06/03/2026
🔥🔥🔥🧨 *A public civil action challenges coal-fired power plants in the 2026 capacity reserve auction and points to a risk to the renewable energy matrix.*
- Understand, therefore, why the Federal Court was called upon to challenge the inclusion of coal in the LRCAP 2026 and, furthermore, what technical and legal points are at the heart of the process.
-
- *Federal court action targets LRCAP 2026*
*Firstly, a Public Civil Action (ACP) it was filed in Federal Justice, the 13th Federal Court of Brasília, to question the participation of coal-fired power plants No. 2026 Reserve Capacity Auction (LRCAP).*
- Furthermore, the initiative was presented by Arayara International Institute against a Union, Ministry of Mines and Energy (MME), Energy Research Company (EPE) and National Electric Energy Agency (ANEEL).
-
- Next, the action, recorded in the process 1021409-24.2025.4.01.3400, argues that the inclusion of coal would motivation addiction, misuse of purpose and, furthermore, it would violate climate commitments assumed by Brazil.
-
- Therefore, the case was taken to the Judiciary to assess the consistency of the bidding process with the stated purposes of the model.
-
*Objective of the auction and criticism regarding its flexibility.*
- First, the government seeks to hire power reserve to ensure energy security in moments of peak demand, especially in the early evening.
- In this context, solar power generation decreases while wind power production can fluctuate, increasing the need for a rapid response.
- However, according to the Arayara International InstituteThe coal power plants they would not flexibility necessary to fulfill this reserve function.
Thus, the central argument points to an operational incompatibility between coal and the design of LRCAP 2026.
- ONS is quoted: “cold start” can take hours.
According to data National Electric System Operator (ONS) cited in the lawsuit, the startup time of coal-fired power plants, called cold start, can reach up to eight hours.
- Therefore, this timeframe would be incompatible with the need for a rapid response required by the capacity reservation model.
- Furthermore, Figueira Thermal Power Plant It is cited as an example because it can lead more than ten additional hours to achieve the maximum generation after initial activation.
- Still, the proposal of MME It is expected that, once activated, the plants will remain switched on for at least 18 consecutive hours.
The risk of switching to continuous generation and putting pressure on renewables.
- In this sense, the Institute argues that this operational characteristic tends to transform the power reserve em continuous generation.
Consequently, in practice, the system could be forced to reduce production of renewable sourcesas the solar e wind, to accommodate the coal.
- *Furthermore, this dynamic, according to the argument, would raise costs and, at the same time, it would increase emissions.*
*Hence, Juliano Bueno de Araújo, director of the Arayara International Institute, states that allowing coal to "live longer" would jeopardize a cleaner energy "heritage."*
- Climate commitments, 2009 law and cited vetoes
From a legal standpoint, the lawsuit claims that contracting for coal-fired power plants violates international commitments, such as the Paris Agreement.
Furthermore, the text mentions the National Policy on Climate Change, established by Law No. 12.187 / 2009, as a benchmark for climate obligation.
- According to the Institute, the federal government itself has already acknowledged, in recent vetoes proposals for subsidies for coal, that this source increases fares and contradicts the public interest.
-
- Thus, the legal document reinforces the argument of inconsistency between discourse and practice, according to the narrative presented.
Environmental impacts cited and institutional warnings.
- Furthermore, the document -mentions environmental impacts associated with plants in the sector, such as... UTE Candiota III, the target of court decisions related to environmental contamination.
It is also mentioned that Figueira Thermal Power Plant, currently deactivated, with Environmental liabilities estimated at around R$ 1 billion., as described in the text.
- Finally, the executive director of the Institute, Nicole FigueiredoHe states that the ACP serves as a warning about the direction of energy policy.
-
- Furthermore, she mentions that the Federal Court of Accounts (TCU) has already opened an investigation into evidence of irregularities in the auction prices and that the Ministry of Finance He classified the inclusion of coal as a step backward.
Public consultation, technical note, and dispute over the exclusion of coal.
- *On the other hand, the ARAYARA Institute claims that it contributed to the process of public consultation of LRCAP 2026 and thus signaled to MME The risk of maintaining coal-fired power plants due to potential litigation.*
*However, according to the text, the Ministry issued technical note denying the request to exclude coal, requested by more than 20 entities.*
*Therefore, the dispute focuses simultaneously on legal fundamentals and on the technical criteria for operating the electrical system.*
- Thus, the Judiciary will decide whether to include coal in LRCAP 2026 It holds up against the allegations in the case. 1021409-24.2025.4.01.3400 — and therefore, which direction will energy policy take from now on?
-
Understand, therefore, why the Federal Court was called upon to contest the inclusion of coal in the LRCAP 2026 and, furthermore, what technical and legal points are at the heart of the process. Action in Federal Court targets LRCAP 2026. Firstly, a Public Civil Action (ACP) was filed in the Federal...
