Brazil sells rights to oil blocks near Amazon river mouth
Brazil sold extraction rights to 19 oil and gas blocks near the mouth of the Amazon river Tuesday, at an auction slammed by environmentalists months before the country is to host a UN climate summit.
Two consortiums -- one comprising Brazil's state-owned Petrobras and US giant ExxonMobil, the other US multinational Chevron and China's CNPC -- spent $153 million on exploration and production concessions for 19 blocks on offer in an area considered vulnerable to environmental harm.
They are among 172 blocks, most of them offshore, that went on auction Tuesday as dozens of protesters gathered outside the venue under a banner reading: "Stop the doomsday auctions."
Green groups have expressed particular concern over 47 blocks in the Atlantic, in an area near the mouth of the Amazon River that flows through the world's largest carbon-capturing tropical rainforest.
The first 19 blocks to which rights were sold were part of these 47.
In all, 34 blocks found takers at the auction, bringing in about $180 million for the state.
Investments of more than $260 million are planned for exploration.
- 'Cannot ignore it' -
Already Latin America's biggest oil and gas producer, Brazil is seeking to increase production from 4.68 million to 5.3 million barrels per day by 2030.
At the same time, the country has pledged to reduce its emissions of planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions to 1.2 billion tons of CO2 equivalent (CO2e).
By 2050, it is seeking to reach neutrality -- meaning emissions do not exceed the amount captured, by forests, for example.
Brazil's ClimaInfo research institute had estimated that the 172 blocks placed on auction would emit some 11.1 billion tons of CO2e.
Leftist President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, seeking to position himself as a leader in the fight against climate change, supported the auction that will see the successful bidders pay royalties on whatever oil and natural gas they eventually do extract.
"If this wealth exists, we cannot ignore it, as it will help us to make the energy transition and secure funds to preserve our forests," Lula declared in February.
"We must act responsibly. I do not want oil exploration to cause any harm to the environment," he added.
Before they can start exploration, the companies must obtain a drilling license from environment oversight body Ibama -- a process that can take years.
The Climate Action Tracker, which measures governments' actions, has said Brazil "is not on track" to meet its emissions targets and needed to "peak and rapidly decrease emissions" if the world is to succeed in limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit).
The auction went ahead despite Brazil's Federal Public Ministry, an independent rights-monitoring body set up under the Brazilian constitution, calling for it to be suspended pending "adequate studies" on the potential impact of exploration.
"Brazil is missing an opportunity to be a leader in decarbonization and environmental protection," Suely Araujo, a former president of Ibama and coordinator of the Climate Observatory NGO said ahead of Tuesday's auction.
And the WWF's Brazil branch said the country "already has enough oil reserves to meet its internal demand" while gradually transitioning to a greener energy mix.
"The climate crisis requires bold decisions and public policies focused on the future, not the past," it added.
Brazil will host the UN climate conference called COP30 in November in the Amazonian city of Belem.
lg/tmo/mlr/dw
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Wire
an hour ago
- Business Wire
ExxonMobil Recommends Shareholders Reject Below-Market Mini-Tender Offer by TRC Capital Investment Corporation
SPRING, Texas--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Exxon Mobil Corporation (NYSE:XOM) has received notice of an unsolicited mini-tender offer by TRC Capital Investment Corporation to purchase up to 1 million shares of ExxonMobil common stock, which represents approximately 0.023 percent of the shares outstanding as of the June 9, 2025 offer date. TRC's offer of $100 per ExxonMobil share is 4.1% below the closing price on June 6, 2025, on the New York Stock Exchange, the last trading day prior to opening of the offer. It is also more than 10% below its closing price yesterday. ExxonMobil recommends that stockholders do not tender their shares in response to TRC's offer because the offer has a conditional market price for ExxonMobil's shares of $99.06 each and is subject to numerous other conditions. ExxonMobil is not affiliated or associated in any way with TRC, its mini-tender offer, or the offer documentation. TRC has made similar mini-tender offers for shares of other companies. Mini-tender offers seek to acquire less than 5 percent of a company's shares outstanding, thereby avoiding many disclosure and procedural requirements of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that apply to offers for more than 5 percent of a company's shares outstanding. As a result, mini-tender offers do not provide investors with the same level of protections as provided by larger tender offers under U.S. securities laws. The SEC has cautioned investors that some bidders making mini-tender offers at below-market prices are 'hoping that they will catch investors off guard if the investors do not compare the offer price to the current market price.' More on the SEC's guidance to investors on mini-tender offers is available at ExxonMobil urges investors to obtain current market quotations for their shares, to consult with their broker or financial advisor and to exercise caution with respect to TRC's offer. ExxonMobil recommends that shareholders who have not responded to TRC's offer take no action. Shareholders who have already tendered their shares may withdraw them at any time prior to the expiration of the offer, in accordance with TRC's