🔗 Share this article

As dawn was breaking the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, delegates remained trapped in a enclosed conference room, unaware whether it was day or night. For more than 12 hours in difficult discussions, with numerous ministers representing various coalitions of countries from the most vulnerable nations to the richest economies.

Tempers were short, the air thick as weary delegates confronted the grim reality: they were unlikely to achieve a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The latest global climate summit faced the brink of total collapse.

The central impasse: Fossil fuels

As science has told us for well over a century, the carbon dioxide produced by burning fossil fuels is warming our planet to dangerous levels.

Nevertheless, during over three decades of yearly climate meetings, the essential necessity to cease fossil fuel use has been addressed only once – in a decision made two years ago at previous UN climate talks to "move beyond fossil fuels". Representatives from the Middle Eastern nations, Russia, and a few other countries were adamant this would not occur another time.

Mounting support for change

Simultaneously, a growing number of countries were similarly resolved that movement on this issue was urgently necessary. They had created a proposal that was attracting expanding support and made it apparent they were willing to dig in.

Emerging economies urgently needed to advance on securing funding support to help them cope with the growing impacts of environmental crises.

Turning point

During the night of Saturday, some delegates were ready to withdraw and force a collapse. "The situation was precarious for us," commented one government representative. "I was ready to walk away."

The pivotal moment happened through discussions with Saudi Arabia. Near 6am, principal delegates separated from the main group to hold a closed-door meeting with the chief Saudi negotiator. They urged language that would obliquely recognise the global commitment to "transition away from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Unexpected agreement

Rather than explicitly mentioning fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the previous commitment". After consideration, the Saudi delegation surprisingly approved the wording.

Delegates expressed relief. Applause rang out. The deal was completed.

With what became known as the "Brazil agreement", the world took an incremental move towards the phaseout of fossil fuels – a uncertain, inadequate step that will barely interrupt the climate's steady march towards catastrophe. But nevertheless a significant departure from complete stagnation.

Important aspects of the agreement

• Complementing the subtle acknowledgment in the formal agreement, countries will commence creating a framework to phase out fossil fuels
• This will be largely a voluntary initiative led by Brazil that will deliver findings next year
• Addressing the essential decreases in greenhouse gas emissions to not exceed the 1.5C limit was similarly postponed to next year
• Developing countries obtained a tripling to $120bn of yearly funding to help them manage the impacts of environmental crises
• This sum will not be completely provided until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "equitable change process" to help people working in fossil fuel sectors transition to the clean economy

Mixed reactions

With global conditions approaches the brink of climate "critical thresholds" that could destroy ecosystems and plunge whole regions into disorder, the agreement was not the "giant leap" needed.

"Negotiators delivered some modest progress in the proper course, but in light of the scale of the climate crisis, it has failed to rise to the occasion," cautioned one climate expert.

This limited deal might have been all that was possible, given the political challenges – including a US president who ignored the talks and remains wedded to oil and coal, the growing influence of conservative movements, continuing wars in various areas, intolerable levels of inequality, and global economic instability.

"Fossil fuel corporations – the oil and gas companies – were ultimately in the focus at Cop30," notes one policy convener. "There is no turning back on that. The political space is open. Now we must convert it to a actual pathway to a safer world."

Deep fissures revealed

Even as nations were able to applaud the official adoption of the deal, Cop30 also revealed major disagreements in the only global process for confronting the climate crisis.

"Climate conferences are agreement-dependent, and in a era of geopolitical divides, consensus is ever harder to reach," observed one senior UN official. "It would be dishonest to claim that this summit has delivered everything that is needed. The gap between our current position and what science demands remains alarmingly large."

If the world is to prevent the worst ravages of climate crisis, the UN climate talks alone will fall far short.