Cecilia Requena is a Bolivian senator with Parliamentarians for a Fossil Free Future and Juan Pablo Osornio is engagement and policy director at Earth Insight.
In late April, delegations from dozens of governments will gather in Colombia for the First Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels. Together with the roadmaps announced at November’s UN climate summit in Brazil, which will call on countries to transition away from fossil fuels and halt deforestation by 2030, political will is building to save our most critical natural resources.
Now we need the practical application of where and how this will work – specific places where the line is drawn against new fossil fuel extraction. That is what Fossil Free Zones offer.
What is a Fossil Free Zone?
A Fossil Free Zone is a defined area demarcated by its ecological, biodiversity, or cultural significance, where exploration, extraction, and development of fossil fuels are permanently prohibited. Think tropical rainforests, key biodiversity areas, Indigenous Peoples’ territories, and critical marine ecosystems. They translate the abstract global commitment to transitioning away from fossil fuels into something tangible: a map, a boundary, a legal safeguard.
The stakes for getting this right are enormous. Research shows that oil and gas blocks already overlap with approximately 179 million hectares of tropical moist forests – roughly 21% of the Amazon, Congo Basin, and Southeast Asian forest cover.
Globally, almost 27% of global conventional oil resources overlap with top-priority socio-environmental areas. In 2024 alone, 85% of new oil discoveries were made offshore, frequently overlapping with marine biodiversity hotspots.
Colombia: A model for the world
No country illustrates the possibilities better than Colombia – fittingly, the nation hosting this conference (along with the Netherlands). Last September, Colombia announced a landmark ban on fossil fuel and mining extraction across its entire Amazon region – the world’s first region-wide Fossil Free Zone of its kind.
Colombia’s decision followed in the wake of our new research, which found that developing untapped reserves beneath the country’s forest would generate billions of dollars in stranded assets while doing almost nothing for national energy security. It would, however, threaten 20% of the intact Amazon forest and the territories of nearly 70% of the Indigenous and local communities whose lands overlap with fossil fuel concessions. In most of the Colombian Amazon, the cost of extraction is higher than the cost of conservation.
How a global roadmap can meet the promise to halt deforestation
Other countries are also taking steps in this direction. Mexico has 100 million hectares of similar Safeguard Zones, Guatemala ended oil extraction in the Mayan Biosphere Reserve, and parliamentarians across the Amazon basin have introduced legislation to extend the ban region-wide.
The economic case for leaving fossil fuels in the ground
The fossil fuel endgame – a period of declining global demand as renewable energy scales – means that unconventional and frontier reserves in remote forests are increasingly uncompetitive. They require massive public investment in infrastructure, including roads that themselves become vectors for illegal logging, small-scale mining, and agricultural encroachment. Stranded asset risk is real and growing.
In 2025, wind and solar growth outpaced all new electricity demand, and more than a quarter of all vehicles sold were electric.
For forested nations, there is also an emerging economic logic for protection: intact forests generate jobs and revenue from protected area management, watershed services, and sustainable tourism, while supporting the small-scale agriculture that most rural economies depend on. They also underpin water security for agriculture and energy generation and act as carbon sinks. Over 33 million people are employed directly in the forest sector, and there are more than 1.6 billion small forest farm producers.
Fossil fuel investment amid volatile energy markets
Developing countries with fossil fuel reserves face genuine pressures to develop them – credit ratings, currency stability, social services, and energy security are tied to an ever-growing fossil frontier, particularly in the midst of volatile energy markets.
The conflict in Iran has amplified that volatility, spiking oil prices and giving fossil fuel-dependent governments renewed short-term pressure to expand domestic production – making the case for internationally-backed Fossil Free Zones, paired with real financial support, all the more urgent.
Innovative financial mechanisms like the Tropical Forest Forever Facility – a fund proposed at COP30 that would provide long-term, results-based payments to tropical forest nations to keep forests standing – can shift the economic scales enough to make Fossil Free Zones in high-integrity forests politically viable.
Colombia pledges to exit investment protection system after fossil fuel lawsuits
Industries leading the energy transition – renewable energy developers, green hydrogen producers, sustainable finance institutions, and technology companies with net-zero supply chain commitments – also have a direct stake in the Fossil Free Zone agenda. Moreover, the reputational and legal risks of investments in fossil fuel frontiers are escalating.
Already, 11 banks have applied various levels of financial restrictions to the oil and gas sector in the Amazon. Some of these policies are strong, others are closer to greenwashing, but these commitments prove that banks see the increasing risks.
What should emerge from Colombia conference
Our hope for the upcoming conference in Colombia is that, at a minimum, Fossil Free Zones are uplifted as part of a shared international vision for the energy transition. At best, a coalition of countries commits to include Fossil Free Zones in their national plans and establishes a shared framework with principles to identify new zones and implementation guidance for other countries.
