate Home that Afreximbank’s actions are in direct contradiction of their “empty words” on climate change.
“Afreximbank is funding the destruction of our own people, while at the same time speaking about energy transition and a commitment to a cleaner future. It is a big disappointment,” he said.
Afreximbank did not respond to Climate Home’s request for comment.
Oil pipeline faces strong opposition
The 1,443-km pipeline would carry crude oil extracted from oilfields under development near Lake Albert in Uganda to Tanga port in Tanzania for onward export to international markets. The long-delayed project has been the target of protests and lawsuits from campaigners that accuse the project developers of displacing communities, damaging the environment and fuelling the climate crisis.
A coalition of regional civil society groups said on Thursday it is a “shame” that the EACOP developer would announce financing for the project on a day many Ugandans had come face-to-face with the dire impacts of global warming. This stark reality was evident on the front page of the state-owned New Vision newspaper, which published the EACOP announcement just above a picture of the deadly floods that hit the capital Kampala this week.
The coalition said it is considering “legal and other actions” against financial institutions that “continue to prioritise profits over the lives and wellbeing of East Africans. Campaigners said the project has already displaced thousands of people and stands to harm plants and animals, while also threatening livelihoods in the farming and tourism sectors.
‘Desperate’ search for funders
The construction of the pipeline is a key element in Uganda’s push to become an oil producer, which the government says would propel the country’s economic growth.
The East African nation has been looking to exploit its natural resources for nearly two decades since oil reserves were discovered in the Albertine Rift Basin near the Democratic Republic of Congo. But development stalled as the plans faced local opposition and the project struggled to attract external financing.
Several Western banks, including BNP Paribas, Société Générale, Barclays and Standard Chartered, have publicly stated their intention not to pour money into the project.
Ugandan energy minister Ruth Nankabirwa, who has blamed activists for the project’s setbacks, said last September that at least seven European banks had committed, in private, to finance the project, the Financial Times reported – but no official announcement has materialised since then.
Where East African oil pipeline meets sea, displaced farmers bemoan “bad deal” on compensation
Afreximbank, Standard Bank, Stanbic Bank and Islamic Development Bank had all indicated their willingness to fund the pipeline construction in the past, while KCB Bank of Uganda is only being linked with the project now.
Okulony said Wednesday’s announcement amounted to a “desperate move” from the EACOP developer to demonstrate progress and drum up additional interest from investors in the project.
He added that regional African banks are becoming lenders of last resort for the oil industry in the continent, “covering up a gap” left by the accelerating withdrawal of Western lenders.
Oil investments clash with climate pledge
Afrieximbank – whose main shareholders are the Egyptian and Nigerian governments – is a major backer of fossil fuel developments in Africa.
The lender’s exposure to the oil and gas sector increased in 2024, making up over a fifth of its total loans. It has bankrolled the expansion of oil production in Nigeria and the Republic of Congo, and last month it announced the intention to set up a $1-billion financing facility for the fast-growing oil industry in Guyana.
The investments contrast with Afrieximbank’s public attempts to bolster its climate credentials.
At the COP29 climate summit, the lender said it would advocate for policies and investments that accelerate Africa’s energy transition and called for a scale-up in climate finance. Its president, Nigerian economist Benedict Oramah, stressed that the devastating impacts of climate change on the continent would probably intensify in the next decade.
“We are at the point where taking action does not only suggest good environmental stewardship,” he said, “but must also be seen as a sound economic policy, considering that the cost of immediate and decisive action is far less than the cost of inaction and delayed efforts.”
Similarly, another backer of the Ugandan project, Standard Bank, wrote in its climate policy that it supports the Paris Agreement in transitioning Africa to a lower-carbon economy and aims for net zero emissions from its portfolio by 2050.
‘Assault’ on the planet
The STOPEacop coalition said the decision to fund a fossil fuel infrastructure project “is not just “irresponsible” but also an “active assault” on the planet and people. The banks supporting the project have marked themselves as “enemies of the people” which enable “climate chaos, environmental destruction” and support international profiteers at the expense of local communities, its statement added.
The project developer still needs to raise the majority of the funding for the pipeline construction, which has an expected price tag of $5 billion.
Okulony said EACOP is trying to attract interest from Islamic financial institutions, especially in Oman.
Ryan Brightwell, deputy director at campaigning group BankTrack, told Climate Home that EACOP has tried since 2018 to secure financing for the project, and the fact that it has now only finalised one tranche “only goes to show the extent of their troubles”.