offering documents. The offer is currently scheduled to expire at 11:59 p.m., New York City time, on July, 10, 2025. TRC may extend the offering period at its discretion. ExxonMobil encourages brokers and dealers, as well as other market participants, to review the SEC's letter regarding broker-dealer mini-tender offer dissemination and disclosure at ExxonMobil requests that a copy of this news release be included with all distributions of materials relating to TRC's mini-tender offer related to ExxonMobil shares of common stock. About ExxonMobil ExxonMobil, one of the largest publicly traded international energy and petrochemical companies, creates solutions that improve quality of life and meet society's evolving needs. The corporation's primary businesses - Upstream, Product Solutions and Low Carbon Solutions – provide products that enable modern life, including energy, chemicals, lubricants, and lower emissions technologies. ExxonMobil holds an industry-leading portfolio of resources, and is one of the largest integrated fuels, lubricants, and chemical companies in the world. ExxonMobil also owns and operates the largest CO2 pipeline network in the United States. In 2021, ExxonMobil announced Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emission-reduction plans for 2030 for operated assets, compared to 2016 levels. The plans are to achieve a 20-30% reduction in corporate-wide greenhouse gas intensity; a 40-50% reduction in greenhouse gas intensity of upstream operations; a 70-80% reduction in corporate-wide methane intensity; and a 60-70% reduction in corporate-wide flaring intensity. With advancements in technology and the support of clear and consistent government policies, ExxonMobil aims to achieve net-zero Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions from its operated assets by 2050. To learn more, visit and ExxonMobil's Advancing Climate Solutions.
New York Post
3 hours ago
- New York Post
Greedy restaurant slammed by internet over hidden living wage fee added to bill
A disgruntled patron posted a receipt from a recent trip to a restaurant that charged its guests a mandatory 'living wage fee' on Instagram threads — and the internet was incensed. 4 Despite the clarification at the bottom of the receipt, the original user captioned their post: 'WTF is a living wage fee?' @ / Instagram Tipping culture has long been a point of contention for Americans, and as prices continue to rise, the practice has become an even more controversial topic. But now it seems that businesses are taking things too far by tacking on extra fees such as this one — and people aren't happy about it. 4 'It's your job,' respond many in this camp when it comes to tip-demanding employees. FornStudio – 'Price increase without having to update the menu,' claimed one reply on the post. '[This] means I'm never eating at that restaurant again,' said another. Meanwhile, another commenter proposed an entirely separate issue of debate: the pooling of tips. 'If I wanna tip a person, I wanna tip that individual, not the entire team. This is unfair to the server and to me.' However, a few lonely restaurant-goers cut the restaurant, which remained unnamed in the post — and the growing industry trend — some slack, and fired back at fellow commenters. 'Y'all have been asking for no tipping, this is what it looks like. It could reflect in drink/food prices, but then you all would say the place was too expensive. No one is trying to trick you — if they were transparent about the service fee, STFU,' one empassioned viewer responded. 4 'Consumers pay wages via prices,' one user commented, acknowledging the lack of consequence for this specific charge as opposed to increased menu prices. MargJohnsonVA – 'Just include [the fee] in the cost of the food and drinks, like the rest of the world is doing, and pay the workers properly. Sincerely, a guy from Europe,' one aggrieved commenter suggested under the post. This response was the sole sentiment that united incensed restaurant patrons on both sides of the debate. 'Mind your European business,' advised one reply, while another said: 'Hey, stay out of our insanity!' For some small, family-owned restaurants, implementing charges like this living wage fee might allow the business to stay afloat and support their employees — especially amid a cost-of-living crisis. Durham, North Carolina-based Lula & Sadie's is one spot that charges a living wage fee to combat 'rising overhead costs, slim industry profit margins and a minimum wage that won't budge,' per the family-operated restaurant's website. 'The fee is transparently listed on our menus, website and posted around the restaurant.' Though local laws vary greatly in terms of tipping and charging policies in restaurants, New York City Consumer and Worker Protection rules, state that 'restaurants cannot charge a surcharge or other fee in addition to listed food or beverage prices,' but they can 'charge a bona fide service charge, but only if the charge is conspicuously disclosed to consumers before food is ordered.' 4 With general costs rising, both businesses and consumers struggle to meet new standards. Kittiphan – Examples of 'bona fide service charges' include splitting a meal on multiple plates, minimums per person and mandatory gratuity for large dining parties. That being said, 'living wage fees' are often considered service charges, depending on how they're disclosed and absorbed by the business. 'There is no law in New York State that specifically prohibits automatic gratuities. However, it is incumbent upon any restaurant including an automatic gratuity charge to provide—in advance—clear and conspicuous notice that an automatic gratuity charge will be levied and all terms associated with the automatic charge. If consumers are not provided advanced notice, [they] may have a claim under the NYS Deceptive Acts & Practices law, ' New York State's Division of Consumer Protection told News10NBC.
