🔗 Share this article

When dawn illuminated the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, representatives remained stuck in a windowless conference room, uncertain whether it was day or night. Having spent 12 hours in tense discussions, with scores ministers representing various coalitions of countries ranging from the most vulnerable nations to the wealthiest economies.

Tempers were short, the air stifling as weary delegates faced up to the grim reality: they would not reach a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The 30th UN climate conference teetered on the brink of total collapse.

The central impasse: Fossil fuels

Scientific evidence has shown for nearly a century, the CO2 emissions produced by consuming fossil fuels is increasing temperatures on our planet to critical levels.

However, during over three decades of regular climate meetings, the urgent need to cease fossil fuel use has been addressed only once – in a decision made two years ago at previous UN climate talks to "shift from fossil fuels". Delegates from the Middle Eastern nations, Russia, and multiple other countries were determined this would not be repeated.

Increasing pressure for change

Meanwhile, a increasing coalition of countries were similarly resolved that advancement on this issue was vitally needed. They had developed a proposal that was gathering expanding support and made it apparent they were ready to stand their ground.

Emerging economies urgently needed to make progress on securing funding support to help them cope with the already disastrous impacts of climate disasters.

Critical moment

During the night of Saturday, some delegates were willing to walk out and cause breakdown. "It was on the edge for us," remarked one energy minister. "I considered to walk away."

The critical development happened through discussions with Saudi Arabia. Shortly after 6am, principal delegates split from the main group to hold a closed-door meeting with the chief Saudi negotiator. They encouraged language that would indirectly acknowledge the global commitment to "transition away from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Unanticipated resolution

Rather than explicitly namechecking fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the Dubai agreement". Upon deliberation, the Saudi delegation surprisingly agreed to the wording.

Participants expressed relief. Celebrations began. The agreement was done.

With what became known as the "Amazon accord", the world took another small step towards the gradual elimination of fossil fuels – a hesitant, inadequate step that will minimally impact the climate's continued progression towards catastrophe. But nevertheless a significant departure from total inaction.

Key elements of the agreement

• In addition to the indirect reference in the legally agreed text, countries will commence creating a plan to gradually eliminate fossil fuels
• This will be primarily a optional undertaking led by Brazil that will provide updates next year
• Addressing the required reductions in greenhouse gas emissions to not exceed the 1.5C limit was also put off to next year
• Developing countries obtained a significant expansion to $120bn of annual finance to help them cope with the impacts of climate disasters
• This amount 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 clean economy

Differing opinions

As the world hovers near the brink of climate "critical thresholds" that could destroy ecosystems and throw whole regions into chaos, the agreement was not the "major breakthrough" needed.

"Cop30 gave us some baby steps in the right direction, but considering the magnitude of the climate crisis, it has fallen short of the occasion," warned one environmental analyst.

This flawed deal might have been the maximum achievable, given the geopolitical headwinds – including a Washington administration who ignored the talks and remains aligned with oil and coal, the increasing presence of conservative movements, continuing wars in different locations, extreme measures of inequality, and global economic instability.

"The climate arsonists – the fossil fuel giants – were finally in the focus at these negotiations," says one environmental advocate. "We have crossed a threshold on that. The political space is open. Now we must convert it to a actual pathway to a safer world."

Significant divisions revealed

Even as nations were able to welcome the formal approval of the deal, Cop30 also revealed major disagreements in the primary worldwide framework for tackling the climate crisis.

"UN negotiations are agreement-dependent, and in a time of geopolitical divides, consensus is increasingly difficult to reach," stated one global leader. "We should not suggest that this summit has delivered everything that is needed. The disparity between where we are and what research requires remains dangerously wide."

If the world is to prevent the most severe impacts of climate breakdown, the global discussions alone will fall far short.