Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has asked his government to draft by February guidelines for a national roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels, an idea he championed during COP30.
In a directive issued on Monday, the Brazilian leader requested the ministries of finance, energy and environment, together with the chief of staff’s office, to come up with a proposal for a roadmap to a “just and planned energy transition” that would lead to the “gradual reduction of the country’s dependence on fossil fuels”.
The order also calls for the creation of financial mechanisms to support a roadmap, including an “Energy Transition Fund” that would be financed with government revenues from oil and gas exploration.
The guidelines, due in 60 days, will be delivered “as a priority” to Brazil’s National Energy Policy Council, which will use them to craft an official fossil fuel transition roadmap.
At the COP30 climate summit in Brazil, President Lula and Environment Minister Marina Silva called on countries to agree a process leading to an international roadmap for the transition away from fossil fuels, after Silva argued earlier in June that “the worst possible thing would be for us to not plan for this transition”.
Yet, to the disappointment of more than 80 countries, the proposal for a global roadmap did not make it into the final Belém agreement as other nations that are heavily reliant on fossil fuel production resisted the idea. Draft compromise language that would have offered countries support to produce national roadmaps was axed.
Brazil seeks to set an example
Instead, Brazil’s COP30 president said he would work with governments and industry on a voluntary initiative to produce such a roadmap by next year’s UN climate summit, while a group of some 25 countries backed a conference to discuss a just transition away from coal, oil and gas that will be hosted by Colombia and the Netherlands in April 2026.
Experts at Observatório do Clima, a network of 130 Brazilian climate NGOs, welcomed Lula’s subsequent order for a national roadmap and said in a statement it sends signals abroad that Brazil is “doing its homework”.
“President Lula seems to be taking the roadmap proposal seriously,” said Cláudio Angelo, international policy coordinator at Observatório do Clima. “If Brazil – a developing country and the world’s eighth-largest oil producer – demonstrates that it is willing to practice what it preaches, it becomes harder for other countries to allege difficulties.”
The Amazon rainforest emerges as the new global oil frontier
Brazil is one of a number of countries planning a major expansion of oil and gas extraction in the coming decade, according to the Production Gap report put together by think-tanks and NGOs. Much of the exploration is set to take place offshore near the Amazon basin, which is poised to become a new frontier for fossil fuel development.
Significant funding needed
Natalie Unterstell, president of the Brazilian climate nonprofit Talanoa Institute and a member of Lula’s Council for Sustainable Social Economic Development, welcomed the national roadmap proposal in a post on LinkedIn, but emphasised it must tackle Brazil’s goal of becoming the world’s fourth largest oil producer by 2030.
Another key question is whether the Energy Transition Fund it envisages will be large enough to catalyse a real shift over to clean energy, she added. “Small and fragmented tools won’t move the dial,” she wrote.
Some Brazilian states have tested a model similar to the proposal for a national Energy Transition Fund. In the oil-producing state of Espirito Santo, for example, a percentage of the state government’s oil revenues go to a sovereign fund that invests in renewable energy, energy efficiency projects and substitution of fossil fuels with less polluting alternatives.
Colombia seeks to speed up a “just” fossil fuel phase-out with first global conference
Andreas Sieber, associate director for policy at campaign group 350.org, said a meaningful roadmap for Brazil would need to secure “adequate, fair and transparent financing to make the transition real on the ground”.
He also called for “a truly participatory process – involving scientists, civil society, workers whose livelihoods are at stake, and frontline and traditional communities whose rights must be upheld – while ensuring that those with vested fossil fuel interests do not shape the outcome”.
The post Brazil’s Lula requests national roadmap for fossil fuel transition appeared first on Climate Home News.
Brazil’s Lula requests national roadmap for fossil fuel transition
Climate Change
Nearly One-Fifth of Americans Are Consuming Water With High Levels of Nitrates
Nitrates, largely from agricultural runoff, are linked to cancers and birth defects. Research says areas with factory farms have higher levels of risk.
Close to 20 percent of Americans are exposed to water polluted with high levels of potentially cancer-causing nitrates, known to come mostly from agricultural runoff, according to new research published this month.
Nearly One-Fifth of Americans Are Consuming Water With High Levels of Nitrates
Climate Change
WATCH: ‘This is a fossil fuel crisis’, Greenpeace tells Senate gas tax Inquiry
Greenpeace Australia Pacific has slammed gas corporation war profiteering and environmental damage in a scathing Senate hearing as part of the Select Committee on the Taxation of Gas Resources, urging fair taxation of gas corporations and the transition to secure, homegrown renewable energy to protect Australian households and the economy from future energy shocks.
Speaking at the hearing, Greenpeace said the US and Israel’s illegal war on Iran has laid bare the fundamental flaws of an energy system built on fossil fuel extraction, geopolitical power plays and corporate greed, and will be a defining moment for how the world thinks about energy security.