The post African banks back oil export pipeline despite climate commitments appeared first on Climate Home News.
African banks back oil export pipeline despite climate commitments
Climate Change
FLIP OFF WOODSIDE TO SAVE SCOTT REEF: Greenpeace, Michael Caton, Thinkerbell mobilise Australia to challenge gas project at Scott Reef
6 November 2026
Greenpeace Australia Pacific has joined forces with Thinkerbell and iconic Australian actor Michael Caton on a major public movement and behaviour change initiative to save Scott Reef, calling on Australians to “flip off” gas corporation Woodside. The company plans to drill for gas at Australia’s largest oceanic reef, home to vulnerable green sea turtles, endangered pygmy blue whales, and thousands of marine species, off the coast of Western Australia.
WATCH THE FULL VIDEO HERE
At the heart of the collaboration is somebody who knows a thing or two about fighting off corporations to protect a home: Michael Caton. Set in a courtroom, Caton gives his voice to a voiceless inhabitant, a green sea turtle, and together they invite the public to show their support to save Scott Reef.
Designed to shift public behaviour and drive national debate, the movement asks the public to tag their MPs – applying direct political pressure on Environment Minister Murray Watt and Prime Minister Albanese Albanese to “flip off” Woodside’s dirty gas project, which would see up to 57 toxic wells drilled around Scott Reef off the coast of Western Australia.
Voiced by Michael Caton and set to a soundtrack provided by Radiohead, the narrative centres on our hero turtle defending her home from corporate overreach in a courtroom showdown. As the turtle defiantly flips her flippers at Woodside, Michael Caton calls on everyday Australians to take a stand and help save her home.
Michael Caton said: “I’m proud to lend my voice to Greenpeace to help save Scott Reef. The marine life out there can’t speak up, so we need to. Some things are too precious to risk.”
Glenn Walker, Head of Nature at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, added: “Woodside’s dirty gas project at Scott Reef, Australia’s largest oceanic reef, is an environmental disaster waiting to happen, threatening thousands of species, including the extremely vulnerable green sea turtles that nest there. By literally flipping off Woodside and Big Gas, Aussies are cutting through corporate spin and sending an unignorable message to Environment Minister Murray Watt and the Albanese government: save Scott Reef.”
Adam Ferrier, co-founder of Thinkerbell, said: “You can fight a corporation in the courtroom forever, but the real power to deliver lasting protection rests in parliament. Right now, our MPs hold an extraordinary opportunity to safeguard Scott Reef for generations to come. I’m proudly from WA, and I know how much the natural environment means to the people and economy of Western Australia. I’m also sure Woodside wants to do the right thing, and with enough public support and government action we’ll together save Scott Reef.
Paul Swann, Chief Creative Tinker at Thinkerbell notes: “When the stakes are this high, polite ads don’t work. You need an unignorable provocation that galvanises people and puts the pressure squarely where it belongs, on our leaders in Canberra. This isn’t just about protecting a reef; it’s about holding power to account.”
Greenpeace has been campaigning to stop Woodside’s dirty gas plans for years, increasing pressure on the Australian government to save Scott Reef from becoming an industrialised gas zone. From actions aboard Woodside’s gas platform to cinemas across Australia, Greenpeace isn’t backing off in their advocacy to save Scott Reef.
Rolling out across OOH, digital, social and cinema with an interactive landing page, this project will be amplified by high-profile figures urging Australians to take action, tag their MPs, and defend Scott Reef. The movement combines cinematic storytelling with organic social mobilsation and earned media, planned via Thinkerbell’s Alchemy model to drive real behaviour change and impact.
Marking their first Australian tour in 15 years, English rock band Radiohead will play 16 arena shows across Perth, Melbourne and Sydney in May and June 2027. A $2 donation is included in every ticket price with proceeds going to Greenpeace Australia Pacific and the Australian Marine Conservation Society. Radiohead will match the final amount raised.
ENDS
WATCH NOW:
FOR ASSETS OR MORE INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT:
Adam Ferrier | 0413 633 344 | adamferrier@thinkerbell.com
Kimberley Bernard | 0407 581 404 | kbernard@greenpeace.org
ABOUT THINKERBELL
Thinkerbell is a 9-year-old independent creative company. We practise Measured Magic – the coming together of marketing science and hardcore creativity – to help our clients build their brands and change behaviour.
ABOUT GREENPEACE
Greenpeace Australia Pacific is a global independent campaigning organisation that uses peaceful protest and creative confrontation to expose environmental problems and promote solutions that are essential to a green and peaceful future.