Boston Globe
3 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Firms led by US military veterans deliver aid in Africa and Gaza, alarming humanitarian groups
In South Sudan and Gaza, two for-profit US companies led by American national security veterans are delivering aid in operations backed by the South Sudanese and Israeli governments. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The American contractors say they're putting their security, logistics, and intelligence skills to work in relief operations. Fogbow, the US company that carried out last week's air drops over South Sudan, says it aims to be a 'humanitarian' force. Advertisement 'We've worked for careers, collectively, in conflict zones. And we know how to essentially make very difficult situations work,' said Fogbow president Michael Mulroy, a retired CIA officer and former senior defense official in the first Trump administration, speaking on the airport tarmac in Juba, South Sudan's capital. But the UN and many leading nonprofit groups say US contracting firms are stepping into aid distribution with little transparency or humanitarian experience, and, crucially, without commitment to humanitarian principles of neutrality and operational independence in war zones. Advertisement 'What we've learned over the years of successes and failures is there's a difference between a logistics operation and a security operation, and a humanitarian operation,' said Scott Paul, a director at Oxfam America. ''Truck and chuck' doesn't help people,' Paul said. 'It puts people at risk.' Fogbow took journalists up in a cargo plane to watch their team drop 16 tons of beans, co,rn and salt for South Sudan's Upper Nile state town of Nasir. Residents fled homes there after fighting erupted in March between the government and opposition groups. Mulroy acknowledged the controversy over Fogbow's aid drops, which he said were paid for by the South Sudanese government. But, he maintained: 'We don't want to replace any entity' in aid work. Fogbow was in the spotlight last year for its proposal to Since then, Fogbow has carried out aid drops Fogbow says ex-humanitarian officials are also involved, including former UN World Food Program head David Beasley, who is a senior adviser. Operating in Gaza, meanwhile, Safe Reach Solutions, led by a former CIA officer and other retired US security officers, has partnered with the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, a US-backed nonprofit that Israel says is the linchpin of a new aid system to Advertisement Starting in late May, the American-led operation in Gaza has distributed food at fixed sites in southern Gaza, in line with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's stated plan to use aid to concentrate the territory's more than 2 million people in the south, freeing Israel to fight Hamas elsewhere. Aid workers fear it's a step toward another of Netanyahu's public goals, removing Palestinians from Gaza in 'voluntary' migrations. Since then, several hundred Palestinians have been killed and hundreds more wounded The Israeli military has denied firing on civilians. It says it fired warning shots in several instances, and fired directly at a few 'suspects' who ignored warnings and approached its forces. It's unclear who is funding the new operation in Gaza. No donor has come forward, and the US says it's not funding it. In response to criticism over its Gaza aid deliveries, Safe Reach Solutions said it has former aid workers on its team with 'decades of experience in the world's most complex environments' who bring 'expertise to the table, along with logisticians and other experts.' Last week's air drop over South Sudan went without incident, despite fighting nearby. A white cross marked the drop zone. Only a few people could be seen. Fogbow contractors said there were more newly returned townspeople on previous drops. Fogbow acknowledges glitches in mastering aid drops, including one last year in Sudan's South Kordofan region that ended up with too-thinly-wrapped grain sacks split open on the ground. Advertisement After gaining independence from Sudan in 2011, South Sudan has South Sudan said it engaged Fogbow for air drops partly because of the But two South Sudanese groups question the government's motives. 'We don't want to see a humanitarian space being abused by military actors ... under the cover of a food drop,' said Edmund Yakani, head of the Community Empowerment for Progress Organization, a local civil society group. Asked about suspicions the aid drops were helping South Sudan's military aims, Fogbow's Mulroy said the group has worked with the UN World Food Program to make sure 'this aid is going to civilians.' 'If it wasn't going to civilians, we would hope that we would get that feedback, and we would cease and desist,' Mulroy said. In a statement, WFP country director Mary-Ellen McGroarty said: 'WFP is not involved in the planning, targeting or distribution of food air-dropped' by Fogbow on behalf of South Sudan's government, citing humanitarian principles. Longtime humanitarian leaders and analysts are troubled by what they see as a teaming up of warring governments and for-profit contractors in aid distribution. When one side in a conflict decides where and how aid is handed out, and who gets it, 'it will always result in some communities getting preferential treatment,' said Jan Egeland, executive director of the Norwegian Refugee Council. Advertisement
