🔗 Share this article

As dawn was breaking the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, representatives remained trapped in a windowless conference room, unaware whether it was day or night. For more than 12 hours in strained discussions, with dozens ministers representing 17 groups of countries including the most vulnerable nations to the richest economies.

Frustration mounted, the air thick as weary delegates acknowledged the grim reality: they were unlikely to achieve a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The 30th UN climate conference teetered on the brink of abject failure.

The sticking point: Fossil fuels

Research has demonstrated for well over a century, the CO2 emissions produced by burning fossil fuels is warming our planet to dangerous levels.

Yet, during more than three decades of yearly climate meetings, the urgent need to stop fossil fuel use has been referenced only once – in a decision made two years ago at Cop28 to "shift from fossil fuels". Representatives from the Arab Group, Russia, and a few other countries were determined this would not be repeated.

Increasing pressure for change

Simultaneously, a growing number of countries were similarly resolved that advancement on this issue was crucially important. They had created a proposal that was gathering growing support and made it clear they were willing to hold firm.

Emerging economies desperately wanted to advance on securing economic resources to help them address the increasingly severe impacts of environmental crises.

Critical moment

In the pre-dawn period of Saturday, some delegates were willing to leave and cause breakdown. "It was on the edge for us," commented one energy minister. "I considered to walk away."

The pivotal moment happened through negotiations with Saudi Arabia. Shortly after 6am, senior representatives split from the main group to hold a closed-door meeting with the chief Saudi negotiator. They urged text that would indirectly acknowledge the global commitment to "shift from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Unexpected agreement

As opposed to explicitly referencing fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the previous commitment". Following reflection, the Saudi delegation surprisingly approved the wording.

Delegates collapsed into relief. Applause rang out. The settlement was done.

With what became known as the "Brazil agreement", the world took an incremental move towards the gradual elimination of fossil fuels – a uncertain, limited step that will minimally impact the climate's continued progression towards disaster. But nevertheless a important shift from absolute paralysis.

Key elements of the agreement

• In addition to the indirect reference in the legally agreed text, countries will commence creating a roadmap to gradually eliminate fossil fuels
• This will be largely a voluntary initiative led by Brazil that will provide updates next year
• Addressing the necessary cuts in greenhouse gas emissions to stay within the 1.5C limit was similarly postponed to next year
• Developing countries achieved a tripling to $120bn of yearly funding to help them cope with the impacts of extreme weather
• This funding will not be completely provided until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "fair adjustment program" to help people working in polluting businesses move toward the renewable industry

Differing opinions

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

"Negotiators delivered some modest progress in the proper course, but in light of the magnitude of the climate crisis, it has not met the occasion," stated one climate expert.

This flawed deal might have been the maximum achievable, given the geopolitical headwinds – including a Washington administration who avoided the talks and remains committed to oil and coal, the growing influence of nationalist politics, ongoing conflicts in multiple regions, extreme measures of inequality, and global economic volatility.

"The climate arsonists – the fossil fuel giants – were ultimately in the crosshairs at these negotiations," says one policy convener. "We have crossed a threshold on that. The political space is accessible. Now we must turn it into a real fire escape to a safer world."

Deep fissures revealed

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

"Climate conferences are consensus-based, and in a period of global disagreements, consensus is ever harder to reach," observed one senior UN official. "I cannot pretend that this summit has delivered everything that is needed. The gap between our current position and what science demands remains dangerously wide."

When the world is to avoid the most severe impacts of climate collapse, the global discussions alone will not be nearly enough.