Climate Change
Jimmy Barnes, King Gizz lead Aussie music supergroup on new release to save Scott Reef
SYDNEY, Monday 9 November 2026 — Australian music icons Jimmy Barnes AO, King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard, Fred Leone, Gordi & Montaigne are among the more than 20 Australian artists who have joined forces to release a new song with an urgent message: save Scott Reef.
Released today, “If Not Now” is a reimagining of King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard’s Environmental Music Prize-winning song “If Not Now, Then When?”, and is a collaboration between Greenpeace Australia Pacific, Green Music Australia, and p(doom) Records.
Scott Reef is a 15-million-year-old ancient coral reef located 270 kilometres off the Kimberley coast of Western Australia. It is Australia’s largest oceanic reef and is home to thousands of marine animals and endangered species, but fossil fuel corporation Woodside plans to drill up to 57 toxic wells under and around the reef, threatening to turn it into an industrial gas zone.
“If Not Now” is the reef’s first and only release, out on all digital platforms and on limited edition 7” vinyl. The song is accompanied by cover art and visualiser from acclaimed Australian artist and ARIA-winning music video director Jonathan Zawada (Flume, The Avalanches).
Speaking about the track, Stu Mackenzie (lead singer, King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard) said: “Why are we still digging up coal and gas? Why are we allowing this? Why is the Australian government so hell-bent on destroying our beautiful wild and untouched places? I’m proud that a King Gizz song was chosen to represent a growing movement of people who are asking these questions and applying pressure. Let’s shut it down and keep it beautiful.”
Rock legend Jimmy Barnes AO said: “Scott Reef is one of the few pristine reefs left in the world and it happens to be on our doorstep. We’re custodians of it — we’re supposed to be looking after it. It’s ridiculous. We must protect our country and look after what we value most, which is the nature and the beauty of this country.”
Hannah Schuch, Senior Campaigner for Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “I’m filled with hope by the incredible musicians and artists who are using their voices and skills to amplify the voices of half a million Australians who are calling on the government to stop Woodside’s nature and climate-wrecking gas plans and save Scott Reef. Australian music has long been a powerful catalyst for change, so saving Scott Reef is a no-brainer for Australian music lovers.”
Contributing artists (in alphabetic order):
- Alex Lahey
- Brinkley Davies (marine biologist/freediver)
- Birdland
- Close Counters
- DOBBY
- Fred Leone (Artist of the Year at the 2026 NIMAs, singing in Butculla)
- Gordi
- John Butler
- Jimmy Barnes
- King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard
- Leah Senior
- Mahalia Barnes
- Montaigne
- Ngaiire
- NIDALA
- Peppa Lane (Spacey Jane)
- Ruby Rodgers (2026 Environmental Music Prize winner)
- Terry Guyula (Drifting Clouds, singing in Yolgu Matha)
- Tom Mahler (The Moving Stills)
- Urthboy
Production cast:
- Becki Whitton (G Flip, Allday, Stella Donnelly)
- Stu McKenzie (King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard)
- Tay Blunt (FVNERAL)
- Tim Shiel (Green Music Australia)
Three generations of the Barnes family, Jimmy Barnes, his daughter, Mahalia Barnes and granddaughter Ruby Rodgers, contributed to the track.
The release comes amid growing national pressure on the Federal Government to save Scott Reef from Woodside’s gas drilling plans.
Last week, a leaked letter from WA’s environmental watchdog to Woodside revealed the agency deemed drilling risks to Scott Reef ‘serious, significant and irreversible’, while Greenpeace Australia Pacific activists occupied a major Woodside gas platform, and Perth communities delivered one of the biggest environmental petitions in Australia’s history to Woodside HQ.
The Federal Government is expected to make a decision on Woodside’s Scott Reef drilling plans in the coming months.
-ENDS-
Media contact
To arrange an interview or for more information, contact Emma Sangalli on 0431 513 465 or emma.sangalli@greenpeace.org
High res images and footage of Scott Reef can be found here (NEW) and here.
Jimmy Barnes, King Gizz lead Aussie music supergroup on new release to save Scott Reef
What might a high-school course look like if it helped students understand climate change—and see a place for themselves in responding to it?
Not simply a course about emissions or environmental problems. A course that connects science with the places students know, the decisions their communities face, and the work they might one day do.
Canadian schools already teach climate change and environmental responsibility, including through required curriculum expectations. Ontario’s Grade 9 science course, for example, asks students to assess climate change’s effects on ecosystems and communities, including First Nations, Métis, and Inuit communities. Across Canada, however, the depth and placement of climate learning vary, and opportunities for more specialized study often sit within elective courses.
