Path to replacing fossil fuels to be laid out by November
Nearly eight months before the 31st Conference on Climate Change (COP31), to be held in Antalya, Turkey, from November 9 to 20, Ambassador André Corrêa do Lago faces the challenge of concluding his work leading the Brazilian presidency within the United Nations multilateral climate action process.
Among the priorities are the development of roadmaps to end global deforestation and transition away from fossil fuels, enabling a significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions responsible for climate change.
The COP30 presidency has launched a global call for contributions from countries, observers, and stakeholders, open until March 31. Amid a busy schedule of participation in international forums and meetings addressing the global agenda, Corrêa do Lago took time to speak exclusively with Agência Brasil about the progress of the work and the efforts led by Brazil since COP30.
Agência Brasil: Since COP30 in November 2025, what progress has been made in global climate action?
André do Lago: First of all, the actions have to be closely coordinated with the presidency of COP31, which will be a somewhat special COP. It will take place in Turkey, under the Turkish presidency, but with the Australian negotiating presidency. They are coordinating in a very particular way. Therefore, we wanted to ensure that what we consider to be some of the main legacies of COP30 are fully understood and incorporated into the preparations for COP31.
Agência Brasil: Are these main legacies related to the climate action agenda?
André do Lago: There is a growing awareness that the COPs are entering a new phase, which we are calling the implementation phase. In other words, negotiations will continue, but we must ensure that the COPs become more effective instruments for implementation, given that we believe there is little time left. Therefore, we have to do our best within the short timeframe that science tells us we have.
Agência Brasil: Bringing the implementation of the negotiations closer to the Action Agenda was a significant step forward. However, there was also frustration, mainly due to the lack of consensus on the issue of fossil fuels, even though it was not on the conference agenda. Colombia is now leading an initiative and will promote a meeting on the matter. What is Brazil’s role in this movement?
André do Lago: I believe the leadership lies with Brazil, not Colombia, because the idea of the Roadmap was launched by President Lula. He introduced it at the [Climate] Summit at the political level. Colombia had already been engaged in related efforts and therefore embraced President Lula’s proposal.
It is important to distinguish between what can be done at the political level and what can be done at the negotiation level. For example, Colombia never proposed placing this issue on the formal agenda; matters can only be negotiated if they are included on the agenda. And for an item to be placed on the agenda, there must be consensus.
President Lula put forward the political proposal, but, as we know, there is no consensus to include it on the agenda, much less to reach a negotiated outcome. The movement led by Colombia brought together around 85 countries in support. However, whether it is 85 or 192 countries, consensus is still required. Since there is no consensus, the Brazilian [COP] presidency proposed creating the roadmap this year.
Agência Brasil: What is the outlook for the roadmap away from fossil fuels? Can we expect it to be ready by COP 31 in November this year?
André do Lago: We will present the roadmap priorities in stages throughout the year, as we want to consult and engage in discussions with various countries, including at the Santa Marta Conference in Colombia - an initiative that we support and consider important. However, the roadmap we are proposing is intended as an implementation of a decision adopted in Dubai, included in the final document of COP28, which introduced the concept of transition.
There is another parallel movement in which Colombia participates very actively: the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Fossil Fuels. It is an informal initiative that has existed for several years and in which Colombia has been involved. We are therefore working with Colombia to ensure that efforts to implement the Dubai consensus are as constructive as possible, because moving in a very radical direction can provide arguments to those who are unwilling to engage in the discussion.
Agência Brasil: The Security Conference in Munich, held fifteen days ago, once again emphasized in its final report that climate change and extreme weather events top the list of threats to the security of G20 countries, including developing nations. In Davos, at the World Economic Forum, climate change is also a concern, but there has been little progress in terms of action. Why do we face so much difficulty in advancing the climate agenda?
André do Lago: Because of the economic impact of this discussion. To give you an idea, at the United Nations, the topic of energy only entered the agenda under the nuclear energy section, due to the non-proliferation dimension. As a result, all the major energy organizations in the world, with the exception of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, are outside the UN [United Nations]. The world has never been able to create a structure dedicated specifically to the discussion of energy, because the energy debate carries profound geopolitical and economic consequences.
You end up having the energy discussion fragmented across various entities, and this difficulty in addressing energy leads to several consequences. One of the problems is that there is less discussion than there should be. Another is that certain countries prefer to deal with the issue in a sector-specific manner, within different organizations. And finally, a major problem is the absence of a truly universal discussion. As a result, the energy issue has migrated to the climate change negotiations, which constitute a universal forum involving 193 countries.
The Climate Convention ended up becoming a forum where the energy issue began to be discussed, although that was not its original purpose. As a result, there is also a debate about how energy should be addressed within the Convention and the Paris Agreement. The roadmap proposed by Brazil is intended precisely to clarify how far discussions on this topic can go under the Climate Convention and the Paris Agreement.
