🔗 Share this article

While dawn illuminated the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, delegates remained trapped in a windowless conference room, unaware whether it was day or night. Having spent 12 hours in difficult discussions, with dozens ministers representing various coalitions of countries ranging from the poorest nations to the most developed economies.

Frustration mounted, the air stifling as sweaty delegates faced up to the harsh reality: there would not be a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The 30th UN climate conference teetered on the brink of abject failure.

The sticking point: Fossil fuels

As science has told us for well over a century, the CO2 emissions produced by utilizing fossil fuels is increasing temperatures on our planet to critical levels.

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

Growing momentum for change

Meanwhile, a increasing coalition of countries were similarly resolved that advancement on this issue was urgently necessary. They had created a initiative that was gathering expanding support and made it apparent they were ready to stand their ground.

Less wealthy nations urgently needed to advance on securing funding support to help them manage the increasingly severe impacts of extreme weather.

Critical moment

By the early hours of Saturday, some delegates were ready to walk out and force a collapse. "It was on the edge for us," remarked one energy minister. "I was prepared 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 head Saudi negotiator. They urged wording that would indirectly acknowledge the global commitment to "transition away 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". After consideration, the Saudi delegation unexpectedly agreed to the wording.

The room collapsed into relief. Cheers erupted. The agreement was done.

With what became known as the "Brazil agreement", the world took a modest advance towards the gradual elimination of fossil fuels – a uncertain, limited step that will barely interrupt the climate's ongoing trajectory towards disaster. But nevertheless a important shift from absolute paralysis.

Major components of the agreement

• In addition to the indirect reference in the formal agreement, countries will commence creating a roadmap to systematically reduce fossil fuels
• This will be mostly a voluntary initiative led by Brazil that will report back next year
• Addressing the necessary cuts in greenhouse gas emissions to not exceed the 1.5C limit was likewise deferred to next year
• Developing countries obtained a threefold increase to $120bn of annual finance to help them manage the impacts of extreme weather
• This funding will not be completely provided until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "equitable change process" to help people working in fossil fuel sectors move toward the renewable industry

Mixed reactions

As the world teeters on the brink of climate "irreversible changes" that could destroy ecosystems and throw whole regions into disorder, the agreement was insufficient as the "major breakthrough" needed.

"Negotiators delivered some modest progress in the correct path, but given the magnitude of the climate crisis, it has not met the occasion," warned one environmental analyst.

This imperfect deal might have been the best attainable, given the international tensions – including a Washington administration who avoided the talks and remains wedded to oil and coal, the rising tide of conservative movements, continuing wars in various areas, unacceptable degrees of inequality, and global economic uncertainty.

"Major polluters – the fossil fuel giants – were ultimately in the focus at these negotiations," comments one environmental advocate. "This represents progress on that. The opportunity is accessible. Now we must convert it to a genuine solution to a more secure planet."

Deep fissures revealed

Although nations were able to welcome the formal approval of the deal, Cop30 also exposed major disagreements in the sole international mechanism for confronting the climate crisis.

"Climate conferences are consensus-based, and in a era of international tensions, agreement is progressively challenging to reach," observed one international diplomat. "I cannot pretend that this summit has delivered everything that is needed. The difference between our current position and what research requires remains dangerously wide."

Should the world is to avert the worst ravages of climate crisis, the international negotiations alone will not be nearly enough.