🔗 Share this article

As dawn crept over the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, representatives remained confined in a windowless conference room, unaware whether it was day or night. Having spent 12 hours in difficult discussions, with scores ministers representing various coalitions of countries including the least developed nations to the most developed economies.

Patience wore thin, the air thick as sweaty delegates acknowledged the grim reality: they would not reach a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The 30th UN climate conference hovered near the brink of total collapse.

The sticking point: Fossil fuels

As science has told us for more than a century, the carbon dioxide produced by consuming fossil fuels is heating up our planet to dangerous levels.

Nevertheless, during nearly three decades of regular climate meetings, the urgent need to stop fossil fuel use has been mentioned only once – in a resolution made two years ago at previous UN climate talks to "transition away from fossil fuels". Delegates from the Gulf states, Russia, and a few other countries were adamant this would not occur another time.

Growing momentum for change

At the same time, a growing number of countries were just as committed that advancement on this issue was crucially important. They had formulated a proposal that was attracting expanding support and made it clear they were prepared to hold firm.

Emerging economies desperately wanted to move forward on securing economic resources to help them manage the already disastrous impacts of environmental crises.

Breaking point

In the pre-dawn period of Saturday, some delegates were prepared to walk out and trigger failure. "We were close for us," commented one energy minister. "I considered to walk away."

The breakthrough came through discussions with Saudi Arabia. Around 6am, key negotiators split from the main group to hold a closed-door meeting with the lead Saudi negotiator. They encouraged wording that would subtly reference the global commitment to "shift from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Surprising consensus

Rather than explicitly mentioning fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the Dubai agreement". Upon deliberation, the Saudi delegation unexpectedly approved the wording.

Delegates collapsed into relief. Cheers erupted. The agreement was completed.

With what became known as the "Belém political package", the world took an incremental move towards the gradual elimination of fossil fuels – a hesitant, limited step that will scarcely affect the climate's continued progression towards catastrophe. But nevertheless a notable change from absolute paralysis.

Important aspects of the agreement

• Complementing the indirect reference in the formal agreement, countries will start developing a framework to gradually eliminate fossil fuels
• This will be primarily a voluntary initiative led by Brazil that will report back 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 obtained a tripling to $120bn of annual finance to help them manage the impacts of extreme weather
• This sum will not be fully available until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "equitable change process" to help people working in fossil fuel sectors move toward the clean economy

Differing opinions

With global conditions hovers near the brink of climate "critical thresholds" that could eliminate habitats and plunge whole regions into chaos, the agreement was insufficient as the "major breakthrough" needed.

"Negotiators delivered some modest progress in the correct path, but given the severity of the climate crisis, it has failed to rise to the occasion," cautioned one environmental analyst.

This limited deal might have been the best attainable, given the political challenges – including a US president who avoided the talks and remains wedded to oil and coal, the rising tide of rightwing populism, continuing wars in various areas, extreme measures of inequality, and global economic volatility.

"The climate arsonists – the fossil fuel giants – were ultimately in the focus at Cop30," comments one environmental advocate. "There is no turning back on that. The opportunity is open. Now we must turn it into a genuine solution to a protected environment."

Major disagreements revealed

Although nations were able to welcome the formal approval of the deal, Cop30 also exposed significant divisions in the primary worldwide framework for confronting the climate crisis.

"Climate conferences are consensus-based, and in a period of global disagreements, consensus is increasingly difficult to reach," observed one international diplomat. "I cannot pretend that these talks has delivered everything that is needed. The difference between present circumstances and what science demands remains dangerously wide."

If the world is to avert the worst ravages of climate collapse, the global discussions alone will fall far short.