Wells Fargo dropped both its 2030 and 2050 emissions reduction commitments in late 2024

Wells Fargo announced in November 2024 that it would no longer pursue the specific emissions reduction targets it had previously set for 2030 and 2050. The bank had committed to reducing financed emissions — the greenhouse gas output of companies it lends to — by 50% by 2030 and reaching net-zero by 2050. The bank did not say it would stop working on climate issues altogether, but it removed the numerical targets and timelines that had defined its public climate strategy.

This reversal matters because Wells Fargo is one of the largest banks in the United States, and its lending decisions shape which industries and companies receive capital. When a major lender steps back from emissions targets, it signals a shift in how the financial sector approaches climate commitments — and it raises questions about whether such targets were ever realistic or binding to begin with.

Key Takeaways

  • Wells Fargo removed its 2030 and 2050 emissions reduction targets in November 2024, though it said it would continue climate-related work without specific numerical goals.
  • The bank cited the challenge of measuring financed emissions across its loan portfolio and disagreement over how to count emissions from different types of lending.
  • Other major banks including JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America have also walked back or paused their climate commitments in recent years.
  • The move reflects broader tension between financial institutions, their investors, and regulators over what climate commitments should look like and whether they are enforceable.

What Wells Fargo's targets actually covered

Wells Fargo's 2030 target aimed to cut financed emissions by 50% compared to a 2015 baseline. Financed emissions are the greenhouse gas emissions produced by the companies that a bank lends money to — not the bank's own operations. So if Wells Fargo lent $1 billion to an oil company, the emissions from that oil company's drilling and refining would count toward Wells Fargo's financed emissions total.

The 2050 net-zero target meant the bank wanted all of its financed emissions to reach zero by mid-century. These targets applied to specific sectors: oil and gas, power generation, and automotive manufacturing — the industries responsible for the largest share of global emissions. Wells Fargo had not set targets for other lending categories like commercial real estate or consumer finance.

The bank had also committed to phasing out financing for new coal plants and reducing its exposure to coal mining. Those commitments remain in place, according to Wells Fargo's statements, even though the numerical reduction targets do not.

Why Wells Fargo said it was dropping the targets

Wells Fargo cited two main reasons for abandoning the targets. First, the bank said measuring financed emissions across its entire loan portfolio is technically difficult and uncertain. Calculating the exact emissions produced by every company a bank lends to requires data that is often incomplete, inconsistent, or unavailable — especially for smaller borrowers or companies in countries with weak emissions reporting standards.

Second, Wells Fargo disagreed with how the financial industry calculates financed emissions, particularly for certain types of lending. The bank objected to methodologies that assign emissions to lenders based on their share of a company's total debt. Wells Fargo argued this approach can double-count emissions if multiple banks are lending to the same company, and it can penalize banks for lending to companies that are actually reducing their own emissions.

The bank did not frame the decision as a retreat from climate concerns. Instead, Wells Fargo said it would focus on "transition finance" — lending money to companies that are actively working to reduce their emissions — rather than pursuing a specific numerical reduction target. This approach is less measurable and less publicly accountable than a fixed target.

How this fits into a broader pattern among major banks

Wells Fargo is not alone. JPMorgan Chase, the largest bank in the United States by assets, has also faced criticism for the vagueness of its climate commitments. In 2023, JPMorgan Chase said it would not set a firm important date for reaching net-zero emissions, citing similar measurement challenges. Bank of America paused its emissions reduction targets in 2023, saying it needed more time to develop a sound methodology.

Citigroup initially set a goal to reach net-zero financed emissions by 2050 but has since narrowed the scope of that commitment and faced shareholder pressure over its continued lending to fossil fuel companies. These reversals suggest that the initial climate targets set by major banks around 2020 and 2021 may have been made without fully thinking through how to measure progress or what trade-offs would be required.

The pattern also reflects pressure from multiple directions. Some shareholders and environmental groups want banks to cut fossil fuel lending faster and set firmer targets. Other shareholders and industry groups argue that strict emissions targets could limit banks' ability to lend and could push capital away from the energy sector without reducing global emissions overall.

