🔗 Share this article

While dawn crept over the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, representatives remained trapped in a airless conference room, uncertain whether it was day or night. They had been 12 hours in strained discussions, with scores ministers representing multiple blocs of countries ranging from the least developed nations to the wealthiest economies.

Frustration mounted, the air thick as sweaty delegates acknowledged the grim reality: they would not reach a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The latest global climate summit hovered near the brink of complete breakdown.

The central impasse: Fossil fuels

Scientific evidence has shown for nearly a century, the carbon dioxide produced by utilizing fossil fuels is increasing temperatures on our planet to critical levels.

However, during more than three decades of yearly climate meetings, the essential necessity to halt fossil fuel use has been mentioned only once – in a agreement made two years ago at previous UN climate talks to "shift from fossil fuels". Officials from the Arab Group, Russia, and several other countries were adamant this would not be repeated.

Growing momentum for change

At the same time, a increasing coalition of countries were similarly resolved that progress on this issue was urgently necessary. They had formulated a proposal that was attracting increasing support and made it evident they were ready to dig in.

Less wealthy nations strongly sought to advance on securing economic resources to help them address the already disastrous impacts of climate disasters.

Critical moment

During the night of Saturday, some delegates were ready to withdraw and force a collapse. "It was on the edge for us," remarked one energy minister. "I considered to walk away."

The critical development came through negotiations with Saudi Arabia. Around 6am, principal delegates split from the main group to hold a closed-door meeting with the head Saudi negotiator. They encouraged text that would indirectly acknowledge the global commitment to "shift from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Surprising consensus

As opposed to explicitly namechecking fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the UAE consensus". After consideration, the Saudi delegation unforeseeably accepted the wording.

Delegates collapsed into relief. Celebrations began. The settlement was completed.

With what became known as the "Brazil agreement", the world took another small step towards the systematic reduction of fossil fuels – a faltering, inadequate step that will scarcely affect the climate's ongoing trajectory towards catastrophe. But nevertheless a significant departure from absolute paralysis.

Important aspects of the agreement

• Alongside the subtle acknowledgment in the legally agreed text, countries will begin work a roadmap to systematically reduce fossil fuels
• This will be mostly a non-binding program led by Brazil that will deliver findings next year
• Addressing the necessary cuts in greenhouse gas emissions to remain below the 1.5C limit was likewise deferred to next year
• Developing countries achieved a threefold increase to $120bn of yearly funding to help them adapt to the impacts of climate disasters
• This amount will not be completely provided until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "fair adjustment program" to help people working in fossil fuel sectors shift to the sustainable sector

Mixed reactions

With global conditions hovers near the brink of climate "irreversible changes" that could destroy ecosystems and force whole regions into chaos, the agreement was insufficient as the "giant leap" needed.

"Negotiators delivered some modest progress in the right direction, but in light of the scale of the climate crisis, it has fallen short of the occasion," warned one environmental analyst.

This flawed deal might have been the maximum achievable, given the geopolitical headwinds – including a US president who ignored the talks and remains wedded to oil and coal, the increasing presence of nationalist politics, ongoing conflicts in different locations, extreme measures of inequality, and global economic instability.

"Fossil fuel corporations – the energy conglomerates – were ultimately in the spotlight at the climate summit," notes one policy convener. "This represents progress on that. The opportunity is accessible. Now we must convert it to a real fire escape to a more secure planet."

Deep fissures revealed

While nations were able to celebrate the formal approval of the deal, Cop30 also highlighted significant divisions in the only global process for tackling the climate crisis.

"Climate conferences are unanimity-required, and in a period of global disagreements, agreement is progressively challenging to reach," observed one global leader. "It would be dishonest to claim that these talks has delivered everything that is needed. The difference between where we are and what science demands remains alarmingly large."

When the world is to avert the gravest consequences of climate crisis, the international negotiations alone will prove insufficient.