Brazil’s Post-COP30 Energy Pivot
Growth Without the Fossil Script
BELÉM, Brazil — In April 2026, a new summit in Santa Marta, Colombia, promises to advance on one crucial point the U.N. climate summits have been failing to address after 30 editions: planning the transition to a world without fossil fuels.
An action plan for a phaseout was once again left out of COP official outcomes in the Amazonian city of Belém, which held the event for two weeks ending Nov. 22. Although Brazil spearheaded a road map to move away from planet-warming fossil fuels, it was never included in the official agenda — despite expectations following COP28’s call for a transition.
Brazil hosted COP30 with high promises despite its scaling environmental contradictions, such as green-lighting the exploration of oil on the Amazon coast weeks before the event. However, the Belém summit was presented as the “implementation COP” and the “COP of the truth” in official banners. In a powerful opening speech, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva first launched the road map proposal.
“We need road maps that will enable humankind, in a fair and planned manner, to overcome its dependence on fossil fuels, halt and reverse deforestation and mobilize resources to achieve these goals,” he said.
Lula’s speech was within the spirit of mutirão, which initially took over negotiations in Belém. The Portuguese word with roots in the Indigenous language Tupi-Guarani means making a “collective effort” to achieve concrete results.
The idea gained surprising momentum during the event but was ultimately left out of final commitments made by participating nations. As an alternative, Brazil, which will hold COP’s presidency until the next summit, offered to develop two road maps outside the formal process, one to transition away from fossil fuels and another to halt and reverse deforestation. The idea is to bring them back for discussion in 2026.
“We will convene high-level dialogues, gathering key international organizations, governments from both producing and consuming countries, industry, workers, scholars, civil society, and we’ll report back to the COP,” said COP president André Corrêa do Lago.
The Brazilian diplomat plans to work with the Colombian and the Dutch delegations, staunch supporters of a fossil fuel transition. The three countries will lead the First International Conference on the Just Transition Away from Fossil Fuels, scheduled for April 2026, in Santa Marta, Colombia. The event aims to negotiate a Fossil Fuel Treaty and outline “equitable timelines” and “financial support” for a phaseout, according to organizers.
For Greenpeace’s deputy international program director Jasper Inventor, while these are good ideas, the conference result was a huge letdown. “COP30 started with a bang of ambition but ended with a whimper of disappointment,” he told Mongabay right after the event’s conclusion. “The absence of a fossil fuel transition road map, especially, means we failed to match the emergency that is demanded.”
Other experts expressed their disappointment with the summit’s results.
Inventor sees the move to create a parallel road map as a “consolation prize” from the Brazilian leadership. “It doesn’t erase the fact that we were not able to secure this plan as part of the official COP30 results,” he said. “That would have been a more formal process in which parties commit to making this road map possible.”
COP30 concluded with the approval of 29 decisions by consensus, which included modest advances, such as the commitment to tripling adaptation financing until 2035 and the conclusion of an adaptation road map. In parallel, it also secured $6.7 billion in sponsor capital for Brazil’s Tropical Forests Forever Facility (TFFF) finance program, less than a quarter of the amount needed for a full-scale rollout.
For Soenke Kreft, an international climate policy expert at the United Nations University, pursuing the road map in a separate track was the only way to keep the initiative alive. During heated negotiations (which only can be approved by consensus), many fossil fuel-producing nations refused to support an official road map, while others set it aside amid broader bargaining talks, especially over adaptation finance.
“I think it was a good move because countries just couldn’t agree,” Kreft told Mongabay. “It would have been impossible to negotiate the road map in this context.” Kreft also sees with good eyes that the COP presidency took a more active role compared with previous events. “They decided on this alternative plan when the final decision was not good enough, which signals a positive change in the COP process.”
Questions remain over whether the proposal will gain additional supporters and make its way back into the U.N. system for COP31. Stakes will be even higher, as participating nations might have to confront the possibility that keeping global temperatures below 1.5° Celsius (2.7° Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels is no longer in reach.
It’s also unclear whether the next COP presidency will support the phaseout plan. Turkey and Australia will share leadership at COP31. Australia is one of the world’s biggest exporters of coal and LNG, while Turkey is Europe’s largest coal-power producer.