What happens to Wells Fargo's lending to fossil fuel companies

Dropping the numerical targets does not mean Wells Fargo will when ready increase lending to oil and gas companies. The bank still has policies restricting financing for new coal plants and coal mining operations. It also has sector-specific policies for oil and gas that limit certain types of financing, though these policies are narrower than a firm emissions reduction target.

Without a 2030 target, however, Wells Fargo has no public benchmark against which to measure whether its fossil fuel lending is actually declining. The bank can point to individual deals it declined or policies it maintains, but there is no overall metric showing whether the bank's financed emissions are going up or down. This lack of transparency makes it harder for investors, regulators, and the public to hold the bank accountable.

Why regulators and investors are watching this closely

Bank regulators, particularly the Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, have been developing climate risk frameworks to assess how well banks understand and manage the financial risks posed by climate change. A bank's exposure to fossil fuel lending and its ability to measure that exposure are part of this regulatory picture.

Institutional investors — pension funds, insurance companies, and asset managers that own large stakes in banks — have also pushed for clearer climate commitments. Some have filed shareholder resolutions demanding that banks set and meet specific emissions reduction targets. When a major bank abandons its targets, it can embolden other financial institutions to do the same, or it can trigger shareholder backlash.

The broader question is whether voluntary climate commitments by banks are meaningful at all. If a bank can set a target, then drop it when measurement becomes difficult, the target was never a real constraint on the bank's behavior. This dynamic has led some regulators and investors to call for mandatory climate disclosure standards and legally binding emissions limits, rather than relying on banks to set their own goals.

What this means for companies seeking financing

For companies trying to transition away from fossil fuels, Wells Fargo's move creates uncertainty. A company that was counting on the bank to prioritize transition finance — lending to support emissions reductions — may find that the bank's commitment to that strategy is less firm than it appeared. Without a numerical target, there is no clear incentive for the bank to favor transition projects over other lending opportunities.

Conversely, fossil fuel companies may find it easier to find financing from Wells Fargo now that the bank has removed its public emissions reduction targets. The bank's policies on coal and certain oil and gas activities remain in place, but the overall framework has become less restrictive and less transparent.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does this mean Wells Fargo will start lending more to oil and gas companies?

Not necessarily. Wells Fargo still has policies restricting coal financing and certain types of oil and gas lending. However, without a numerical emissions reduction target, the bank has no public benchmark for measuring whether its fossil fuel exposure is increasing or decreasing. The bank's lending decisions will likely depend on market conditions and internal risk assessments rather than a firm climate commitment.

Can shareholders force Wells Fargo to set new climate targets?

Shareholders can file resolutions asking the bank to set new targets, and they can vote on such resolutions at annual meetings. However, shareholders cannot force the bank to adopt a target if the board of directors opposes it. Shareholder pressure has led some banks to strengthen their climate policies, but it has not been enough to prevent others from backing away from previous commitments.

Will other banks follow Wells Fargo's lead and drop their targets?

Some may. JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America have already stepped back from firm net-zero timelines. If more major banks abandon their targets, it could signal that the financial industry views climate commitments as too difficult to measure or enforce. This could also prompt regulators to develop mandatory climate standards rather than relying on voluntary bank commitments.

What is "transition finance" and why does Wells Fargo prefer it to emissions reduction targets?

Transition finance means lending money to companies that are actively working to reduce their emissions, such as a coal plant converting to natural gas or a manufacturer installing renewable energy. Wells Fargo says this approach is more practical than pursuing a firm emissions reduction target. However, transition finance is harder to measure and track, so it offers less public accountability than a specific numerical goal.

How does this affect my ability to get a loan from Wells Fargo?

Wells Fargo's decision to drop its climate targets does not change the bank's lending standards for individual customers. Your ability to get a loan depends on your credit score, income, debt levels, and the bank's underwriting criteria — not on the bank's climate commitments. However, the move may affect which industries and companies the bank prioritizes for lending over time.