🔗 Share this article

While dawn crept over the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, delegates remained stuck in a windowless conference room, uncertain whether it was day or night. For more than 12 hours in tense discussions, with scores ministers representing various coalitions of countries ranging from the least developed nations to the richest economies.

Tempers were short, the air thick as sweaty delegates acknowledged the sobering reality: they were unlikely to achieve a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The international climate negotiations hovered near the brink of complete breakdown.

The central impasse: Fossil fuels

Research has demonstrated for well over a century, the CO2 emissions produced by consuming fossil fuels is warming our planet to dangerous levels.

Yet, during over three decades of annual climate meetings, the urgent need to halt fossil fuel use has been referenced only once – in a resolution made two years ago at previous UN climate talks to "transition away from fossil fuels". Representatives from the Arab Group, Russia, and several other countries were resolved this would not be repeated.

Increasing pressure for change

Simultaneously, a increasing coalition of countries were equally determined that advancement on this issue was crucially important. They had formulated a initiative that was attracting growing support and made it clear they were prepared to stand their ground.

Developing countries strongly sought to advance on securing financial assistance to help them address the increasingly severe impacts of extreme weather.

Turning point

By the early hours of Saturday, some delegates were prepared to walk out and force a collapse. "The situation was precarious for us," stated one national delegate. "I was ready to walk away."

The critical development happened through talks with Saudi Arabia. Around 6am, key negotiators separated from the main group to hold a closed-door meeting with the lead Saudi negotiator. They urged language that would obliquely recognise the global commitment to "transition away from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Surprising consensus

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

The room expressed relief. Cheers erupted. The agreement was done.

With what became known as the "Amazon accord", the world took a modest advance towards the gradual elimination of fossil fuels – a uncertain, limited step that will minimally impact the climate's continued progression towards crisis. But nevertheless a notable change from complete stagnation.

Key elements of the agreement

• Complementing the indirect reference in the formal agreement, countries will begin work a framework to systematically reduce fossil fuels
• This will be largely a voluntary initiative led by Brazil that will deliver findings next year
• Addressing the required reductions in greenhouse gas emissions to stay within the 1.5C limit was likewise deferred to next year
• Developing countries secured a significant expansion to $120bn of annual finance to help them cope with the impacts of climate disasters
• This amount will not be delivered in full until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "just transition mechanism" to help people working in high-carbon industries transition to the renewable industry

Differing opinions

As the world hovers near the brink of climate "irreversible changes" that could destroy ecosystems and plunge whole regions into disorder, the agreement was insufficient as the "major breakthrough" needed.

"The summit provided some small advances in the proper course, but given the severity of the climate crisis, it has fallen short of the occasion," stated one climate expert.

This limited deal might have been all that was possible, given the political challenges – including a American leader who shunned the talks and remains committed to oil and coal, the growing influence of rightwing populism, continuing wars in multiple regions, unacceptable degrees of inequality, and global economic volatility.

"Major polluters – the energy conglomerates – were ultimately in the focus at these negotiations," says one climate activist. "We have crossed a threshold on that. The opportunity is available. Now we must convert it to a genuine solution to a safer world."

Major disagreements revealed

While nations were able to applaud the gavelling through of the deal, Cop30 also revealed significant divisions in the only global process for tackling the climate crisis.

"UN negotiations are agreement-dependent, and in a period of international tensions, unanimity is increasingly difficult to reach," stated one international diplomat. "I cannot pretend that Cop30 has provided all that is needed. The disparity between our current position and what research requires remains alarmingly large."

When the world is to avert the most severe impacts of climate collapse, the UN climate talks alone will not be nearly enough.