🔗 Share this article

When 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. They had been 12 hours in tense discussions, with numerous ministers representing multiple blocs of countries ranging from the most vulnerable nations to the wealthiest economies.

Patience wore thin, the air heavy as exhausted 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 abject failure.

The sticking point: Fossil fuels

As science has told us for well over a century, the carbon dioxide produced by consuming fossil fuels is heating up our planet to dangerous levels.

However, during more than three decades of annual climate meetings, the crucial requirement to cease fossil fuel use has been referenced only once – in a agreement made two years ago at Cop28 to "transition away from fossil fuels". Representatives from the Middle Eastern nations, Russia, and a few other countries were determined this would not occur another time.

Increasing pressure for change

Meanwhile, a growing number of countries were just as committed that advancement on this issue was vitally needed. They had developed a proposal that was earning growing support and made it clear they were prepared to hold firm.

Less wealthy nations desperately wanted to make progress on securing funding support to help them manage the growing impacts of climate disasters.

Turning point

During the night of Saturday, some delegates were prepared to walk out and cause breakdown. "We were close for us," remarked one government representative. "I was prepared to walk away."

The pivotal moment occurred through negotiations with Saudi Arabia. Near 6am, senior representatives separated from the main group to hold a private conversation with the lead Saudi negotiator. They pressed text that would indirectly acknowledge the global commitment to "transition away from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Surprising consensus

Instead of explicitly referencing fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the Dubai agreement". Upon deliberation, the Saudi delegation unexpectedly accepted the wording.

Participants expressed relief. Applause rang out. The settlement was done.

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

Key elements of the agreement

• Alongside the indirect reference in the formal agreement, countries will commence creating a plan to phase out fossil fuels
• This will be primarily a voluntary initiative led by Brazil that will provide updates next year
• Addressing the essential decreases in greenhouse gas emissions to stay within the 1.5C limit was similarly postponed to next year
• Developing countries secured a significant expansion to $120bn of regular financial support to help them cope with 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 polluting businesses transition to the sustainable sector

Varied responses

With global conditions approaches the brink of climate "critical thresholds" that could eliminate habitats and throw whole regions into crisis, the agreement was far from the "giant leap" needed.

"The summit provided some baby steps in the right direction, but considering the magnitude of the climate crisis, it has fallen short of the occasion," cautioned one policy director.

This flawed deal might have been all that was possible, given the geopolitical headwinds – including a US president who shunned the talks and remains committed to oil and coal, the rising tide of rightwing populism, continuing wars in different locations, unacceptable degrees of inequality, and global economic uncertainty.

"The climate arsonists – the energy conglomerates – were at last in the spotlight at these negotiations," comments one policy convener. "This represents progress on that. The platform is open. Now we must turn it into a genuine solution to a safer world."

Deep fissures revealed

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

"International summits are unanimity-required, and in a time of global disagreements, consensus is ever harder to reach," observed one senior UN official. "It would be dishonest to claim that Cop30 has provided all that is needed. The disparity between our current position and what science demands remains dangerously wide."

If the world is to avert the gravest consequences of climate collapse, the global discussions alone will fall far short.