WATCH OUR WEBINAR: Santa Marta – Fossil fuel transition in an unstable world
This is a practical on-ramp for countries that want to align with the global transition but need a concrete, geographically-defined starting point – and as a direct delivery mechanism for the deforestation roadmap, translating a global pledge to halt forest loss into specific action to thwart a real driver of deforestation.
The question is no longer whether fossil fuel extraction will end, but whether that end will be managed or chaotic, putting the planet’s most critical ecosystems in danger. Fossil Free Zones offer a hope of preventing irreversible harm to the forests, marine ecosystems, and Indigenous communities that represent humanity’s best remaining insurance against climate collapse – one territory at a time.
The post Fossil Free Zones can be on-ramps to the clean energy transition appeared first on Climate Home News.
Fossil Free Zones can be on-ramps to the clean energy transition
Climate Change
“Sink or swim”: WA Gov hugely underestimating decline in regional gas demand while sleeping on green exports, new report finds
PERTH, Tuesday 13 October 2026 — A new report from Greenpeace Australia Pacific and Springmount Advisory reveals green commodity exports are an untapped economic opportunity for Western Australia in a declining Asian gas market, while offering a genuine solution for decarbonising Asia.
From Gas to Green: Building Western Australia’s Future State is a comprehensive analysis of the declining gas market in Asia, and the untapped economic opportunity for WA to become a global leader in green commodity exports while driving the regional shift away from fossil fuels.
The report offers key recommendations for the WA Government to support regional decarbonisation through an orderly phase out of gas exports in favour of green iron and other green exports. It comes as global climate leaders from across business, politics and advocacy prepare to meet for the Global Citizen Now: Perth event focused on decarbonising WA.
Key findings:
- Gas demand is falling across WA’s core markets in Asia: Gas demand fell in 2025 and is projected to continue to decline, driven by a combination of global geopolitical factors and domestic concerns.
- Policy shifts in key markets since the war on Iran now prioritise renewables and nuclear over gas: Japan, South Korea and China have legislated energy plans that prioritise renewables and nuclear over gas.
- New WA gas would arrive in a saturated, uncertain Asian market filled with cheaper gas: The US is now the world’s largest liquefied gas producer and plans to double its capacity as it also targets Asian markets.
- Green commodities offer a real solution to sustain WA’s economy: WA can lead Australia’s green commodity exports, which by 2060 could be worth almost a trillion dollars.
- Exporting more WA gas is likely to delay or impede Asia decarbonisation: Despite claims by the gas industry, there is no evidence that WA gas is displacing coal in Asia, and in fact diverts resources from genuine decarbonisation options.
Geoff Bice, WA Campaign Lead at Greenpeace Australia Pacific said: “As our export partners in Asia shift away from expensive and polluting gas, the WA Government has a golden opportunity to pivot our economy to green exports, like green iron, which is the most effective way to help our region to decarbonise.
“The writing is on the wall: gas is in decline, renewables are our future. In this context, it makes zero sense for the government to encourage high risk projects like Woodside’s reckless Browse gas proposal at Scott Reef.
“This report clearly shows that the WA Government faces a choice: sink or swim. They can either allow the gas industry to keep ripping off West Australians and continue propping up its decline, or choose the path that will deliver enormous benefits to the state and the world by becoming a leader in the rapidly expanding green economy.”
Tom Quinn, Managing Director of Springmount Advisory: “Western Australia prospers when it looks to the future and builds for future demand. Twenty years from now, what the world needs is green commodities made using WAs abundant renewable resources. Just like it did with iron ore in the 1950s and gas in the 1970s, WA should look to the future and build what the world will need, not sunsetting industries like gas that are already past their peak.”
-ENDS-
Media contact
Kate O’Callaghan on 0406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org
Lucy Keller on 0491 135 308 or lucy.keller@greenpeace.org
A report from Greenpeace Australia Pacific and Springmount Advisory reveals the untapped green economic opportunity for Western Australia in a declining Asian gas market, which also offers a genuine solution for decarbonisation in Asia.
Is Western Australia clinging to a fading gas industry while a thriving green future passes it by? As major Asian trading partners rapidly pivot away from volatile gas imports toward cheap solar and battery storage, this report exposes a high-stakes choice: risk becoming stranded in an oversupplied fossil fuel market, or harness WA’s unmatched sun and wind to lead the global clean energy transition.
Summary
From Gas to Green: Building Western Australia’s Future State reveals that Western Australia (WA) faces a critical juncture as falling Asian gas demand, geopolitical gas supply volatility and accelerating renewable energy deployment undermine the long-term economic viability of gas exports. By harnessing its world-class wind and solar resources, the report demonstrates that WA can execute an orderly phase-out of gas and pioneer a green commodity export economy that could generate $987 billion in economic value by 2060, create 24,000 ongoing jobs, and drive a 9.6% reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions.
