Brazil fossil fuel subsidies outpace renewables: Study

Market: Crude oil, Electricity, Oil products
29/10/24

Brazil's spending on fossil fuels subsidies in 2023 was around 4.5 times larger than its spending on renewables subsidies, according to a study published by the institute of socioeconomic studies Inesc.

The country spent R99.8bn ($17.49bn) in subsidies for both fossil fuels and renewables in 2023, a 3.6pc increase from 2022, the study said. Of the total, R81.74bn were related to fossil fuels — a 0.5pc decrease from a year prior — while R18.06bn went to renewable sources, a near 27pc hike from 2022.

The slight fossil fuel subsidies reduction was due to the return of taxes on gasoline, such as the VAT-like PIS/Confins, the study said. "The government lost the chance of providing greater relief for public coffers as it decided to maintain exemptions for diesel," it added.

But while incentives to fossil fuel consumption decreased, those for exploration and production activities increased by R5.55bn.

Cassio Carvalho, a co-author of the study for Inesc, said the fossil fuels subsidies will harm Brazil's energy transition. "The study indicates that consumers are bearing the subsidies for renewables through electricity bills, while the oil and natural gas industry remains untouched," Carvalho said.

Ending subsidies to fossil fuels is an "unavoidable global commitment" laid out in the UN Cop 28 climate summit in Dubai, said Alessandra Cardoso, the other co-authored of the study.

"What is expected of the Brazilian government is that it recognizes the problem of production subsidies as a domestic problem, the solution to which involves global reform," she said. "Brazil needs to take on this agenda as part of its leading role in the global climate scenario, especially as it will host Cop 30."

Brazil will host Cop 30 in 2025 in Para's state capital Belem, on the edge of the Amazon forest.

By Lucas Parolin

Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

News

28/03/25

UK EAC to explore airport expansion, net zero conflict

London, 28 March (Argus) — UK parliament's cross-party environmental audit committee (EAC) has begun an inquiry into whether the country's airport capacity expansion could be achieved in line with its climate and environment targets. "The aviation sector is a major contributor to the UK's carbon emissions, and on the face of it, any expansion in the sector will make net zero even more elusive," EAC chair Toby Perkins said. Any expansions must meet strict climate and environment commitments, the UK government has said. The government in January expressed support for a third runway at London's Heathrow airport — the country's largest. UK transport minister Heidi Alexander said in February that she was "minded to approve" an expansion at London's Gatwick airport, ahead of a final decision in October. The expansion would involve Gatwick making its northern runway operational. It is currently only used as a back-up option. The government is also "contemplating decisions on airport expansion projects at London Luton… and on the reopening of Doncaster Sheffield," Perkins said. "It is possible — but very difficult — for the airport expansion programme to be consistent with environmental goals," Perkins said. "We look forward to exploring how the government believes this can be achieved." The UK has a legally-binding target of net zero emissions by 2050. Its carbon budgets — a cap on emissions over a certain period — are also legally binding. The government must this year set levels for the UK's seventh carbon budget , which will cover the period 2038-42. The committee has invited written submissions on the possible airport expansions and net zero, with a deadline of 24 April. It will report in the autumn. By Georgia Gratton Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Find out more

