outubro, 21 2025

By WWF-Brazil 

Against the best interests of Brazilians, Petrobras continues to advance its plans to explore for oil in the mouth of the Amazon River, a region that stretches from Amapá state to the Potiguar Basin, off the coast of Rio Grande do Norte state. We believe this approach represents a strategic mistake for Amapá, for Brazil, and for the future of the planet.

The first and most urgent reason to oppose this exploration is that fossil fuels are the main source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, responsible for between 66% and 75% of global emissions. These gases are changing the climate worldwide, including in Brazil, where floods, landslides, and droughts are becoming increasingly frequent.

Amapá itself could lose important areas of its territory, such as a significant portion of Cape Orange National Park, the Piratuba Lake Biological Reserve, and the Cajari River Extractive Reserve, due to sea level rise by 2050, according to Climate Central, which outlines global scenarios for sea level rise. More broadly, last year's extreme events caused agricultural GDP to fall 3.2%—the largest drop since 2016, according to the IBGE (Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics). The numerous crop failures are part of the rising food prices that are eroding the purchasing power of Brazilians, especially the poorest.

Drilling new oil wells exacerbates this situation and keeps Petrobras, one of the world's leading companies in fossil fuel extraction technologies, at the back of the technological race taking place in parallel with the transition to a decarbonised economy—a transition established by the global climate negotiations, which are being hosted this year in Brazil. 

Petrobras urgently needs to review its strategic planning in order to ensure it develops and masters the renewable technologies necessary for the country's energy sovereignty in the coming decades, when the world is expected to surpass peak oil consumption and enter a deceleration path, as predicted by the International Energy Agency (IEA). The country's energy security, in turn, does not require the alleged reserves at the mouth of the Amazon. Brazil already has more than sufficient proven oil reserves to meet its domestic demand in an energy transition scenario.

Furthermore, the idea that oil exploration will bring sustainable regional development is untenable. The oil sector is a capital-intensive industry that generates few jobs and concentrates profits in the hands of a few shareholders. Local populations need development alternatives that truly promote social inclusion and distribute wealth, such as investments in renewable energy, the bioeconomy, and green infrastructure. The continued focus on oil diverts resources and incentives that could be directed to these areas, hindering the energy transition and reducing opportunities for the region's population.

The second reason we're concerned is the environmental risk of exploration in the Equatorial Margin, one of the most biodiverse and sensitive regions in the country. This area contains 80% of Brazil's mangroves, ecosystems essential for coastal protection and carbon capture. The strong dynamics of ocean currents at the mouth of the Amazon increase the risk of oil spills, making containment of a potential disaster extremely difficult. These same concerns led Ibama (Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources) to deny exploration licenses in the region on several occasions, both to the company Total in the past and to Petrobras itself in 2023. Despite this, Petrobras continued to press for the licensing process to be reopened, even without presenting robust environmental guarantees.

The third reason most cited by sectors in favour of exploration is that the generation and distribution of financial resources through the distribution of royalties, seen as financial compensation for the exploration of non-renewable resources, could be used to address negative externalities, but what we see throughout Brazilian history is the lack of control in the management of these resources

The argument for using state-owned oil revenues as a source of increased funding for education, health, and environmental policies doesn't even hold water, since a significant portion of the resources received as dividends are earmarked for paying interest on the domestic debt. Revenues in the form of royalties and special participation, with the exception of those legally transferred to states and municipalities, are rarely allocated to social policies and practically nothing goes to the energy transition.

We advocate that Petrobras assume its responsibility in building a more sustainable energy future. Brazil has huge potential in renewable energies such as solar, wind, and green hydrogen. Petrobras should lead this transformation, not persist in an outdated model that puts the environment and global climate security at risk.

The climate crisis demands courageous choices. There is no longer room for new frontiers of oil exploration. Brazil's future lies not in oil, but in the transition to a sustainable and inclusive economic model