Is there a reason you feel this isn't an issue that could be attacked more efficiently either way by engaging it in the same manner that many institutions are currently engaging research research into reducing mosquito populations? Surely the west owes them that much after systematically sabotaging an entire continent. Or is it alright when it's part of the natural status quo?
A good point, I was lazy and mainly did a population survey, I was wrong in assuming Brazil was significantly industrialized. I'm not sure that helps your point much though since eventually they're going to want their economy to grow unless your position is that Brazilians don't want their economy to grow.
What gas doesn't suffer from though is expensiveness (environmentalism sounds great until you realize you're largely advocating economically regressive policies that disproportionately impact the most vulnerable) and scalability. EU countries might be able to run their industrial sectors on renewables but call me when Russia, India, China, Indonesia, Brazil or even the US are able to do it without costs going up.
I'm not saying it isn't xenophobic and pandering to a nationalist base but it seems like a stretch to call "America First" fascist, especially when the phrase is generally accompanied by (dubious) accusations that the opposing party failed to prioritize the needs of the people. I could see the argument that the slogan was perhaps used as a tool to further fascist policies but "America First" represents fascism about as much as the Che Guervarra hats that Hot Topic used to sell represented communism.