🔗 Share this article

When dawn crept over the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, representatives remained stuck in a airless conference room, oblivious whether it was day or night. They had been 12 hours in tense discussions, with numerous ministers representing various coalitions of countries ranging from the least developed nations to the richest economies.

Tempers were short, the air stifling as sweaty delegates confronted the grim reality: they would not reach a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The latest global climate summit teetered on the brink of complete breakdown.

The sticking point: Fossil fuels

Scientific evidence has shown for nearly a century, the CO2 emissions produced by burning fossil fuels is heating up our planet to critical levels.

Nevertheless, during more than three decades of annual climate meetings, the crucial requirement to stop fossil fuel use has been addressed only once – in a decision made two years ago at previous UN climate talks to "shift from fossil fuels". Delegates from the Middle Eastern nations, Russia, and a few other countries were adamant this would not occur another time.

Increasing pressure for change

At the same time, a expanding group of countries were just as committed that progress on this issue was crucially important. They had created a initiative that was earning growing support and made it apparent they were prepared to hold firm.

Emerging economies urgently needed to move forward on securing financial assistance to help them cope with the increasingly severe impacts of climate disasters.

Critical moment

During the night of Saturday, some delegates were prepared to withdraw and trigger failure. "We were close for us," remarked one government representative. "I considered to walk away."

The pivotal moment happened through discussions with Saudi Arabia. Around 6am, principal delegates left the main group to hold a closed-door meeting with the head Saudi negotiator. They urged wording that would subtly reference the global commitment to "shift from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Surprising consensus

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

Delegates expressed relief. Applause rang out. The deal was done.

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 scarcely affect the climate's steady march towards crisis. But nevertheless a important shift from total inaction.

Key elements of the agreement

• Complementing the oblique commitment in the formal agreement, countries will commence creating a plan to gradually eliminate fossil fuels
• This will be primarily a non-binding program led by Brazil that will report back next year
• Addressing the essential decreases in greenhouse gas emissions to stay within the 1.5C limit was similarly postponed to next year
• Developing countries achieved a significant expansion to $120bn of yearly funding to help them adapt to the impacts of environmental crises
• This amount will not be fully available until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "just transition mechanism" to help people working in fossil fuel sectors move toward the renewable industry

Mixed reactions

As the world approaches the brink of climate "critical thresholds" that could devastate environments and throw whole regions into disorder, the agreement was far from the "giant leap" needed.

"The summit provided some baby steps in the correct path, but given the scale of the climate crisis, it has not met the occasion," cautioned one policy director.

This flawed deal might have been all that was possible, given the geopolitical headwinds – including a US president who shunned the talks and remains wedded to oil and coal, the increasing presence of rightwing populism, ongoing conflicts in various areas, unacceptable degrees of inequality, and global economic instability.

"Major polluters – the fossil fuel giants – were ultimately in the crosshairs at these negotiations," comments one environmental advocate. "This represents progress on that. The political space is open. Now we must convert it to a actual pathway to a safer world."

Deep fissures revealed

Although nations were able to celebrate the formal approval of the deal, Cop30 also revealed significant divisions in the only global process for addressing the climate crisis.

"International summits are unanimity-required, and in a time of international tensions, unanimity is progressively challenging to reach," stated one senior UN official. "It would be dishonest to claim that this summit has achieved complete success that is needed. The difference between our current position and what evidence necessitates remains dangerously wide."

Should the world is to prevent the gravest consequences of climate breakdown, the international negotiations alone will fall far short.