Watch the hearing:
Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said:
“This is not an energy crisis, it’s a fossil fuel crisis. The crisis we’re all facing lays bare the dangers of fossil fuel dependence, for our energy security, our communities, and for global peace and stability.
“Gas corporations like Woodside, Santos, Shell and Chevron — the same companies whose CEOs refused to front this Inquiry — are making obscene war profits, using the illegal war on Iran to price gouge, profiteer and push for more gas we don’t need — while people and our environment pay the price.
“Australians are getting smashed by soaring bills and the impacts of climate disasters — gas corporations should be paying their fair share to help this country, instead of sending billions offshore, tax-free.
“But we’re at a turning point — while gas corporations cynically push to open up more of our oceans and land to drilling for fossil fuels, our allies like the UK are doubling down on renewables in response to the fossil fuel crisis. Our trading partners in Asia are making the same reassessment of fossil fuels.
“Which is why the hearing today is crucial: an effective and well-designed tax on the gas industry’s obscene war time profits is a chance to channel funds to people and communities, fast-track the rollout of clean, secure homegrown wind and solar energy, while holding polluters accountable.
“Our dependence on fossil fuels leave us overexposed to the whims of tyrants like Trump — it’s in Australia’s national interest to end the fossil fuel chokehold for good and usher in the era of clean energy security.”
WATCH: ‘This is a fossil fuel crisis’, Greenpeace tells Senate gas tax Inquiry
Climate Change
Greenpeace Australia Pacific settles in lawsuit against Woodside
SYDNEY, Wednesday 22 April 2026 — A settlement has been agreed in a lawsuit brought by Greenpeace Australia Pacific against fossil fuel multinational Woodside, being heard in the Federal Court of Australia.
Greenpeace Australia Pacific filed the lawsuit against Woodside in December 2023, alleging the fossil fuel giant had misrepresented both its prior emissions reductions, and its emissions reductions targets for 2025, 2030, and 2050.
Greenpeace alleged, among other things, that Woodside represented that its emissions reduction targets will achieve substantial reductions in its actual scope 1 and scope 2 emissions, when in fact Woodside will rely heavily on offsets to achieve a decrease in net emissions.
Greenpeace also alleged that Woodside represented that its emissions reduction targets are consistent with what the most recent climate science sets out as necessary to meet the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement when in fact Woodside’s emissions reduction targets do not include Woodside’s scope 3 emissions (which account for over 90% of Woodside’s emissions) and Woodside has plans to significantly expand its oil and gas production and processing and thereby the sum of its actual scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions would not materially decrease by 2030 and may increase past 2030.
Greenpeace filed expert evidence which it alleges supported its claim and demonstrated why Woodside’s claims were misleading or deceptive or likely to mislead or deceive.
Woodside has since changed how it represents its strategy to respond to climate change. For example, initially, Woodside displayed a ‘Net zero by 2050 or sooner’ banner on its website, but around July 2025, Woodside removed the banner from its website.
Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said:
“Greenpeace Australia Pacific cares about transparent and accurate climate disclosures, and in December 2023, took Woodside to court challenging its claims.
“During the course of the case, Woodside changed how it was presenting its plans on carbon emissions from what they had said prior to us bringing this case. We take that as a win and have decided to continue the fight against fossil fuel corporations outside of the courts.
“Settling this case does not signal the end of our fight against Woodside’s climate and nature-destroying gas projects. While we may have agreed to resolve our court action against Woodside, in which we alleged it made misleading and deceptive claims to investors regarding its climate plans, the fact is the court of public opinion will judge Woodside for the harm it inflicts on our climate.
“Woodside’s greed-driven appetite to expand fossil fuel production is accelerating the climate crisis, putting the environment and communities at risk.
“Greenpeace strongly supports public interest litigation as a crucial tool in democratic engagement to protect our planet and holding large corporations accountable for their contributions to climate change.
“Investors and the public deserve accurate information about a company’s true climate impact and strategy, especially when those strategies are presented as ‘Paris-aligned’ — an absurd claim for a company responsible for one of the largest LNG export terminals in Australia, and now the United States.
“The expansion of fossil fuels is incompatible with a 1.5C-aligned world — Greenpeace will continue to campaign to fast-track the transition to homegrown, clean, affordable wind and solar energy, the only solution to the energy crisis we are currently all facing globally.”
Greenpeace and Woodside agreed for the proceeding to be dismissed on the basis that each party bears its own costs.
-ENDS-
Media contact
Kate O’Callaghan on 0406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org
Kimberley Bernard on 0407 581 404 or kbernard@greenpeace.org
Greenpeace Australia Pacific settles in lawsuit against Woodside
-
Greenhouse Gases9 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change9 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Renewable Energy6 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