News

Singapore, Vietnam eye greater low-carbon power trade

28/03/25

News

28/03/25

Singapore, Vietnam eye greater low-carbon power trade

Singapore, 28 March (Argus) — Singapore and Vietnam have signed a letter of intent (LOI) to enhance collaboration on cross-border electricity trade for the Asean power grid. Under the LOI, the countries will explore raising the targeted capacity of low-carbon electricity imports from Vietnam to Singapore to around 2GW by 2035, announced Singapore's Ministry of Trade and Industry on 26 March. This builds on the previous conditional approval that was granted by Singapore's Energy Market Authority to Sembcorp Utilities in October 2023 to import 1.2GW of low-carbon electricity from Vietnam. The electricity will be transmitted from Vietnam to Singapore via new sub-sea cables of around 1,000km. The Vietnam and Singapore governments will continue to engage interested companies that have credible and commercially viable proposals, said MTI. "This LOI reflects our enhanced level of ambition to support not just cross-border electricity trading between our two countries, but the broader development of a sustainable, inclusive and resilient Asean power grid," said Singapore's second minister for trade and industry Tan See Leng. Singapore aims to import up to 6GW of low-carbon electricity by 2035 , and has signed supply agreements with Malaysia , as well as granted conditional approvals to projects in Indonesia. There have been steps toward the development of the long-awaited Asean power grid, which once established, could help the region source and share electricity regionally. The Lao PDR-Thailand-Malaysia-Singapore power integration project (LTMS-PIP) will be enhanced under its second phase to double the capacity of electricity traded from 100MW to a maximum of 200MW, the EMA announced in September last year. By Prethika Nair Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Oil, biofuel groups meet to align on RFS policy

27/03/25

News

27/03/25

Oil, biofuel groups meet to align on RFS policy

New York, 27 March (Argus) — Energy and farm groups met last week at the American Petroleum Institute to negotiate a joint request for President Donald Trump's administration as it develops new biofuel blend mandates, according to five people familiar with the matter. The private meeting involved groups from across the supply chain, including representatives of feedstock suppliers, biofuel producers, fuel marketers, and oil refiners with Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) obligations. The groups coordinated earlier this year around a letter to the Trump administration on the need to update the RFS and are now seeking agreement on other program elements. According to the people familiar with the matter, the groups agree on pushing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set higher blend mandates under the program's D4 biomass-based diesel and D5 advanced biofuel categories. Groups support slightly different volume targets that are nevertheless all in "a rounding number of each other" in the D4 category, according to one lobbyist. But there is still disagreement about whether to ramp up mandates quickly in 2026 or provide a longer runway to higher volumes. Clean Fuels Alliance America and farm groups have publicly supported a biomass-based diesel mandate of at least 5.25bn USG starting next year, which could justify a broader advanced biofuel mandate above 9bn USG, according to the people familiar, though others worry about fuel cost impacts if mandates spike so quickly. The current mandate for 2025 is 7.33bn USG in the advanced biofuels category, including a 3.35bn USG mandate for the biomass-based diesel subcategory, so the volumes being pushed for future years would be a steep increase. The RFS, highly influential for fuel and commodity crop prices, requires oil refiners and importers to blend annual amounts of biofuels into the conventional fuel supply or buy Renewable Identification Number (RIN) credits from those who do. The idea behind the groups' coordination is that the Trump administration might more quickly finalize RFS updates if lobbyists with a history of sparring over biofuel policy can articulate a shared vision of the program's future. One person familiar said the effort comes after the Trump administration directed industry to align biofuel policy goals, though others said they understood the coordination as largely voluntary. EPA did not provide comment. There is less agreement around the program's D6 conventional biofuel category, which is mostly met by corn ethanol. Oil groups have in the past criticized EPA for setting the implied D6 mandate at 15bn USG, above the amount of ethanol that can feasibly be blended into gasoline, though excess biofuels from lower-carbon categories can be used to meet conventional obligations. Ethanol interests support setting the D6 mandate even higher than 15bn USG, which could be a tough sell. The discussions to date have not involved targets for D3 cellulosic biofuels, a relatively small part of the program. A proposal to lower 2024 volumes has hurt D3 credit prices, signaling that future mandates are effectively optional, according to frustrated biogas executives , and has reduced the salience of the issue for other groups. A proposal from President Joe Biden's administration to create a new category called "eRINs" to credit biogas used to power electric vehicles has similarly not come up. "We're not expecting to see any attempt to include eRINs in this next [RFS] proposal," Renewable Fuels Association president Geoff Cooper told Argus earlier this month. The meeting last week was largely oriented around the RFS, though a National Association of Truck Stop Operators representative raised the issue of tax policy too. The group has been frustrated by the expiration of a long-running blenders credit and the introduction this year of a less generous credit for refiners, which is only partially implemented and has spurred a sharp decline in biomass-based diesel production. But others involved in negotiations, while they acknowledge tax uncertainty could hurt their case for strong mandates, are trying to avoid contentious topics and focus mostly on volumes. Republican lawmakers are separately weighing whether to keep, repeal, or adjust that credit to help out fuel from domestic crops, and there is no telling how long that debate might take to resolve. Another thorny issue discussed at the meeting is RFS exemptions for small refineries. Biofuel producers strongly oppose such waivers and say that exempted volumes should at least be reallocated among facilities that still have obligations. Oil groups have their own views, though it is unclear how involved the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers — which represents some small refiners and has generally been more critical of the RFS than the American Petroleum Institute — are in discussions. EPA is aiming to finalize new volume mandates by the end of this year , people familiar with the administration's thinking have said, though timing for a proposal is still unclear. Future conversations among energy and farm groups to solidify points of unity — and strategize around how to downplay disagreements — are likely, lobbyists said. RIN prices rally Speculation over the trajectory of the RFS, and the potential for higher future volumes, supported soybean oil futures and widened the bean oil-heating oil (BOHO) spread. The BOHO spread maintains a positive correlation with D4 RIN prices as a widening value raises demand for D4 credits as biofuel producers look to offset higher production costs. Thursday's session ended with current-year ethanol D6 credits valued between 79¢/RIN and 82¢/RIN, while their D4 counterparts held at a premium and closed with a range of 84¢/RIN to 89¢/RIN. These gains each measured more than 5.5pc growth relative to Wednesday's values. By Cole Martin and Matthew Cope Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

