By Aleyna Taber
This year, the 30th Conference of the Parties (COP30) will take place in the city of Belém, in Pará, Brazil. The annual convention reuniting world leaders on the issue of climate change aims to review the progress of the Parties, as well as negotiate and draft new measures to reduce the planet’s greenhouse emissions. However, there are controversies surrounding the host country of this year’s conference.
President Lula Da Silva presents himself as a leader of the green transition for developing countries. Since his election in 2023, Lula has cracked down on illegal deforestation and implemented multiple decarbonization measures, such as a mandatory carbon market and the investment in a national energy transition policy worth €330 billion. Yet his aspirations to achieve “zero deforestation in the Amazon by 2030” and “zero gas emissions by 2050” stop at a hurdle, as he simultaneously contends that fossil fuel extraction is essential for his country’s economic development.
Now in advance of COP30, the reality of Brazil’s sustainability pledge is being scrutinized – for one,the country is facing backlash for the installations and transformations that have been made in preparation for hosting the United Nations conference. As the upcoming climate summit brings forward the wider context of sustainability trade-offs that Brazil feels forced to make in the name of logistics and urbanization, the country is faced with a paradoxical choice: meeting the world’s climate goals and meeting its own development goals.
The mere city that was chosen as host for the international conference is representative of the internal contradictions of Brazil: Belém, a tropical port that is a gateway to the Amazon River, is one of the poorest cities in the country. The city also sits at the heart of the climate crisis, as it was 5th among the state capitals in Brazil that lost most urban vegetation between 2003 and 2023, with over 500 hectares being razed. While the capital of Pará was deliberately chosen to highlight the realities of climate change, such as deforestation and economic inequality, many criticize that the region’s vulnerability makes it unequipped to deal with the scale of COP30, which is far greater than anything the rainforest region has previously had to accommodate for.
Many have pointed to the irony of the erection of fake trees to fill the void made from razed canopies. Inspired by the Singaporean super-trees, these so-called “eco-trees” made from recycled steel bars with plants hanging from their branches serve the purpose of reintegrating nature amidst an ever-urbanizing Belém. However, unlike their Singaporean counterparts – which have integrated air exhaust systems, solar energy panels, and rain water systems – professor André Farias from the Environmental Center at the Federal University of Pará argues that just because materials are being reused, Belém’s new metal trees cannot be called ecological when the essential environmental functions that a tree provides, such as decarbonization, are nullified, and they in effect “only provide shade”.
The fake-tree controversy is only the tip of the iceberg. Over the past 20 years, Belém, which was once known as “the city of mango trees,” has experienced a dramatic loss of vegetation, a process which has been further accelerated by the arrival of COP30. In preparation for the conference, over 100 hectares of vegetation have been cleared to make way for the construction of two new highways: the Avenida Liberdade and Rua da Marinha. The government of Pará argues that these wide roads are necessary for logistical reasons, in order to manage the flow of people commuting to the conference, but the roads were allegedly planned long before Belém was chosen as host. The road projects are merely part of the country’s urbanization and development trends.
Furtherover, the flock of an estimated 60,000 people for the international conference will take a major toll on Belém, forcing the rainforest city to accommodate an influx of tourism. The expansion of the city’s airport to double its capacity, coupled with an increase in traffic congestion, will inevitably lead to a hike in local carbon emissions and the degradation of the natural environment. In addition, construction has intensified as the government has promised to provide 29,000 rooms and 55,000 beds for the event – this number is still insufficient compared to the masses of tourists coming in. The surge in hotel prices and real-estate has reinforced already drastic inequalities within the urban peripheries. This, coupled with the construction of the two new major expressways, could lead Belém to boom as an urban metropolis. Considering the typical growth patterns of Brazilian cities, the forested areas surrounding the highways could be quickly seized for the construction of illegal housing, which often become legalized and eventually expand as extensions of the city nucleus.
