The California Senate has taken a bold step in the ongoing debate over environmental responsibility and energy sourcing, unanimously approving a resolution on August 25, 2025, that calls for a comprehensive review—and eventual phase-out—of the state’s imports of crude oil from the Amazon rainforest. The move, which comes after years of persistent advocacy from Indigenous leaders in South America, signals a potentially dramatic shift in California’s approach to climate leadership and global supply chains.
Senate Resolution 51, introduced by Democratic Senator Josh Becker, passed with a resounding 37-0 vote. The resolution directs the state legislature to examine California’s position as one of the world’s top buyers of Amazon crude oil, most of which is sourced from Ecuador. It also urges lawmakers to explore actionable steps to reduce and ultimately end these imports. While the measure is nonbinding, its passage has been hailed by environmentalists and Indigenous advocates as a watershed moment in the fight for both climate justice and Indigenous rights.
The roots of this legislative push stretch back to June 2025, when leaders from the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of the Ecuadorian Amazon traveled to Sacramento. Their visit included meetings with lawmakers and a dramatic protest staged in kayaks near the Chevron refinery in Richmond, California—one of several state facilities that process oil extracted from the Amazon. According to The Associated Press, much of the gasoline refined from this oil is sold within California, but significant volumes are shipped onward to neighboring states such as Arizona and Nevada, expanding the environmental and ethical implications of California’s energy choices.
Environmental groups have long argued that oil drilling in the Amazon is a primary driver of deforestation, the destruction of irreplaceable biodiversity, and the violation of Indigenous rights—often proceeding without the free, prior, and informed consent of local communities. These critics contend that California’s continued purchases of Amazon crude undermine its reputation as a climate leader, even as the state touts its ambitious efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions. "Consuming oil from the Amazon is incompatible with climate leadership. As the world’s fourth-largest economy, California is sending a powerful market signal by examining its crude footprint and role in Amazon destruction," said Kevin Koenig, climate and energy director at Amazon Watch, as reported by The Associated Press.
The timing of California’s resolution is especially significant, coming as Ecuador and Peru move to expand their own oil extraction efforts. Ecuador, for example, plans to auction more than 2 million hectares (4.9 million acres) in what it calls the “Southern Oil Round.” This auction includes oil blocks on remote Indigenous territories—an area roughly the size of New Jersey. At the same time, the state oil companies of Ecuador and Peru have inked a deal to construct a bi-national pipeline, a project that has drawn sharp condemnation from Indigenous groups who fear further environmental degradation and loss of ancestral lands.
For many Indigenous leaders, California’s move is a long-overdue recognition of the outsized impact that foreign demand for Amazon crude has on their communities and ecosystems. Diana Chávez, International Relationships leader at Pakkiru, an Indigenous organization based in Ecuador’s Amazon, told AP, "I believe this Senate resolution is a call for coherence. As Indigenous peoples, we are already protecting the forests, life, and culture, and resisting extractive activities. It’s time for others to assume their social responsibility and take meaningful action." These sentiments echo a broader call for global solidarity and ethical accountability in the face of mounting environmental crises.
Supporters of Senate Resolution 51 argue that California could feasibly stop using Amazon crude without increasing costs for drivers, provided that state refineries prioritize making more fuel for local consumption rather than exporting it. This, they say, would not only help align the state’s fuel sourcing with its aggressive climate targets but also offer meaningful protections for Indigenous communities whose lands are threatened by oil extraction. According to The Independent, the resolution lays out a framework for potential changes to California’s fuel sourcing, even though it does not carry the force of law. Backers believe that the measure sends a clear signal to both domestic and international markets about the direction California intends to take.
Still, the path ahead is fraught with challenges and competing interests. While many environmentalists and Indigenous advocates see the resolution as a crucial first step, others question whether it will lead to substantive change without binding legislative action. The oil industry, for its part, has historically argued that reducing imports of Amazon crude could disrupt fuel supplies or raise prices at the pump—a claim that supporters of the resolution dispute. They point to the state’s ability to adjust refinery outputs and the potential for new sourcing strategies that better reflect California’s climate commitments.
Meanwhile, the broader context of global oil markets and geopolitical realities cannot be ignored. As Ecuador and Peru move forward with their own expansion plans, the international demand for Amazon crude remains robust. The auctioning of new oil blocks and the planned pipeline construction suggest that, absent coordinated global action, the pressures on the Amazon—and the people who call it home—will only intensify. Indigenous groups continue to fight for greater recognition of their rights, insisting that any extraction on their lands must have their consent and respect their cultural and environmental heritage.
California’s move also raises deeper questions about the responsibilities of wealthy economies in the context of climate change. As the world’s fourth-largest economy, California wields significant influence over international supply chains and environmental norms. By examining and potentially curbing its reliance on Amazon crude, the state could set a precedent for other major oil consumers to follow suit. At the same time, the nonbinding nature of the resolution means that much depends on the political will of lawmakers, the vigilance of civil society, and the ongoing advocacy of Indigenous and environmental groups.
For now, though, the passage of Senate Resolution 51 stands as a notable milestone in the intersection of climate policy, Indigenous rights, and global energy markets. It reflects a growing recognition that true climate leadership requires not just ambitious goals at home, but also a willingness to scrutinize—and change—the ways in which local choices reverberate across the planet. Whether this resolution leads to lasting change remains to be seen, but the conversation it has sparked is likely to shape California’s environmental legacy for years to come.