Key Findings
- Gas demand is falling in Asia – WA can no longer rely on gas exports: Gas demand in core Asian markets fell in 2025 and is projected to continue to decline in 2026. Legislated energy plans in Japan, South Korea, and China now prioritise renewables and nuclear over gas.
- Asia is increasing renewables, importing gas just gets in the way: Evidence from markets like Thailand suggests that gas imports are increasingly crowding out cheaper renewable energy investments and battery storage rather than displacing coal, locking in more emissions over time.
- Green commodities offer a real solution to decarbonise Asia – this is a major win for WA: With world-class renewables, WA can lead Australia’s green commodity exports, which by 2060 could be worth almost a trillion dollars ($987 billion) and support a genuine 9.6% reduction in global emissions.
Recommendations to WA government
Recommendation 1: Plan an orderly gas phase-out aligned with a trading partner pivot plan
Implement a managed, orderly phase-out of gas exports aligned with trading partners’ decarbonisation pathways, rather than waiting for demand to collapse, by:
- Developing and implementing a staged phase-out of gas facilities aligned with feedstock supply expiry or typical end of facility lifespans.
- Committing to no new gas development for gas expansion, including Browse and Kimberley fields.
- Developing new, reciprocal trade relationships with existing gas trade partners, structured to progressively replace gas exports with green commodities – integrated with recommendation 2.
Recommendation 2: Develop an integrated green commodity export strategy, positioning WA as a global green iron manufacturing hub
Establish an integrated green commodity export strategy that immediately prioritises green iron development, positioning WA as a global green iron manufacturing hub, by:
- Committing to green commodity export targets to give industry and investors a clear demand signal.
- Prioritising green iron as the lead sector within the broader green commodity strategy, given WA’s iron ore endowment and first-mover potential.
Recommendation 3: Reject false solutions such as carbon dumping (CCS) and blue hydrogen
Reject carbon dumping (also described as carbon capture and storage, or CCS) and blue hydrogen as viable decarbonisation technologies, and prioritise green hydrogen and proven renewables for clean energy and fuel production by:
- Excluding blue hydrogen projects (and CCS-dependent projects) from all government support programs.
- Requiring existing hydrogen-based production (including ammonia, methanol, synthetic fuels) to have clear, near-term transition timelines to switch to green hydrogen production.
What you can do
Together, we can push for a prosperous green future.
You can help by:
- Sending an email to Environment Minister Murray Watt and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, calling on them to reject Browse.
- Sharing this story to help more Australians understand what’s at stake.
- Encouraging your friends and family to take action.
REPORT: “From Gas to Green” Building Western Australia’s Future State
Cleaner cooking projects in the UN carbon market will have to set aside a share of their credits to insure against the risk that the trees they save are lost to fire, drought or logging, after the market’s regulator rejected calls to exempt the sector.
The requirement is part of a new rulebook that the Paris Agreement carbon market regulator – the Article 6.4 Supervisory Body – approved last Friday for programmes that aim to cut emissions by distributing new and cleaner cookstoves in regions that still burn wood or charcoal for cooking.
These are the UN mechanism’s first rulebooks for cookstoves, one of the carbon market’s most popular credit types and also one of its most criticised for overstating climate benefits.
They consist of two methodologies: one for programmes that aim to cut greenhouse gas emissions by distributing more efficient cookstoves that burn less wood or charcoal, and a separate methodology for projects shifting households to lower-emissions cookers running on electricity or liquid petroleum gas (LPG).
Mkhuthazi Steleki, the South African chair of the Supervisory Body, said “this decision gives cleaner cooking projects a new pathway under the UN carbon market, with clear rules to ensure that each credit represents a real and credible emission reduction”.
Industry and NGOs lobby to weaken UN carbon credit rules in “coordinated” push
In copycat submissions and a private briefing to government officials, the groups have opposed a proposal to tighten safeguards for emissions offsetsLaunch of Africa Energy Bank delayed again in blow to oil and gas hopes
Repeated delays are raising questions about the bank’s momentum and whether it can mobilise investment to finance Africa’s oil and gas ambitions in an era of energy transition
Exemption push rejected
More efficient cookstove projects earn credits based on the amount of carbon they save by preserving trees that would have otherwise been cut down and burned for fuel. But if those trees later burn in a wildfire or are logged, the carbon stored would be released anyway, erasing the climate benefits of the credits.
Several carbon credit developers, conservation NGOs and the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) disputed that cookstove projects face this risk, in what critics described as a “coordinated lobbying campaign”.
They argued that, unlike forest protection schemes, this type of credit represents a “flow” of avoided emissions rather than a “stock” of stored carbon that can be released. They also warned that requiring a buffer would impose disproportionate costs and undermine the financial viability of these activities.
But the UN carbon market regulator was not persuaded by the argument. It decided that projects would have to protect against this reversal risk by handing over a percentage of credits to a so-called “buffer pool” instead of selling them.
‘New paradigm’
The amount of credits to be g