Another point of contention brought by the arrival of the COP30 conference concerns Brazil’s projects in fossil fuel extraction. Recently, the potential for offshore oil reserves has been discovered in the Equatorial Margin region of Brazil, extending from the state of Rio Grande do Norte all the way to Amapá, close to the border with French Guiana, which includes hundreds of kilometers of coastal water. Both the governor of the Pará region and the self-proclaimed environmentalist president of the country support oil drilling. This would represent a major step backwards from Lula’s “zero-emissions” goals and seems incompatible with the aims of the conference that Brazil is hosting; however, president Lula argues that, paradoxically, oil drilling is necessary to fund the country’s energy transition, which will be very costly: “We need to start thinking about Brazil’s needs. Is this good or bad for Brazil? Is this good or bad for Brazil’s economy?”
Advocates for oil exploration like Roberto Ardenghy, the president of the Brazilian Petroleum and Gas Institute (IBP), claim that the search for oil is “justified from an energy and food security standpoint” in order to support the country’s growth and prosperity. This claim reflects a sense of climate justice, given that developing countries like Brazil bear unequal historical responsibility with respect to climate change: while the country has not undergone the same process of industrialization as many Western nations, a large portion of vulnerable natural territory is under their jurisdiction and responsibility. Ergo, Brazil is confronted with an environmental dilemma: how to finance key economic and social development while simultaneously making this transition sustainable?
Yet environmental activists view this dilemma more critically. Nicole Oliveira, founder of Arayara Institute and leader of the fight against oil drilling in the Equatorial Margin, attests that there is “no indication of any real willingness from the government to pursue an energy transition … On the contrary, there is growing pressure on environmental agencies to issue licenses and open up new areas in the Foz do Amazonas and across the entire Equatorial Margin.” After several legal disputes, Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA) ultimately granted licenses to the state-owned petrol company, Petrobras, despite having denied them twice. While Petrobras claims that their endeavors are “fully in line with the principles of climate justice, biodiversity protection, and the social development of the communities where it operates”, critics remain sceptical, wary of the impact that exploratory drilling would have on the Amazon River’s ecosystem, indigenous communities, and the climate. But more significantly, Oliveira warns that the risk that the approval of this license poses is that this could open up “47 new blocks up for auction” as it will become very difficult for IBAMA to “deny future licenses in the same region.” If COP’s goals are to “keep global warming to 1.5 degrees celsius, which is where we already are,” the country cannot afford to drill “a single new oil well.”
As November approaches, Brazil is being increasingly scrutinized for its contradictory promises and actions regarding its green transition. During the Bonn climate talks, COP30 Presidency repeatedly stated that COP30 will be “the COP of the people” and of “local action” and “solutions”. Yet, the reality seems less promising. Leading up to the conference, Brazil has effectively increased the construction of infrastructure and expanded the exploration of oil, which will only exacerbate the degradation of the environment. COP30 aims to introduce the new, collaborative initiative of the “mutirão” – a Portuguese word derived from the Indigenous Tupi-Guarani language, which refers to a group coming together to work on a shared task – thereby inviting delegates to listen and converse with indigenous communities. But these negotiations appear pointless while indigenous communities are being disregarded ,demanding that their land not be converted into oil drilling sites.
All in all, during these politically contentious times, Caetano Scannavino, the coordinator of the Health and Happiness Project in the Amazon, regrets that investment in the climate seems to be the least of world leaders’ concerns: “we are about to lose the battle of the 1.5C goal of Paris, and the only consensus among the nations that claim to be leaders of humanity – the US, China, Russia and Europe – is to put more money into buying weapons.” Much like the artificial trees that are being installed in Pará, the “tragic irony” of this year’s COP conference is that the solutions discussed may turn out to be only artificial alternatives to what the planet really needs: more real trees, less oil, fewer weapons and less construction.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and may not reflect the opinions of The St Andrews Economist.
Image Credit: Pará’s “eco-trees.” Photo from SAMAÚMA Journalism, by Shiny Things/Wikimedia Commons