🔗 Share this article

As dawn illuminated the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, delegates remained stuck in a windowless conference room, unaware whether it was day or night. For more than 12 hours in strained discussions, with numerous ministers representing 17 groups of countries including the least developed nations to the richest economies.

Tempers were short, the air heavy as exhausted delegates faced up to the sobering reality: there would not be a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The latest global climate summit faced 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 heating up our planet to alarming levels.

Yet, during nearly three decades of annual climate meetings, the urgent need to stop fossil fuel use has been mentioned only once – in a agreement made two years ago at previous UN climate talks to "transition away from fossil fuels". Representatives from the Arab Group, Russia, and a few other countries were resolved this would not happen again.

Mounting support for change

Simultaneously, a increasing coalition of countries were equally determined that progress on this issue was vitally needed. They had created a initiative that was gathering increasing support and made it apparent they were prepared to dig in.

Less wealthy nations strongly sought to advance on securing funding support to help them cope with the growing impacts of extreme weather.

Breaking point

In the pre-dawn period of Saturday, some delegates were prepared to withdraw and force a collapse. "It was on the edge for us," stated one energy minister. "I considered to walk away."

The critical development came through negotiations with Saudi Arabia. Around 6am, key negotiators separated from the main group to hold a closed-door meeting with the chief Saudi negotiator. They encouraged language that would obliquely recognise the global commitment to "move beyond fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Unexpected agreement

Rather than explicitly referencing fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the UAE consensus". Following reflection, the Saudi delegation unforeseeably approved the wording.

Participants collapsed into relief. Applause rang out. The agreement was done.

With what became known as the "Brazil agreement", the world took an incremental move towards the systematic reduction of fossil fuels – a hesitant, insufficient step that will minimally impact the climate's continued progression towards disaster. But nevertheless a notable change from absolute paralysis.

Key elements of the agreement

• In addition to the subtle acknowledgment in the legally agreed text, countries will start developing a framework to systematically reduce fossil fuels
• This will be primarily a voluntary initiative led by Brazil that will report back next year
• Addressing the essential decreases in greenhouse gas emissions to not exceed the 1.5C limit was similarly postponed to next year
• Developing countries obtained a threefold increase to $120bn of yearly funding to help them manage the impacts of climate disasters
• This sum will not be fully available until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "just transition mechanism" to help people working in fossil fuel sectors shift to the clean economy

Varied responses

As the world hovers near the brink of climate "tipping points" that could devastate environments and throw whole regions into chaos, the agreement was not the "giant leap" needed.

"Negotiators delivered some baby steps in the proper course, but considering the scale of the climate crisis, it has failed to rise to the occasion," stated one climate expert.

This flawed deal might have been all that was possible, given the political challenges – including a American leader who shunned the talks and remains aligned with oil and coal, the increasing presence of conservative movements, continuing wars in various areas, extreme measures of inequality, and global economic instability.

"Fossil fuel corporations – the oil and gas companies – were ultimately in the spotlight at these negotiations," says one policy convener. "There is no turning back on that. The political space is open. Now we must turn it into a actual pathway to a safer world."

Major disagreements revealed

Even as nations were able to applaud the official adoption of the deal, Cop30 also revealed significant divisions in the sole international mechanism for addressing the climate crisis.

"UN negotiations are unanimity-required, and in a time of global disagreements, consensus is progressively challenging to reach," commented one international diplomat. "I cannot pretend that this summit has provided all that is needed. The disparity between present circumstances and what science demands remains alarmingly large."

When the world is to avoid the gravest consequences of climate collapse, the global discussions alone will not be nearly enough.