🔗 Share this article

While dawn crept over the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, negotiators remained trapped in a enclosed conference room, oblivious whether it was day or night. They had been 12 hours in difficult discussions, with scores ministers representing 17 groups of countries including the most vulnerable nations to the wealthiest economies.

Tempers were short, the air heavy as weary delegates confronted the harsh reality: they would not reach a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The 30th UN climate conference faced the brink of total collapse.

The major obstacle: Fossil fuels

Scientific evidence has shown for more than a century, the greenhouse gases produced by utilizing fossil fuels is warming our planet to alarming levels.

Yet, during nearly three decades of regular climate meetings, the urgent need to stop fossil fuel use has been addressed only once – in a agreement made two years ago at the Dubai climate summit to "shift from fossil fuels". Officials from the Middle Eastern nations, Russia, and multiple other countries were determined this would not be repeated.

Increasing pressure for change

At the same time, a expanding group of countries were just as committed that movement on this issue was vitally needed. They had created a proposal that was gathering expanding support and made it apparent they were willing to hold firm.

Developing countries strongly sought to advance on securing financial assistance to help them cope with the growing impacts of environmental crises.

Breaking point

During the night of Saturday, some delegates were ready to walk out and trigger failure. "It was on the edge for us," remarked one national delegate. "I considered to walk away."

The pivotal moment happened through talks with Saudi Arabia. Shortly after 6am, senior representatives separated from the main group to hold a confidential discussion with the chief Saudi negotiator. They encouraged wording that would indirectly acknowledge the global commitment to "move beyond fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Surprising consensus

Rather than explicitly referencing fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the UAE consensus". Upon deliberation, the Saudi delegation unforeseeably accepted the wording.

Delegates showed visible relief. Cheers erupted. The deal was completed.

With what became known as the "Brazil agreement", the world took another small step towards the phaseout of fossil fuels – a hesitant, inadequate step that will minimally impact the climate's steady march towards disaster. But nevertheless a notable change from absolute paralysis.

Important aspects of the agreement

• Complementing the oblique commitment in the official document, countries will start developing a framework to gradually eliminate fossil fuels
• This will be largely a optional undertaking led by Brazil that will report back next year
• Addressing the required reductions in greenhouse gas emissions to stay within the 1.5C limit was also put off to next year
• Developing countries secured a threefold increase to $120bn of annual finance to help them manage the impacts of climate disasters
• This funding will not be fully available until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "equitable change process" to help people working in high-carbon industries transition to the clean economy

Differing opinions

With global conditions teeters on the brink of climate "irreversible changes" that could destroy ecosystems and force whole regions into crisis, the agreement was not the "major breakthrough" needed.

"Negotiators delivered some small advances in the right direction, but given the severity of the climate crisis, it has fallen short of the occasion," cautioned one policy director.

This limited deal might have been all that was possible, given the political challenges – including a Washington administration who avoided the talks and remains wedded to oil and coal, the rising tide of nationalist politics, persistent fighting in multiple regions, unacceptable degrees of inequality, and global economic instability.

"The climate arsonists – the oil and gas companies – were finally in the focus at Cop30," notes one environmental advocate. "We have crossed a threshold on that. The opportunity is open. Now we must turn it into a actual pathway to a protected environment."

Major disagreements revealed

While nations were able to celebrate the gavelling through of the deal, Cop30 also revealed deep fissures in the sole international mechanism for confronting the climate crisis.

"Climate conferences are unanimity-required, and in a era of international tensions, agreement is progressively challenging to reach," commented one global leader. "We should not suggest that Cop30 has provided all that is needed. The gap between present circumstances and what evidence necessitates remains dangerously wide."

If the world is to avert the most severe impacts of climate crisis, the international negotiations alone will fall far short.