US mulls cutting funds to H2 hubs outside of GOP states

27/03/25

News

27/03/25

US mulls cutting funds to H2 hubs outside of GOP states

Houston, 27 March (Argus) — The US Department of Energy (DOE) is considering cutting funding to hydrogen hubs that are located in primarily Democratic states, while sparing those mostly spread across Republican states, according to a list shared with Argus . A table circulating among officials shows hubs that are to receive federal funding labeled as either "cut" or "keep." Out of the seven hubs, only three are set to "keep": HyVelocity, in Texas and Louisiana, the Appalachian hub spanning Ohio, Kentucky and West Virginia and the Heartland hub spread across Minnesota, South Dakota and North Dakota. The hubs that may lose federal support include California's ARCHES; the Pacific Northwest Hydrogen Association (PNWH2) spanning Oregon, Washington and Montana; the Midwest hub encompassing Illinois, Indiana and Michigan, and the Mid-Atlantic hub in Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New Jersey. With the exception of the Midwest hub, most of the hubs facing potential cuts would use renewable and nuclear power to produce hydrogen. Most of the projects in the hubs on the "keep" list would be powered by natural gas and use carbon capture and storage (CCS) facilities to reduce emissions. The DOE did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Fuel Cell and Hydrogen Energy Association (FCHEA) chief executive Frank Wolak said the list came from DOE but cautioned the department's plans are still unclear."We're aware a list has been created that shows four of seven hubs being cut," said Wolak. "We haven't seen anything formal and don't understand exactly what is the DOE intention." Hydrogen hub funding advanced by the administration of former president Joe Biden was expected to come under scrutiny after President Donald Trump paused disbursements and ordered a review of clean-energy initiatives. Federal funding for the hubs grew out of the bipartisan Inflation Reduction Act and the Infrastructure and Investment Jobs Act, which together dedicated $8bn to jump start domestic hydrogen production in industrial clusters from the east to west coasts. The funding was structured to pay out to the hubs over four phases spanning a decade, with disbursements dependent upon projects meeting defined objectives related to operational progress and private-investment commitments. The first tranches to the seven hubs, totaling over $20mn, have been delivered but the list of potential cuts puts the fate of the second phase into doubt. "So far the Trump administration hasn't attempted to claw back that phase-one funding," said Sara Gersen, senior attorney for Earthjustice. "The question is, what happens in 2026 when they try to renew contracts for phase 2?" ARCHES chief executive Angelina Galiteva said the California hub "remains committed to working with our partners to establish a secure, reliable and competitive hydrogen ecosystem". Spokespeople for the others hubs vulnerable to losing federal funds did not immediately respond to requests for comment. However, at least one of the hubs put out a public statement highlighting how its goals align with the administration's objectives. "Many of these opportunities will support rural communities" and "advance American energy independence", the Pacific Northwest hub said in a social media post. Environmental advocates argue that the climate benefits from hydrogen originating from natural gas with CCS, the technology proposed for projects on the "keep" list, evaporate when net emissions are taken into account and do not justify the potentially billions of dollars in federal support they may receive when compared to other decarbonization techniques. "Spending billions of dollars on untested carbon capture technology in applications with no net-climate benefit is a waste of taxpayer money," said Anika Juhn, IEEFA energy data analyst and co-author of the report Blue Hydrogen's Carbon Capture Boondogle . "Building out renewable power infrastructure, improving energy efficiency, and reducing methane leakage from the natural gas system are more cost-effective and proven approaches to a clean energy transition." For now, both fossil-fuel based and renewable energy companies have been lobbying the Trump administration to keep clean energy incentives enacted by the IRA without differentiating how the hydrogen is produced. The potential cut to federal funding is not expected to affect industry support for the most lucrative incentives that come in the form of tax cuts, such as the support that has coalesced around protecting the 45V hydrogen production credit, said Wolak. "I don't see any change to the agenda of 45V, that effort is primary," said Wolak. "I see an effort perhaps arising to define the hubs and the merit of the hubs rising parallel to the 45V effort." FCHEA is advising its members that may be affected by hub funding cuts to contact their congressional representatives, Wolak said. By Jasmina Kelemen Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Several countries have met fossil finance pledge: CSO

