🔗 Share this article

While dawn was breaking the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, representatives remained stuck in a airless conference room, uncertain whether it was day or night. Having spent 12 hours in strained discussions, with numerous ministers representing multiple blocs of countries from the most vulnerable nations to the most developed economies.

Tempers were short, the air thick as exhausted delegates faced up to the sobering reality: they were unlikely to achieve a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The 30th UN climate conference faced the brink of total collapse.

The central impasse: Fossil fuels

Scientific evidence has shown for nearly a century, the CO2 emissions produced by consuming fossil fuels is increasing temperatures on our planet to critical levels.

Nevertheless, during more than three decades of yearly climate meetings, the urgent need to halt fossil fuel use has been addressed only once – in a decision made two years ago at previous UN climate talks to "transition away from fossil fuels". Delegates from the Gulf states, Russia, and several other countries were resolved this would not happen again.

Mounting support for change

Simultaneously, a expanding group of countries were equally determined that progress on this issue was crucially important. They had formulated a plan that was gathering increasing support and made it apparent they were prepared to stand their ground.

Less wealthy nations strongly sought to advance on securing financial assistance to help them address the increasingly severe impacts of environmental crises.

Turning point

In the pre-dawn period of Saturday, some delegates were willing to walk out and force a collapse. "We were close for us," commented one government representative. "I considered to walk away."

The critical development came through discussions with Saudi Arabia. Around 6am, principal delegates split from the main group to hold a confidential discussion with the lead Saudi negotiator. They pressed text that would subtly reference the global commitment to "transition away from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Unanticipated resolution

Rather than explicitly namechecking fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the Dubai agreement". After consideration, the Saudi delegation unforeseeably approved the wording.

Participants showed visible relief. Applause rang out. The agreement was finalized.

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

Major components of the agreement

• In addition to the subtle acknowledgment in the formal agreement, countries will commence creating a roadmap to systematically reduce fossil fuels
• This will be mostly a voluntary initiative led by Brazil that will report back next year
• Addressing the necessary cuts in greenhouse gas emissions to remain below the 1.5C limit was similarly postponed to next year
• Developing countries secured a tripling to $120bn of regular financial support to help them adapt to the impacts of climate disasters
• This funding will not be fully available until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "just transition mechanism" to help people working in high-carbon industries move toward the clean economy

Varied responses

As the world approaches the brink of climate "irreversible changes" that could destroy ecosystems and force whole regions into chaos, the agreement was not the "giant leap" needed.

"The summit provided some small advances in the right direction, but given the magnitude of the climate crisis, it has fallen short of the occasion," cautioned one climate expert.

This imperfect deal might have been the best attainable, given the geopolitical headwinds – including a American leader who avoided the talks and remains aligned with oil and coal, the growing influence of rightwing populism, persistent fighting in multiple regions, extreme measures of inequality, and global economic instability.

"Major polluters – the fossil fuel giants – were at last in the spotlight at these negotiations," notes one policy convener. "This represents progress on that. The opportunity is available. Now we must transform it into a real fire escape to a protected environment."

Major disagreements revealed

Even as nations were able to applaud the gavelling through of the deal, Cop30 also exposed deep fissures in the primary worldwide framework for addressing the climate crisis.

"Climate conferences are consensus-based, and in a era of geopolitical divides, agreement is increasingly difficult to reach," stated one global leader. "We should not suggest that this summit has provided all that is needed. The disparity between our current position and what research requires remains alarmingly large."

When the world is to avoid the worst ravages of climate crisis, the global discussions alone will prove insufficient.