🔗 Share this article

As dawn was breaking the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, negotiators remained trapped in a windowless conference room, unaware whether it was day or night. They had been 12 hours in tense discussions, with scores ministers representing 17 groups of countries including the least developed nations to the most developed economies.

Frustration mounted, the air stifling as weary delegates acknowledged the grim reality: they were unlikely to achieve a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The latest global climate summit teetered on the brink of complete breakdown.

The sticking point: Fossil fuels

As science has told us for nearly a century, the carbon dioxide produced by consuming fossil fuels is warming our planet to critical levels.

Yet, during nearly three decades of annual climate meetings, the urgent need to halt fossil fuel use has been referenced only once – in a resolution made two years ago at the Dubai climate summit to "transition away from fossil fuels". Delegates from the Arab Group, Russia, and multiple other countries were resolved this would not happen again.

Mounting support for change

At the same time, a expanding group of countries were similarly resolved that advancement on this issue was urgently necessary. They had formulated a proposal that was gathering expanding support and made it evident they were willing to hold firm.

Less wealthy nations urgently needed to make progress on securing financial assistance to help them manage the growing impacts of environmental crises.

Breaking point

By the early hours of Saturday, some delegates were prepared to walk out and trigger failure. "We were close for us," commented one government representative. "I was prepared to walk away."

The pivotal moment happened through negotiations with Saudi Arabia. Around 6am, senior representatives separated from the main group to hold a confidential discussion with the head Saudi negotiator. They encouraged 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 referencing fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the UAE consensus". Upon deliberation, the Saudi delegation surprisingly agreed to the wording.

Delegates expressed relief. Celebrations began. The settlement was done.

With what became known as the "Brazil agreement", the world took an incremental move towards the phaseout of fossil fuels – a faltering, limited step that will barely interrupt the climate's ongoing trajectory towards catastrophe. But nevertheless a notable change from complete stagnation.

Key elements of the agreement

• Complementing the indirect reference in the legally agreed text, countries will begin work a roadmap to phase out fossil fuels
• This will be primarily a optional undertaking led by Brazil that will report back next year
• Addressing the required reductions in greenhouse gas emissions to not exceed the 1.5C limit was likewise deferred to next year
• Developing countries obtained a threefold increase to $120bn of annual finance to help them manage the impacts of climate disasters
• This funding will not be completely provided until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "just transition mechanism" to help people working in fossil fuel sectors transition to the sustainable sector

Varied responses

As the world hovers near the brink of climate "irreversible changes" that could eliminate habitats and force whole regions into crisis, the agreement was not the "major breakthrough" needed.

"Negotiators delivered some baby steps in the right direction, but given the severity of the climate crisis, it has not met the occasion," cautioned one policy director.

This limited deal might have been all that was possible, given the geopolitical headwinds – including a Washington administration who shunned the talks and remains committed to oil and coal, the increasing presence of nationalist politics, ongoing conflicts in multiple regions, unacceptable degrees of inequality, and global economic volatility.

"Fossil fuel corporations – the fossil fuel giants – were ultimately in the crosshairs at Cop30," notes one climate activist. "There is no turning back on that. The political space is available. Now we must transform it into a genuine solution to a safer world."

Deep fissures revealed

Even as nations were able to applaud the formal approval of the deal, Cop30 also highlighted major disagreements in the primary worldwide framework for confronting the climate crisis.

"UN negotiations are unanimity-required, and in a period of geopolitical divides, consensus is increasingly difficult to reach," commented one senior UN official. "I cannot pretend that these talks has provided all that is needed. The disparity between our current position and what evidence necessitates remains concerningly substantial."

When the world is to prevent the most severe impacts of climate collapse, the UN climate talks alone will fall far short.