🔗 Share this article

While dawn was breaking the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, representatives remained confined in a airless conference room, unaware whether it was day or night. For more than 12 hours in tense discussions, with numerous ministers representing multiple blocs of countries ranging from the least developed nations to the richest economies.

Frustration mounted, the air thick as sweaty delegates confronted the harsh reality: they were unlikely to achieve a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The 30th UN climate conference hovered near the brink of abject failure.

The central impasse: Fossil fuels

Scientific evidence has shown for more than a century, the CO2 emissions produced by burning fossil fuels is warming our planet to dangerous levels.

Yet, during more than three decades of regular climate meetings, the crucial requirement to cease fossil fuel use has been addressed only once – in a resolution made two years ago at previous UN climate talks to "shift from fossil fuels". Officials from the Gulf states, Russia, and a few other countries were resolved this would not be repeated.

Increasing pressure for change

At the same time, a increasing coalition of countries were just as committed that advancement on this issue was crucially important. They had created a initiative that was earning growing support and made it apparent they were ready to hold firm.

Less wealthy nations urgently needed to make progress on securing economic resources to help them address the already disastrous impacts of environmental crises.

Breaking point

In the pre-dawn period of Saturday, some delegates were willing to withdraw and force a collapse. "It was on the edge for us," commented one government representative. "I was prepared to walk away."

The critical development occurred through talks with Saudi Arabia. Shortly after 6am, senior representatives left the main group to hold a closed-door meeting with the lead Saudi negotiator. They urged text that would indirectly acknowledge the global commitment to "shift from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Unanticipated resolution

Rather than explicitly mentioning fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the previous commitment". Following reflection, the Saudi delegation unexpectedly agreed to the wording.

Delegates expressed relief. Applause rang out. The agreement was finalized.

With what became known as the "Amazon accord", the world took a modest advance towards the systematic reduction of fossil fuels – a hesitant, inadequate step that will minimally impact the climate's ongoing trajectory towards catastrophe. But nevertheless a important shift from complete stagnation.

Important aspects of the agreement

• Alongside the subtle acknowledgment in the legally agreed text, countries will start developing a roadmap to systematically reduce fossil fuels
• This will be largely a non-binding program led by Brazil that will deliver findings next year
• Addressing the essential decreases in greenhouse gas emissions to not exceed the 1.5C limit was also put off to next year
• Developing countries achieved a significant expansion to $120bn of yearly funding to help them cope with the impacts of extreme weather
• This amount will not be delivered in full until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "just transition mechanism" to help people working in fossil fuel sectors shift to the sustainable sector

Differing opinions

With global conditions approaches the brink of climate "critical thresholds" that could destroy ecosystems and throw whole regions into crisis, the agreement was not the "significant advancement" needed.

"Negotiators delivered some small advances in the correct path, but given the scale of the climate crisis, it has fallen short of the occasion," cautioned one policy director.

This limited deal might have been the maximum achievable, given the political challenges – including a US president who shunned the talks and remains aligned with oil and coal, the rising tide of rightwing populism, ongoing conflicts in various areas, unacceptable degrees of inequality, and global economic uncertainty.

"Fossil fuel corporations – the oil and gas companies – were finally in the focus at Cop30," says one policy convener. "There is no turning back on that. The political space is available. Now we must transform it into a genuine solution to a safer world."

Significant divisions revealed

Even as nations were able to welcome the formal approval of the deal, Cop30 also exposed deep fissures in the only global process for confronting the climate crisis.

"Climate conferences are unanimity-required, and in a period of international tensions, consensus is increasingly difficult to reach," stated one international diplomat. "I cannot pretend that these talks has provided all that is needed. The gap between present circumstances and what research requires remains concerningly substantial."

If the world is to avert the gravest consequences of climate crisis, the international negotiations alone will fall far short.