🔗 Share this article

While dawn crept over the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, representatives remained stuck in a windowless conference room, unaware whether it was day or night. Having spent 12 hours in difficult discussions, with scores ministers representing various coalitions of countries from the poorest nations to the richest economies.

Patience wore thin, the air thick as weary delegates acknowledged the sobering reality: they would not reach a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The 30th UN climate conference hovered near the brink of total collapse.

The central impasse: Fossil fuels

Scientific evidence has shown for well over a century, the carbon dioxide produced by consuming fossil fuels is increasing temperatures on our planet to dangerous levels.

Yet, during nearly three decades of annual climate meetings, the essential necessity to stop fossil fuel use has been mentioned only once – in a resolution made two years ago at Cop28 to "transition away from fossil fuels". Officials from the Arab Group, Russia, and several other countries were adamant this would not be repeated.

Increasing pressure for change

At the same time, a growing number of countries were similarly resolved that movement on this issue was urgently necessary. They had created a proposal that was gathering increasing support and made it evident they were willing to hold firm.

Developing countries desperately wanted to advance on securing funding support to help them address the already disastrous impacts of environmental crises.

Turning point

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

The critical development happened through talks with Saudi Arabia. Shortly after 6am, key negotiators separated from the main group to hold a confidential discussion with the chief Saudi negotiator. They pressed text that would indirectly acknowledge the global commitment to "move beyond fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Unexpected agreement

Instead of explicitly namechecking fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the Dubai agreement". After consideration, the Saudi delegation surprisingly agreed to the wording.

Participants expressed relief. Celebrations began. The settlement was completed.

With what became known as the "Brazil agreement", the world took a modest advance towards the phaseout of fossil fuels – a faltering, limited step that will minimally impact the climate's steady march towards crisis. But nevertheless a significant departure from absolute paralysis.

Major components of the agreement

• Complementing the subtle acknowledgment in the formal agreement, countries will begin work a roadmap to gradually eliminate fossil fuels
• This will be mostly a optional undertaking 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 also put off to next year
• Developing countries obtained a significant expansion to $120bn of yearly funding to help them adapt to the impacts of environmental crises
• This funding will not be completely provided until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "fair adjustment program" to help people working in fossil fuel sectors transition to the clean economy

Varied responses

As the world hovers near the brink of climate "irreversible changes" that could destroy ecosystems and throw whole regions into chaos, the agreement was not the "significant advancement" needed.

"The summit provided some modest progress in the proper course, but given the scale of the climate crisis, it has fallen short of the occasion," stated one environmental analyst.

This flawed deal might have been all that was possible, given the geopolitical headwinds – including a US president who shunned the talks and remains aligned with oil and coal, the increasing presence of nationalist politics, continuing wars in various areas, intolerable levels of inequality, and global economic volatility.

"The climate arsonists – the oil and gas companies – were ultimately in the focus at Cop30," says one climate activist. "There is no turning back on that. The platform is open. Now we must transform it into a real fire escape to a more secure planet."

Deep fissures revealed

While nations were able to celebrate the gavelling through of the deal, Cop30 also highlighted major disagreements in the only global process for confronting the climate crisis.

"UN negotiations are agreement-dependent, and in a time of geopolitical divides, consensus is increasingly difficult to reach," observed one senior UN official. "We should not suggest that these talks has achieved complete success that is needed. The disparity between where we are and what science demands remains dangerously wide."

If the world is to avert the gravest consequences of climate crisis, the international negotiations alone will not be nearly enough.