Government platforms from presidential candidates reveal a consensus on renewables and strategic minerals, yet diverge on environmental protection and the pace of decarbonization.
The presidential race in Brazil naturally brings crucial discussions about the country’s future to the forefront, with strategies for the energy and mining sectors occupying a central role in the debate. In a global landscape defined by the pursuit of sustainability, the nation’s plans for its energy transition and the utilization of its mineral resources are of high interest to investors and enthusiasts of the clean energy sector.
A recent analysis by the Climate Observatory (OC) of the government platforms from the leading candidates for the Presidency of the Republic reveals a landscape with more points of convergence than divergence in these areas. However, while most aspirants to the nation’s highest office agree on the expansion of renewable energy and the exploration of critical minerals, the level of commitment to socio-environmental safeguards and the urgency of decarbonizing the economy vary significantly, outlining the true stakes for sustainable development.
Convergences in the Green Agenda
The Climate Observatory analysis, released recently, categorizes proposals as favorable, vague, dubious, contrary, or unmentioned, covering 28 items on the socio-environmental agenda. In the energy axis, which includes promoting renewables and low-carbon technologies, most candidates—including Lula (PT), Flávio Bolsonaro (PL), Augusto Cury (Avante), Renan Santos (Missão), Ronaldo Caiado (PSD), and Romeu Zema (Novo)—present proposals deemed vague. This indicates a shared vision regarding the importance of clean energy, but without substantial details on how to effectively drive it.
The consensus extends to the exploration of critical minerals and rare earths, seen as levers for the next phase of Brazilian industrialization. Global demand for these inputs, essential for low-carbon technologies and high-tech sectors, positions Brazil strategically within the global value chain.
Decarbonization and the Fossil Fuel Dilemma
Proposals for the gradual phase-out of fossil fuels and a long-term plan for the decarbonization of the economy reveal the primary points of divergence. The proposals from candidate Lula, although classified as “dubious” and “vague,” are considered slightly better than those of his opponents, who, for the most part, “work against” this agenda.
This “advantage,” however, is challenged by the energy policy currently in effect under the sitting administration. The OC report itself highlights an apparent contradiction: the expansion of renewable sources coexisting with an increase in oil and gas production, with no clear goals or deadlines to reduce dependence on fossil fuels.
The government has combined ambitious rhetoric in the international arena and the expansion of renewable energy with an increase in oil and gas production.
The analysis further details that while the current plan advocates for the progressive replacement of fossil fuels with biofuels and participation in international debates on a roadmap away from fossil fuels, it also celebrates record-breaking oil and gas production, defending investments in mature fields and liquefied natural gas infrastructure.
Mining and the Environmental Challenge
In the mining sector, the convergence between platforms deepens regarding the focus on critical minerals, but disagreement fundamentally lies in the socio-environmental safeguards. The proposals of most of the six candidates are classified as dubious, contrary, or omissive regarding environmental guarantees, oversight, the strengthening of licensing, and combating illegal mining. Lula and Ronaldo Caiado, for example, tie with two “vague” mentions each on items within the mining axis.
Lula‘s plan, while focused on adding value domestically and state control of assets, does not detail the strengthening of environmental licensing or oversight of critical mineral ventures, according to the OC. There is a demand for a policy that includes free, prior, and informed consultation, and licensing without deregulation.
Augusto Cury, aiming to transform Brazil into a producer of high-value-added goods, proposes a mineral expansion that “accelerates and simplifies” environmental licensing, which is viewed as an obstacle to environmental oversight. Similarly, Romeu Zema plans to unlock extraction and research permits at the National Mining Agency (ANM) with faster procedures for projects deemed strategic—a measure also seen as “working against” licensing.
On the other hand, Ronaldo Caiado presents more explicit control measures, such as mineral traceability and dam inspections, but is considered dubious regarding safeguards because he addresses consultation only in generic terms, without an express commitment to ILO Convention 169.
The platforms of Flávio Bolsonaro and Renan Santos focus on expanding activity without equivalent commitments to value-added processing or environmental protection. Flávio Bolsonaro advocates for accelerating projects and increasing foreign capital, while Renan Santos proposes a framework for exploration on indigenous lands without mentioning prior consultation, which is seen as harmful to environmental oversight and licensing.
In summary, the landscape outlined by the Climate Observatory analysis shows that the next government will face the challenge of reconciling economic development driven by clean energy and strategic minerals with the urgency of environmental issues. The presidential election will define not only the direction of Brazil‘s energy and mineral matrix but also the country’s level of commitment to a fair energy transition and a responsible mining model aligned with global expectations of sustainability and ecosystem protection. The debate points to the need for more robust and clear proposals that ensure environmental protection without stalling development potential.
