🔗 Share this article

While dawn illuminated the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, delegates remained confined in a enclosed conference room, uncertain whether it was day or night. They had been 12 hours in strained discussions, with dozens ministers representing 17 groups of countries from the least developed nations to the wealthiest economies.

Patience wore thin, the air thick as sweaty delegates faced up to the sobering reality: they would not reach a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The international climate negotiations teetered on the brink of abject failure.

The central impasse: Fossil fuels

As science has told us for well over a century, the carbon dioxide produced by burning fossil fuels is increasing temperatures on our planet to dangerous levels.

However, during more than three decades of regular climate meetings, the urgent need to stop fossil fuel use has been addressed only once – in a decision made two years ago at the Dubai climate summit to "transition away from fossil fuels". Officials from the Gulf states, Russia, and a few other countries were determined this would not be repeated.

Growing momentum for change

At the same time, a growing number of countries were equally determined that progress on this issue was crucially important. They had formulated a plan that was gathering increasing support and made it apparent they were willing to stand their ground.

Emerging economies desperately wanted to advance on securing funding support to help them manage the increasingly severe impacts of environmental crises.

Breaking point

By the early hours of Saturday, some delegates were willing to withdraw and trigger failure. "The situation was precarious for us," remarked one energy minister. "I was ready to walk away."

The critical development occurred through negotiations with Saudi Arabia. Shortly after 6am, key negotiators separated from the main group to hold a closed-door meeting with the chief Saudi negotiator. They encouraged text that would obliquely recognise 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". After consideration, the Saudi delegation surprisingly approved the wording.

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

With what became known as the "Belém political package", the world took an incremental move towards the gradual elimination of fossil fuels – a uncertain, limited step that will scarcely affect the climate's ongoing trajectory towards catastrophe. But nevertheless a important shift from total inaction.

Important aspects of the agreement

• Complementing the oblique commitment in the formal agreement, countries will begin work a framework to phase out fossil fuels
• This will be primarily a optional undertaking led by Brazil that will report back next year
• Addressing the required reductions in greenhouse gas emissions to remain below the 1.5C limit was likewise deferred to next year
• Developing countries secured a tripling to $120bn of regular financial support to help them manage the impacts of environmental crises
• This funding will not be completely provided until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "just transition mechanism" to help people working in fossil fuel sectors move toward the renewable industry

Mixed reactions

With global conditions approaches the brink of climate "critical thresholds" that could devastate environments and throw whole regions into disorder, the agreement was far from the "significant advancement" needed.

"The summit provided some small advances in the proper course, but given the magnitude of the climate crisis, it has not met the occasion," cautioned one climate expert.

This flawed deal might have been all that was possible, given the international tensions – including a US president who ignored the talks and remains aligned with oil and coal, the growing influence of rightwing populism, persistent fighting in multiple regions, intolerable levels of inequality, and global economic volatility.

"The climate arsonists – the oil and gas companies – were at last in the focus at Cop30," says one environmental advocate. "This represents progress on that. The platform is available. Now we must turn it into a genuine solution to a protected environment."

Deep fissures revealed

Even as nations were able to applaud the official adoption of the deal, Cop30 also revealed deep fissures in the only global process for confronting the climate crisis.

"Climate conferences are agreement-dependent, and in a period of international tensions, consensus is ever harder to reach," stated one international diplomat. "We should not suggest that these talks has delivered everything that is needed. The disparity between present circumstances and what science demands remains concerningly substantial."

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