🔗 Share this article

As dawn crept over the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, representatives remained trapped in a enclosed conference room, uncertain whether it was day or night. They had been 12 hours in tense discussions, with dozens ministers representing 17 groups of countries from the most vulnerable nations to the most developed economies.

Patience wore thin, the air stifling as sweaty delegates acknowledged the sobering reality: they were unlikely to achieve a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The international climate negotiations faced the brink of abject failure.

The major obstacle: Fossil fuels

As science has told us for well over a century, the greenhouse gases produced by consuming fossil fuels is heating up our planet to dangerous levels.

Nevertheless, during more than three decades of regular climate meetings, the essential necessity to halt fossil fuel use has been addressed only once – in a resolution made two years ago at previous UN climate talks to "transition away from fossil fuels". Delegates from the Arab Group, Russia, and several other countries were resolved this would not occur another time.

Mounting support for change

Simultaneously, a growing number of countries were equally determined that advancement on this issue was vitally needed. They had formulated a proposal that was gathering expanding support and made it clear they were willing to hold firm.

Emerging economies desperately wanted to make progress on securing financial assistance to help them manage the growing impacts of environmental crises.

Turning point

In the pre-dawn period of Saturday, some delegates were willing to walk out and cause breakdown. "It was on the edge for us," commented one government representative. "I considered to walk away."

The critical development came through discussions with Saudi Arabia. Near 6am, senior representatives left the main group to hold a confidential discussion with the lead Saudi negotiator. They pressed language that would indirectly acknowledge the global commitment to "transition away from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Unexpected agreement

As opposed to explicitly mentioning fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the previous commitment". Upon deliberation, the Saudi delegation unexpectedly agreed to the wording.

Participants showed visible relief. Cheers erupted. The agreement was completed.

With what became known as the "Brazil agreement", the world took an incremental move towards the gradual elimination of fossil fuels – a faltering, inadequate step that will minimally impact the climate's continued progression towards disaster. But nevertheless a notable change from absolute paralysis.

Major components of the agreement

• Alongside the oblique commitment in the legally agreed text, countries will commence creating a plan to gradually eliminate fossil fuels
• This will be largely a optional undertaking led by Brazil that will deliver findings next year
• Addressing the required reductions in greenhouse gas emissions to remain below the 1.5C limit was likewise deferred to next year
• Developing countries obtained a significant expansion to $120bn of yearly funding to help them adapt to the impacts of extreme weather
• This amount will not be fully available until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "fair adjustment program" to help people working in high-carbon industries shift to the renewable industry

Varied responses

With global conditions hovers near the brink of climate "critical thresholds" that could destroy ecosystems and throw whole regions into chaos, the agreement was far from the "significant advancement" needed.

"Negotiators delivered some small advances in the correct path, but considering the scale of the climate crisis, it has failed to rise to the occasion," stated one policy director.

This limited deal might have been the best attainable, given the political challenges – including a Washington administration who ignored the talks and remains wedded to oil and coal, the rising tide of rightwing populism, continuing wars in multiple regions, extreme measures of inequality, and global economic instability.

"Fossil fuel corporations – the oil and gas companies – were finally in the spotlight at Cop30," notes one policy convener. "We have crossed a threshold on that. The political space is available. Now we must transform it into a real fire escape to a more secure planet."

Major disagreements revealed

Although nations were able to celebrate the official adoption of the deal, Cop30 also highlighted deep fissures in the sole international mechanism for confronting the climate crisis.

"Climate conferences are agreement-dependent, and in a era of international tensions, agreement is progressively challenging to reach," stated one global leader. "We should not suggest that Cop30 has achieved complete success that is needed. The gap between present circumstances and what research requires remains dangerously wide."

If the world is to prevent the gravest consequences of climate collapse, the UN climate talks alone will not be nearly enough.