27/03/25

News

27/03/25

Several countries have met fossil finance pledge: CSO

London, 27 March (Argus) — Two-thirds of "high-income" signatories that pledged to end public finance for international fossil fuels have policies in place that realise their commitment, civil society organisation (CSO) Oil Change International said today. Of the 17 "high-income" signatories, 11 are compliant, Oil Change found. They total ten developed countries — Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden and the UK — as well as EU development institution the European Investment Bank (EIB). The policy details vary, "but all put a complete halt to investments in new oil and gas extraction and LNG infrastructure", Oil Change said. The pledge referred to — the Clean Energy Transition Partnership (CETP) — was launched at the UN Cop 21 climate summit in 2021. It aims to shift international public finance "from the unabated fossil fuel energy sector to the clean energy transition". Signatories commit to ending new direct public support for overseas unabated fossil fuel projects within a year of joining. Other countries have updated policy to restrict fossil fuel financing abroad, but Oil Change has deemed them not in line with the pledge made. Belgium's policy "breaches the end-of-2022 deadline, allowing support for projects that have received promise of insurance by July 2022 into 2023", Oil Change said. The Netherlands allows some projects that requested support in 2022 to be approved in 2023, while there are "energy security exemptions and exemptions for some continued support in low-income countries", Oil Change said. The CSO assessed Germany's policy as containing a number of "major loopholes", including not ruling out public finance for gas infrastructure and gas-fired power plants. And it noted that Italy's policy for its export credit agency "allows fossil fuel finance to continue virtually unhindered". Germany has provided $1.5bn across 11 projects since the 2022 deadline passed, while Italy approved nearly $1.1bn for four projects in 2023, Oil Change said. Oil Change classed Switzerland's policy as "severely misaligned", while Portugal has not submitted a policy and the US has withdrawn from the agreement. The US provided $3.7bn for 12 international fossil fuel projects between end-2022 and end-2024, while it approved $4.7bn for the Mozambique LNG project after leaving the CETP. The CETP now has 40 signatories including five development banks and 35 countries. By Georgia Gratton Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more