Part 1 explored how we could build on that foundation through sustained learning from elementary school onward, shaped with First Nations, Inuit, and Métis governments, educators, and education authorities.
One next step worth considering is a required senior-secondary course that brings these threads together. Imagine a course called Climate, Land, and Future Economies: a place to explore climate evidence, community resilience, Indigenous governance, practical solutions, and the possibilities of a changing world.
The idea is not to turn every student into a climate scientist. It is to give every student a stronger foundation for the choices ahead—whether their path leads to university, college, an apprenticeship, employment, entrepreneurship, public service, or work within their own Nation or community.
Start with the science—and make room for questions
A meaningful course would begin with sound science: how the greenhouse effect works, how carbon moves through living systems, how energy choices affect emissions, and how scientists study a changing climate.
But the learning could become more engaging when students have an opportunity to investigate questions close to home.
What can local weather records tell us? How do we distinguish a single unusual season from a longer-term trend? What does a climate projection mean for a community planning its roads, housing, or water systems? What can a dataset tell us—and what remains outside its scope?
These questions invite students into the process of understanding evidence rather than asking them simply to memorize conclusions.
They also create space to discuss uncertainty honestly. Students could explore how researchers reach conclusions, why findings sometimes change, and how to distinguish a legitimate scientific question from a misleading claim.
The aim would be informed curiosity: the confidence to ask good questions, find credible information, and explain what the evidence supports.
Look at climate through the life of a community
Climate learning becomes more meaningful when it moves beyond global averages and into the places people live.
A class might explore a neighbourhood with little shade, a community concerned about flooding, or the choices involved in preparing a school for extreme heat. Students could examine a local emergency plan, speak with community planners, or investigate how housing and transportation decisions affect environmental risk.
The questions soon become as much about people as about climate.
Who has access to a cool, safe place during a heat wave? Who can leave when an evacuation is ordered? What happens when roads, water systems, or food supplies are disrupted? What resources does a community need to prepare?
A course could help students explore how housing, health, income, disability, infrastructure, and access to services shape people’s experiences of environmental change. It could also introduce environmental racism and historic dispossession through carefully researched cases, giving students a way to understand why risks and resources are not always distributed fairly.
That approach would connect climate learning with civic life. Students would begin to see that resilience is not only about stronger buildings or better technology. It is also about relationships, public services, and the ability of communities to care for their members.
Recognize that climate decisions are governance decisions
Consider the questions surrounding a new transmission line, wind project, mine, protected area, or housing development.
Where should it go? Who decides? Whose knowledge informs the decision? Who benefits, and who carries the costs?
These are environmental questions, but they are also questions about governance.
A climate course offers an opportunity to introduce Treaty relationships, Indigenous rights and title, consent, and jurisdiction through specific places and decisions. Rather than presenting these concepts as a single checklist, students could explore the Nations, agreements, histories, and legal frameworks relevant to the case they are studying.
Indigenous governments and communities would enter the discussion as decision-makers with their own laws, responsibilities, and priorities—not only as people affected by projects proposed elsewhere.
Learning of this kind would be strongest when developed through relationships with the relevant Nations and Indigenous education authorities. Their participation could help determine which local examples are appropriate, who should guide the learning, and what knowledge can be shared.
The purpose would not be to simplify difficult issues. It would be to help students understand why responsible decisions require attention to authority, relationships, evidence, and rights.
Explore solutions without pretending they are simple
Students deserve to encounter possibilities as well as problems.
Home retrofits, renewable energy, public transit, ecological restoration, local food systems, repair businesses, flood planning, and community emergency preparedness all offer starting points for investigation.
A class could compare options for improving the school building. Another might study a community-owned energy proposal or explore what would make a neighbourhood safer during extreme heat.
The interesting learning lies in looking beneath the label. Calling something “green” tells us little on its own. What does it accomplish? What materials and energy does it require? Who owns it? What effects might it have on land, water, workers, or neighbouring communities?
Students could learn to ask:
- Does this reduce emissions, strengthen resilience, or both?
- What environmental benefits and harms need to be considered?
- How are Indigenous rights and jurisdiction addressed?
- Who participates in decisions, and who receives the benefits?
- What alternatives or trade-offs deserve a closer look?
These questions do not require students to become cynical about solutions. They invite them to become more thoughtful about what makes a solution worthwhile.
A good course would make room for the possibility that different approaches suit different places—and th