🔗 Share this article

As dawn illuminated the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, delegates remained confined in a windowless conference room, oblivious whether it was day or night. Having spent 12 hours in tense discussions, with dozens ministers representing various coalitions of countries from the most vulnerable nations to the most developed economies.

Tempers were short, the air heavy as weary delegates acknowledged the grim reality: they were unlikely to achieve a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The international climate negotiations hovered near the brink of total collapse.

The sticking point: Fossil fuels

Research has demonstrated for more than a century, the CO2 emissions produced by burning fossil fuels is increasing temperatures on our planet to dangerous levels.

Yet, during nearly three decades of annual climate meetings, the essential necessity to cease fossil fuel use has been referenced only once – in a decision made two years ago at previous UN climate talks to "shift from fossil fuels". Representatives from the Gulf states, Russia, and a few other countries were resolved this would not occur another time.

Mounting support for change

At the same time, a growing number of countries were just as committed that movement on this issue was crucially important. They had formulated a initiative that was attracting growing support and made it evident they were ready to stand their ground.

Emerging economies urgently needed to advance on securing financial assistance to help them manage the already disastrous impacts of extreme weather.

Critical moment

By the early hours of Saturday, some delegates were willing to leave and cause breakdown. "The situation was precarious for us," remarked one national delegate. "I was prepared to walk away."

The pivotal moment happened through talks with Saudi Arabia. Shortly after 6am, key negotiators left the main group to hold a private conversation with the chief Saudi negotiator. They encouraged language that would subtly reference the global commitment to "transition away from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Unexpected agreement

Rather than explicitly referencing fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the UAE consensus". Upon deliberation, the Saudi delegation unforeseeably accepted the wording.

Delegates expressed relief. Celebrations began. The settlement was completed.

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

Major components of the agreement

• In addition to the subtle acknowledgment in the legally agreed text, countries will commence creating a framework to phase out fossil fuels
• This will be primarily a voluntary initiative led by Brazil that will report back next year
• Addressing the required reductions in greenhouse gas emissions to remain below the 1.5C limit was also put off to next year
• Developing countries obtained a tripling to $120bn of annual finance to help them manage the impacts of environmental crises
• This funding will not be completely provided until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "just transition mechanism" to help people working in fossil fuel sectors move toward the clean economy

Varied responses

As the world teeters on the brink of climate "critical thresholds" that could eliminate habitats and force whole regions into chaos, the agreement was insufficient as the "major breakthrough" needed.

"The summit provided some modest progress in the correct path, but in light of the magnitude of the climate crisis, it has not met the occasion," cautioned one environmental analyst.

This limited deal might have been the best attainable, given the international tensions – including a American leader who shunned the talks and remains committed to oil and coal, the increasing presence of nationalist politics, continuing wars in various areas, extreme measures of inequality, and global economic uncertainty.

"The climate arsonists – the oil and gas companies – were finally in the focus at the climate summit," says one environmental advocate. "There is no turning back on that. The platform is accessible. Now we must turn it into a genuine solution to a safer world."

Significant divisions revealed

Even as nations were able to celebrate the formal approval of the deal, Cop30 also exposed deep fissures in the primary worldwide framework for tackling the climate crisis.

"Climate conferences are agreement-dependent, and in a time of international tensions, consensus is increasingly difficult to reach," stated one international diplomat. "It would be dishonest to claim that this summit has delivered everything that is needed. The difference between our current position and what research requires remains dangerously wide."

Should the world is to avoid the most severe impacts of climate crisis, the UN climate talks alone will fall far short.