I am intrigued by Citigroup (C) and its recent pledge to commit $50 billion over the next ten years to address climate change.

So far, this is hands-down the largest commitment to global warming that any company worldwide has put forth. This amount includes the $10 billion that the company has already committed to reducing their own carbon footprint, largely by means of decreasing energy consumption at the 15,000 properties worldwide that it owns or rents.

Thirty-one billion dollars of this initiative are earmarked toward companies that are already working to reduce their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, or even to invest in such projects on its own.

In an interview with NPR, Citigroup’s Director of Corporate Citizenship, Pamela Flaherty, says that this could go toward a wind farm in Brazil or helping to reduce the emissions from power plants. You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to figure out that this is a landmark proposal for Citigroup, or anyone, in raising the bar for corporate sustainability.

Now let’s keep in mind that this is not Citigroup’s first foray into sustainability. The company has long since had its own extensive corporate citizenship policies and has also been a primary influence in the development of the Equator Principles. As a result, Citigroup is represented on the Dow Jones Sustainability Index and FTSE4Good Index Series, two stock market indices that acknowledge companies that have displayed leadership in sustainable business practices.

As the country’s largest financial services institution, Citigroup is apparently looking to position itself as the most sustainable within its peer group. This blockbuster plan, if executed properly, could do the trick. I will keep my eye on developments regarding how this money is actually deployed.

And this kind of announcement probably does not come a moment too soon. Citigroup’s share price performance has languished over the past five years, posting a CAGR of 4.2% vs. 6.9% for the broader S&P500 index. The company’s increasing focus on sustainability during that time was overshadowed by its long string of acquisitions, some perhaps ill-advised.

As a result, the company got bigger and bigger but did not really have an identity. This latest initiative, however, could accomplish that. This proposal could thrust Citigroup into the sustainability spotlight above all the other massive financial service-related "captains of industry" that have also begun their own sustainability programs. Such competitors include Bank of America (BAC), Goldman Sachs (GS), and State Street Corp (STT). Bank of America has also recently rolled out its own large-scale environmental initiative, valued at $20 billion over the next ten years. Needless to say, I am no less eager to see tangible results for this effort than Citigroup’s.

In the aforementioned program on NPR, Innovest Group analyst Greg Larkin mentions that Citigroup, among others, are undertaking these sizable plans to assess the opportunities and risks associated with addressing climate change, and that this is more than just good public relations that a large-cap company would typically want to establish.

Indeed, there is money to be made in this space — and lots of it. For Citigroup’s sake, let’s hope that the money made here also translates into improved share price appreciation going forward.

Disclaimer: I do not give investment advice. Do your own research. Do not rely on anything in this weblog to make investment decisions. I only write about investment opportunities that I think are interesting. Consult an investment professional familiar with your specific financial situation before buying or selling any security.

Disclosures and Confessions: I do not own any of the aforementioned stocks. A financial advisor recommended I invest in Citigroup stock back in early 2002 but I did not end up buying any shares. With an apparent new identity for the future, however, I will now consider doing so. My first job out of college was at State Street Corp. and it was nothing more than a waste of time. Still, a lot has changed since the late 90’s and I wouldn’t mind owning shares of the company today.