The road map momentum
By the second week of the summit, the road map proposal had gathered significant support among participating delegations.
On Tuesday, Nov. 18, an initial draft of COP30’s outcome decision text featured options for a fossil fuel transition, even though the topic was not part of the initial agenda. The draft included a high-level ministerial roundtable to help countries develop “just, orderly and equitable transition roadmaps, including to progressively overcome their dependency on fossil fuels and towards halting and reversing deforestation.”
Later that day, more than 80 country representatives came forward, demanding that the language in the document be strengthened. At a press conference in the Blue Zone, nations from the EU, Latin America, small island states and other regions launched a “Mutirão Call for a Fossil Fuel Roadmap.” At the gathering, they demanded measurable targets and details about what the initiative would look like.
On Wednesday, Nov. 19, Colombia’s acting environment minister, Irene Vélez Torres, added to the pressure by launching a “Declaration of Belém,” a political statement calling for a transition away from fossil fuels. The initiative quickly gained support from 24 nations seeking to push negotiations. Earlier in the summit, Colombia had announced a plan to ban new oil exploration and mining projects in its share of the Amazon Forest.
Brazil’s President Lula seemed to match the growing ambition as he returned to COP30 for the final days of the summit. In a new address, he argued that it was “time to walk away from fossil fuels,” raising hopes that his presence would help steer the talks toward a strong outcome.
Heated debates
On Thursday afternoon, Nov. 20, a fire broke out in the Blue Zone, sending 21 participants to seek medical attention. The outbreak was controlled within a few minutes but blocked diplomatic discussions for several hours. It seemed symbolic of a turnaround in the negotiations themselves.
Talks were resumed later that evening, and when new draft documents were released the next morning, all mentions of fossil fuels had disappeared. The texts included references to creating a just transition mechanism but no set plan to move away from oil, gas and coal.
The new versions drew strong reactions. A group of 29 countries, including the U.K., Chile and the Marshall Islands, wrote a letter to the presidency rejecting the weaker text, saying they cannot support an outcome that does not include a road map on fossil fuels.
“We respectfully yet firmly request that the presidency present a revised proposal,” the letter said. “The success of the presidency will lie in presenting a balanced and forward-looking outcome, rather than in asking others to accept only what the least ambitious are willing to allow.”
Meanwhile, several environmental nonprofits called out the new drafts for not properly addressing the main drivers of climate change. Brazil’s Greenpeace executive director, Carolina Pasquali, stated the new versions were “practically useless” and did “very little to close the 1.5°C ambition gap or to pressure countries to accelerate their actions.”
On Saturday, Nov. 22, a final plenary gathered all 195 parties to vote on the official outcomes. At the gathering, high tensions gave a glimpse into the negotiation breakdown that had transpired behind closed doors.
Midway through the session, Colombian delegates complained they were not given the floor to object to multiple decisions, including the absence of references to fossil fuels. Confusion ensued, and the plenary was suspended for more than an hour.
When the meeting restarted, the Russian delegate, Sergei Kononuchenko, accused Colombians of behaving like children. “[You] want to get your hands on all the sweets and are not prepared to share them with everyone. You want to stuff the sweets down your throat until you make us all sick,” he said to them.
For Andreas Sieber, associate director of policy and campaigns at 350.org, the turbulent plenary exposed deeper rifts over COP30’s final deal. It also highlighted weaknesses in the COP presidency, which stumbled through the session by not following due process.
Sieber sees this performance as further evidence of broader leadership problems that may have contributed to a fossil fuel road map not taking shape.
“During the event, the presidency often convened a few parties one by one and rushed them to read through the text,” he said. “Versus holding multiple open sessions where heads of delegations come together in a big room and have a chance to talk with each other.”
He said he believes a more open discussion about nations’ “red lines” — where they stand on climate negotiations — would have been more productive. “We’ve seen both substantial concerns as well as frustration with the presidency team. And I should be specific that this is not a criticism of [Brazil’s President] Lula nor [Brazil’s Environmental Minister] Mariana Silva, but the COP presidency itself.”
You can return to the main Market News page, or press the Back button on your browser.
