🔗 Share this article

When dawn crept over the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, representatives remained stuck in a enclosed conference room, uncertain whether it was day or night. They had been 12 hours in difficult discussions, with numerous ministers representing multiple blocs of countries from the poorest nations to the richest economies.

Frustration mounted, the air stifling as weary delegates confronted the grim reality: there would not be a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The 30th UN climate conference faced the brink of total collapse.

The sticking point: Fossil fuels

Research has demonstrated for more than a century, the CO2 emissions produced by utilizing fossil fuels is warming our planet to alarming levels.

However, during nearly three decades of regular climate meetings, the essential necessity to cease fossil fuel use has been referenced only once – in a decision made two years ago at Cop28 to "move beyond fossil fuels". Representatives from the Middle Eastern nations, Russia, and a few other countries were resolved this would not be repeated.

Growing momentum for change

Meanwhile, a expanding group of countries were just as committed that progress on this issue was crucially important. They had formulated a initiative that was earning expanding support and made it evident they were prepared to stand their ground.

Less wealthy nations urgently needed to make progress on securing funding support to help them cope with the already disastrous impacts of extreme weather.

Turning point

In the pre-dawn period of Saturday, some delegates were ready to leave and trigger failure. "The situation was precarious for us," commented one energy minister. "I was ready to walk away."

The breakthrough occurred through discussions with Saudi Arabia. Around 6am, key negotiators separated from the main group to hold a confidential discussion with the chief Saudi negotiator. They encouraged text that would subtly reference the global commitment to "shift from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Unanticipated resolution

Rather than explicitly referencing fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the Dubai agreement". Following reflection, the Saudi delegation surprisingly agreed to the wording.

Participants showed visible relief. Celebrations began. The settlement was completed.

With what became known as the "Brazil agreement", the world took a modest advance towards the systematic reduction of fossil fuels – a faltering, insufficient step that will minimally impact the climate's steady march towards catastrophe. But nevertheless a notable change from total inaction.

Key elements of the agreement

• Alongside the indirect reference in the formal agreement, countries will commence creating a roadmap to phase out fossil fuels
• This will be primarily a optional undertaking 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 secured a significant expansion to $120bn of yearly funding to help them adapt to the impacts of environmental crises
• This amount will not be delivered in full until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "fair adjustment program" to help people working in high-carbon industries shift to the sustainable sector

Differing opinions

With global conditions approaches the brink of climate "irreversible changes" that could devastate environments and force whole regions into crisis, the agreement was insufficient as the "giant leap" needed.

"Negotiators delivered some small advances in the proper course, but given the magnitude of the climate crisis, it has not met the occasion," stated one environmental analyst.

This flawed deal might have been all that was possible, given the international tensions – including a Washington administration who shunned the talks and remains wedded to oil and coal, the increasing presence of conservative movements, continuing wars in different locations, intolerable levels of inequality, and global economic instability.

"The climate arsonists – the energy conglomerates – were finally in the spotlight at these negotiations," notes one climate activist. "This represents progress on that. The platform is open. Now we must transform it into a actual pathway to a safer world."

Major disagreements revealed

Even as nations were able to welcome the formal approval of the deal, Cop30 also exposed deep fissures in the sole international mechanism for addressing the climate crisis.

"Climate conferences are unanimity-required, and in a time of geopolitical divides, unanimity is progressively challenging to reach," stated one global leader. "I cannot pretend that this summit has achieved complete success that is needed. The gap between present circumstances and what research requires remains alarmingly large."

When the world is to prevent the worst ravages of climate crisis, the international negotiations alone will fall far short.