🔗 Share this article

While dawn illuminated the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, negotiators remained confined in a windowless 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 poorest nations to the wealthiest economies.

Frustration mounted, the air thick as weary delegates confronted the sobering reality: they were unlikely to achieve a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The 30th UN climate conference teetered on the brink of complete breakdown.

The central impasse: Fossil fuels

Research has demonstrated for nearly a century, the carbon dioxide produced by burning fossil fuels is increasing temperatures on our planet to critical levels.

Yet, during over three decades of regular climate meetings, the crucial requirement to stop fossil fuel use has been referenced only once – in a resolution made two years ago at previous UN climate talks to "move beyond fossil fuels". Representatives from the Middle Eastern nations, Russia, and multiple other countries were resolved this would not be repeated.

Growing momentum for change

Meanwhile, a increasing coalition of countries were just as committed that movement on this issue was vitally needed. They had formulated a proposal that was attracting expanding support and made it evident they were prepared to stand their ground.

Less wealthy nations urgently needed to make progress on securing funding support to help them cope with the growing impacts of environmental crises.

Critical moment

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

The breakthrough happened through talks with Saudi Arabia. Near 6am, key negotiators left the main group to hold a closed-door meeting with the lead Saudi negotiator. They encouraged wording that would subtly reference the global commitment to "move beyond fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Surprising consensus

As opposed to explicitly namechecking fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the previous commitment". Upon deliberation, the Saudi delegation unforeseeably accepted the wording.

Participants collapsed into relief. Celebrations began. The deal was finalized.

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 continued progression towards crisis. But nevertheless a notable change from complete stagnation.

Key elements of the agreement

• Alongside the subtle acknowledgment in the formal agreement, countries will start developing a plan to phase out fossil fuels
• This will be primarily a non-binding program led by Brazil that will provide updates next year
• Addressing the essential decreases in greenhouse gas emissions to stay within the 1.5C limit was also put off to next year
• Developing countries obtained a tripling to $120bn of yearly funding to help them adapt to the impacts of environmental crises
• This sum will not be fully available until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "just transition mechanism" to help people working in high-carbon industries transition to the sustainable sector

Differing opinions

While our planet hovers near the brink of climate "tipping points" that could devastate environments and throw whole regions into crisis, the agreement was insufficient as the "major breakthrough" needed.

"Cop30 gave us some small advances in the right direction, but given the magnitude of the climate crisis, it has not met the occasion," stated one climate expert.

This imperfect deal might have been the best attainable, given the political challenges – including a US president who shunned the talks and remains wedded to oil and coal, the increasing presence of nationalist politics, continuing wars in multiple regions, unacceptable degrees of inequality, and global economic volatility.

"The climate arsonists – the energy conglomerates – were ultimately in the spotlight at the climate summit," says one climate activist. "There is no turning back on that. The political space is available. Now we must convert it to a real fire escape to a more secure planet."

Major disagreements revealed

Even as nations were able to celebrate the gavelling through of the deal, Cop30 also highlighted significant divisions in the sole international mechanism for addressing the climate crisis.

"Climate conferences are unanimity-required, and in a period of geopolitical divides, consensus is ever harder to reach," commented one international diplomat. "I cannot pretend that Cop30 has delivered everything that is needed. The difference between present circumstances and what research requires remains alarmingly large."

If the world is to avoid the worst ravages of climate collapse, the UN climate talks alone will not be nearly enough.