This post is also available in: Portuguese (Brazil)

Follow our full coverage of COP30.

Brazil faces a paradox as it hosts COP30. 

Even as the country hosts and leads the world’s biggest climate conference of 2025, it has also given the green light for oil exploration at the mouth of the Amazon River.

The Amazon rainforest holds nearly one-fifth of the world’s recently discovered oil and natural gas reserves, and the industry is already eyeing it as a new ‘global oil frontier.’

The country’s largest state-owned company, Petrobras, has received the approval of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva to start drilling in an area known as the Equatorial Margin.

But experts have warned of risks to the rainforest and the traditional communities that call it home – as well as the dangers of further entrenching the country in fossil fuels.

So, why are Brazil and oil companies still drilling for oil, and what can be done now to get the world moving away from fossil fuels?

What are the risks of oil exploration in the Amazon?

Exploring for oil in the Equatorial Margin involves immediate short-term operational dangers – that is, those that could have an impact within two years – and the long-term risk of making Brazil even more dependent on fossil fuels.

According to Juliano Bueno de Araujo, executive director of the Arayara Institute, one of the most immediate risks is oil spills and leaks, which can be difficult to address due to the area’s remoteness.

Other immediate threats include seismic noise, affecting both fisheries and marine wildlife, and an increase in vessel traffic, which could lead to territorial conflicts with local communities.

“There is pressure on environmental agencies and fragmented licensing processes, as well as socioeconomic impacts such as declining income from artisanal fishing, higher prices for local food and volatility in tourism and subsistence chains,” he says.

In the medium term – between three and 10 years – he warns that, beyond causing continual damage to communities and biodiversity, Brazil will also be ‘locked into’ fossil fuels as it invests in infrastructure such as ports, pipelines and oil platforms, which he believes will slow down the clean energy transition.

“There is also the fiscal dependence on royalties, exposing states and municipalities to the volatility of Brent crude prices [the leading international oil benchmark],” he adds.

Why does Brazil still want fossil fuels?

Petrobras and the federal government argue that oil production will generate the revenue needed to finance the energy transition.

Critics say it will only deepen fossil fuel dependence and divert resources and investment away from renewables.

Araujo points out that local and federal governments have historically been dependent on revenue from the sector, which they see as a ‘quick fix.’

“There is also severe regulatory capture and lobbying in Congress and in technical agencies by the fossil fuel industry, compounded by pressure from supplier chains and short-term interests in jobs and contracts,” he says.

“As a justification, the government and Petrobras are using the false narrative of ‘energy security’ and a ‘window of opportunity’ before an alleged global decline in demand. This argument is used to justify and accelerate decisions, even though it is known to be false, since oil consumption is expected to peak and start declining by 2030.”

Ilan Zugman, director for Latin America and the Caribbean at 350.org, believes this speaks volumes about Brazil’s current energy priorities.

“[Oil is] a sector of the past – a dirty source of energy – and the main driver of the climate crisis we are facing,” he argues. “Brazil is losing the chance to become a renewable energy powerhouse.”

Zugman points out to projections by the International Energy Agency (IEA) that fossil fuel demand is set to peak by 2030 – before any oil found in the Equatorial Margin could be exploited.

“This could lead to stranded assets and economic losses for Brazil,” he warns.

Even then, the energy transition will be “long, complex, and costly,” says Rafaela Guedes, an energy transition consultant and specialist at the Brazilian Center for International Relations (CEBRI). She believes opening a new oil well could in fact provide Petrobras with the funds to help finance this transition.

“The challenge, therefore, is not to eliminate oil immediately, but to balance the expansion of the energy supply – which is essential for economic growth and overcoming energy poverty – with the construction of a low-carbon energy system,” she explains.

“What really matters is not simply the opening of a new well but what the country will do with the results of that exploration: whether it will reinforce dependence on fossil fuels or use those resources as leverage to accelerate the shift toward a cleaner, safer and more inclusive energy matrix.”

Brazil’s Ministry of Mines and Energy did not respond to requests for comment.

The Amazon isn’t the only part of Brazil being targeted by oil companies. British oil giant BP recently made its largest oil and natural gas discovery in 25 years off Brazil’s southeastern coast, marking its return to oil and gas exploration after shifting away from renewables.

BP declined to comment and reiterated that it “do[es] not have oil exploration interests in the Amazon.”

Is it still possible to phase out fossil fuels?

Given Brazil’s commitment to fossil fuels, can the country still be trusted to help broker ambitious agreements at COP30?

At COP28 in 2023, countries agreed to “transition away from fossil fuels” – albeit without a plan to implement that transition. That drastically raises the stakes at this year’s COP.

“This puts the country in a contradictory position – needing to lead a process with many countries to reach ambitious decisions, such as moving away from fossil fuels,” says Zugman.

“Many countries have contradictions, but Brazil, as the leader of the conference and with a discourse of wanting to be a climate leader, should be choosing the other side at the moment,” he adds.

Fossil fuels are still nowhere to be found on the COP30 agenda at the time of writing.

“It’s likely that this topic will appear in the action agenda, which is not part of the formal negotiations,” Zugman explains. 

“Or the country could, as the COP presidency, propose a cover decision, which would be very significant. But that would require a consensus between over 190 countries.”

He also points to a challenging geopolitical context, with the United States exiting the Paris Agreement and European countries increasingly investing in defense, reducing the resources available for climate action.

“No major victories are expected at this COP,” Zugman concedes.

“We hope for some progress on adaptation and on the just transition program, but on more contentious issues, such as fossil fuels and the ambitious gaps in nationally determined contributions (NDCs), Brazil may need to broker a cover decision to provide a strong and necessary response.”

For Guedes, Brazil’s climate leadership will increasingly be judged by whether the country’s actions live up to its discourse.

“In practice, the country will be assessed less for keeping oil underground and more for how consistently it accelerates investments in clean energy, resilient infrastructure and climate innovation,” she says.

“COP30 is the ideal moment for Brazil to demonstrate both its ambition and its strategy.”