Writen by Jenifer Sato and Clara Bagaroli
COP30, hosted this year in Belém and the world’s largest annual climate get-together, has officially come to an end. It was composed of global leaders, corporations, and media influencers coming together to discuss and promote against global warming. However, behind the speeches, photos, and “green” promises lies a growing sentiment shared by activists, researchers, and the public that the conference had become a place where climate hypocrisy was found rather than meaningful action that the COP was supposed to be about.
This year, the skepticism about the conference is more evident than ever. Online discussions reflected a deeply polarized debate: of the more than 6,100 mentions of COP30 tracked across social platforms, public sentiment were almost split evenly between positive, neutral, and negative. On X/Twitter, where 98% of COP30 conversations occur, the number of positive (1.9k) and negative (1.9k) mentions is identical, a clear sign of how controversial the event was.
Every COP follows a familiar plan. Political leaders announce and promise roadmaps, carbon neutrality by 2050, forests protected and pollution reduced. Yet few of these commitments are actually made with plans.
The numbers are proof of this: despite three decades of climate summits, global emissions continue to rise. And while countries repeat promises of changing to clean energy, most continue to heavily make use of fossil fuels, in which the use was also promised to end. This contradiction becomes even more impactful when host nations like the United Arab Emirates in COP28 or Brazil in COP30 are simultaneously expanding their oil and gas exploration and also big countries like China relying heavily on importation of oil and gas, with 83.4% of their primary energy consumption being relied solemnly on fossil fuels.
Greenwashing on a Global Stage
Corporate participation has emerged as one of the events most controversial elements. Companies with very long histories and a good reputation for environmental harm often appear as sponsors, using COP branding to increase their public image, such as Coca-Cola in COP27, or Petrobras in COP28.
Environmental activist groups, such as Clima Ácido in Brazil, have repeatedly warned that these events risk becoming public relations theaters rather than platforms for accountability. Their mission for COP30 was the following: monitor and expose greenwashing by governments, mining corporations, agribusinesses, and tech companies whose data centers consume enormous amounts of energy while, at the same time, advertising themselves as eco-friendly.
They were able to accomplish this by warning the public through social media posts that highlighted the actions taken during the COP30:
This video shows a warning against big tech and its relevance during the COP30
This video highlighted the hypocrisy of the government right after the COP30
Furthermore, the carbon market, once promoted as an effective solution for reducing emissions, is increasingly criticized by these groups as a “fraud”, a tool that allows polluters to buy their way out of responsibility rather than changing their operations.
Reasons for the carbon market to be considered a “fraud” would be the generation of “phantom credits.”
Fossil Fuels
One of the most impactful contradiction is the ongoing expansion of fossil fuel extraction even though world leaders gather to specifically discuss climate solutions. The debates around oil exploration at the Amazon River highlight the tension between economic interests and environmental promises.
In a panel discussion that took place in the federal government pavilion in the Green Zone, First Lady, Janja Lula da Silva, declared that it “is not yet a reality” to abandon the use and extraction of fossil fuels. This statement was used as a response towards concerns, one as to which mentioned that authorization for oil exploration in the Amazon River are generating apprehension among environmentalists.
With her statement, various criticizes rose up. Many environmentalist organizations spoke out during COP30, demanding real action to end fossil fuels and a fair energy transition. This highlights the evident tension between the government defending the continuation of oil exploration, and the requirement for a transition towards renewable sources of energy to benefit the environment.
Indigenous Protests
The contradictions of the even were further seen when a group of Munduruku Indigenous activists organized a protest directly in front of the COP venue. Carrying banners, traditional body paint, and symbolic artifacts, they reported government claims of environmental responsibility and condemned ongoing violations of their land rights.
Among these, the Munduruku people protested illegal mining (link for video), deforestation, and the continuous advancement of infrastructure projects within the Amazon Forest without any consultation. This ignorance towards the Munduruku served as a reminder to the world of how those who live and protect the forest are often overlooked and not heard inside climate negotiations.
Even though the Brazilian government presented COP 30 as “the COP of truth and implementations” (COP da verdade e da implementacao – as stated by Raoni), the lack of official organization and permission for Raoni to give a speech during the COP, regardless of being one of the most influential figures in the indigenous community of Brazil right now and being one of the current Brazilian president supporters when he came to power once again in 2022. Emphasizes the hypocrisy of the COP. This further highlighted the evident contrast between the speech with fake promises made by the Brazilian government and the actual event.
While the government publicly spreads the importance of the native groups in the protection of the Amazon forest, leaders like Raoni, Davi Kopenawa, and several Munduruku leaders speak about the difficulty of gaining the opportunity to be included in decisive decisions about their land (the forest). https://www.bbc.com/portuguese/articles/ce8gk461ey8o
Recently, some important advances have been made as a result of the protests, being an essential representation of how social mobilization and popular pressure brought concrete results during the COP30. The Brazilian government’s announced decision to move forward with the demarcation of ten indigenous lands, announced on Indigenous Peoples’ Day during COP30, shows a significant response to the results fought for by those indigenous tribes. This set of decrees, signed by Minister Ricardo Lewandowski, raised the number of recognized territories to 21 since the beginning of the current government, something especially significant considering that there had been no demarcation since 2018.
Ultimately, the COP30 reveals a profound contradiction at the center of global climate politics: the people most affected by environmental destruction and those who have protected the Amazon for centuries remain the least heard or included. While governments and corporations took the stage to deliver ambitious speeches and empty promises. Their exclusion exposes a dark truth that the climate discussions continue to prioritize political image over genuine action.
Belém was presented as the place where implementation would finally replace rhetoric, yet what unfolded only deepened criticism. The expansion of fossil fuel exploration, the presence of major polluting companies, and the refusal to grant Raoni an official platform all highlight a climate struggling with its own credibility. If COP30 taught anything, it is that real climate solutions will not emerge from stages or press conferences, but from listening and empowering the communities that defend the forest every day. Without this shift, the world risks turning its most important climate gathering into nothing more than a green illusion.
EAC PRESS 