Agência Brasil: The United States government withdrew from the Climate Convention, but it has also shown considerable interest in issues related to the energy transition. It appears to be competing for the resources necessary for this transition to take place. Could this contradictory behavior indicate an interest in controlling the process?
André do Lago: I think the current position of the US government is to maintain the status quo. It is not a position in favor of transition. The need for an energy transition is linked to reducing emissions from oil, gas, coal, and even nuclear power. However, there has been a strong reaction in the United States against renewables, with biofuels being the only exception. This stance is closely tied to the geopolitical dimension. As the world’s largest producer of oil and gas, the United States sees this as a moment of strength, and may believe that a transition could diminish the country’s relevance and influence.
And it is very interesting to observe that the world’s second-largest economy, China, has chosen exactly the opposite path. Perhaps that is the biggest difference from an economic point of view. Both are now capitalist countries, both have extraordinary private companies, and both invest heavily in technology. However, there is a very clear bet by China on the transition, while the American government is betting on maintaining traditional forms of energy production.
Agência Brasil: But the US government has also shown considerable interest in the resources needed for this transition, such as critical minerals and rare earths. What would be the reason for that?
André do Lago: There are several interpretations of this. Some authors argue that a country can only enter this transition if it has control over these materials. Others say that it should only pursue the transition if doing so preserves its advantage over the United States. So there are various interpretations of why this position is taken. What is clear, however, is that it is very interesting to see that the United States and China are betting on very different paths for energy generation.
Agência Brasil: Until November, when Brazil’s presidency of COP ends, what are the prospects in this multilateral environment addressing climate change?
André do Lago: We have some priorities that we have outlined in several meetings in which we have participated. One of them is to develop the two roadmaps that the Brazilian presidency has committed to: one on ending deforestation and another on the transition away from fossil fuels. These are very clear priorities.
We have formally launched the call from the Brazilian presidency, through the secretariat of the Convention on Climate Change, inviting countries and other stakeholders - including the private sector, NGOs, and academia - to submit suggestions for the two roadmaps by the end of March.
Another priority is to complete the climate finance framework for USD 1.3 trillion per year, which we published last year during Azerbaijan’s presidency [of COP29 in Baku]. In its conclusions, however, we pointed out significant shortcomings in the figures. This year, we are therefore building on that work with improved estimates of potential funding sources to reach USD 1.3 trillion in financing for the transition in developing countries.
In total, there are three roadmaps: two that we have taken on voluntarily, and a third stemming from a decision adopted at the Baku COP, which Brazil and Azerbaijan are developing together.
The Accelerator is also among the priorities and was one of the ideas included in the collective effort decision at COP30 in Belém. It is an initiative aimed at going beyond negotiation and accelerating the implementation of the Paris Agreement, including through a formal model within the Climate Convention framework. The Accelerator is still undefined, and Brazil and the Australian presidency will develop the idea together.
We also have the issue of adaptation, which remains a very high priority for Brazil. In addition, there is the strengthening of the Action Agenda, which the Brazilian presidency sought to structure at the Belém COP, based on the decisions adopted in Dubai at COP28, so that it becomes another instrument for implementation guided by the Global Stocktake. This approach was well received, and there was a certain consensus that the structure should be maintained in the coming years.
Therefore, we are working closely with Turkey and Australia to further strengthen the Action Agenda.
Essentially, there is work underway on the legacy of COP30, in the sense that the Belém COP is understood to have been an extremely innovative step in the [multilateral] process of moving from negotiation to the implementation of climate action.
Agência Brasil: Is it already possible to quantify the current level of climate finance flows to developing countries?
André do Lago: Naturally, those providing the funding tend to emphasize that the amounts are already very significant, while those receiving it tend to argue the opposite. So we need to identify figures that everyone can agree on.
In this year’s roadmap for USD 1.3 trillion, we will add a new chapter breaking down funding sources in order to refine these figures and provide greater clarity, because this lack of precision undermines confidence among countries. And since negotiations must be conducted by consensus, without confidence it is impossible to reach agreement. This, in turn, makes progress on other agendas more difficult as well.
Agência Brasil: In identifying these amounts, has it been possible, for example, to distinguish between climate finance and biodiversity finance?
André do Lago: I hope so. It’s not easy - far from it. We are working with IHLEG [Independent High-Level Expert Group on Climate Change], which is led by the English economist Nicholas Stern, the first to analyze climate change from an economic perspective. Stern has led this group of prominent economists for several years. It was based on IHLEG’s studies that the figure of USD 1.3 trillion for financing developing countries was determined.
In parallel, we are also working with the Council of Economists that we established for COP30. They are making important contributions to help clarify this major challenge.
It becomes very difficult to have a meaningful discussion if we do not have these numbers. Last year, we realized that we still had not reached figures that even come close to the concept of climate finance.
