🔗 Share this article

When dawn illuminated the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, representatives remained stuck in a enclosed conference room, uncertain whether it was day or night. Having spent 12 hours in difficult discussions, with numerous ministers representing 17 groups of countries including the most vulnerable nations to the wealthiest economies.

Frustration mounted, the air stifling as sweaty delegates confronted the sobering reality: they were unlikely to achieve a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The latest global climate summit hovered near the brink of complete breakdown.

The major obstacle: Fossil fuels

As science has told us for well over a century, the greenhouse gases produced by consuming fossil fuels is warming our planet to critical levels.

Nevertheless, during nearly three decades of regular climate meetings, the essential necessity to halt fossil fuel use has been mentioned only once – in a agreement made two years ago at the Dubai climate summit to "shift from fossil fuels". Officials from the Middle Eastern nations, Russia, and multiple other countries were determined this would not occur another time.

Mounting support for change

Simultaneously, a growing number of countries were similarly resolved that movement on this issue was urgently necessary. They had created a proposal that was attracting increasing support and made it clear they were willing to dig in.

Emerging economies desperately wanted to advance on securing funding support to help them cope with the already disastrous impacts of extreme weather.

Breaking point

In the pre-dawn period of Saturday, some delegates were ready to withdraw and force a collapse. "The situation was precarious for us," remarked one national delegate. "I was ready to walk away."

The breakthrough occurred through negotiations with Saudi Arabia. Near 6am, senior representatives separated from the main group to hold a closed-door meeting with the chief Saudi negotiator. They urged text that would indirectly acknowledge the global commitment to "transition away from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Unexpected agreement

Rather than explicitly mentioning fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the previous commitment". Upon deliberation, the Saudi delegation surprisingly accepted the wording.

The room showed visible relief. Celebrations began. The deal was done.

With what became known as the "Amazon accord", the world took a modest advance towards the systematic reduction of fossil fuels – a uncertain, inadequate step that will barely interrupt the climate's steady march towards disaster. But nevertheless a important shift from total inaction.

Major components of the agreement

• Alongside the oblique commitment in the official document, countries will start developing a roadmap to systematically reduce fossil fuels
• This will be largely a optional undertaking led by Brazil that will provide updates next year
• Addressing the necessary cuts in greenhouse gas emissions to remain below the 1.5C limit was similarly postponed to next year
• Developing countries achieved a threefold increase to $120bn of annual finance to help them adapt to the impacts of environmental crises
• This sum will not be delivered in full until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "equitable change process" to help people working in high-carbon industries move toward the renewable industry

Differing opinions

While our planet approaches the brink of climate "critical thresholds" that could devastate environments and force whole regions into disorder, the agreement was not the "significant advancement" needed.

"Negotiators delivered some small advances in the right direction, but in light of the severity of the climate crisis, it has not met the occasion," warned one climate expert.

This limited deal might have been the best attainable, given the international tensions – including a US president who avoided the talks and remains committed to oil and coal, the increasing presence of nationalist politics, persistent fighting in multiple regions, extreme measures of inequality, and global economic instability.

"The climate arsonists – the energy conglomerates – were ultimately in the spotlight at these negotiations," notes one policy convener. "We have crossed a threshold on that. The political space is available. Now we must convert it to a actual pathway to a protected environment."

Deep fissures revealed

Although nations were able to welcome the official adoption of the deal, Cop30 also highlighted significant divisions in the only global process for addressing the climate crisis.

"Climate conferences are unanimity-required, and in a period of global disagreements, consensus is increasingly difficult to reach," commented one senior UN official. "We should not suggest that Cop30 has provided all that is needed. The disparity between where we are and what research requires remains concerningly substantial."

Should the world is to avert the most severe impacts of climate breakdown, the international negotiations alone will fall far short.