🔗 Share this article

As dawn was breaking the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, delegates remained trapped in a windowless conference room, uncertain whether it was day or night. For more than 12 hours in strained discussions, with dozens ministers representing various coalitions of countries including the poorest nations to the most developed economies.

Patience wore thin, the air thick as sweaty delegates acknowledged the grim reality: they were unlikely to achieve a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The latest global climate summit hovered near the brink of complete breakdown.

The sticking point: Fossil fuels

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

However, during nearly three decades of yearly climate meetings, the crucial requirement to cease fossil fuel use has been mentioned only once – in a resolution made two years ago at previous UN climate talks to "transition away from fossil fuels". Officials from the Gulf states, Russia, and several other countries were determined this would not occur another time.

Mounting support for change

Meanwhile, a increasing coalition of countries were just as committed that advancement on this issue was vitally needed. They had created a plan that was gathering expanding support and made it evident they were willing to hold firm.

Less wealthy nations urgently needed to move forward on securing funding support to help them cope with the increasingly severe impacts of environmental crises.

Breaking point

By the early hours of Saturday, some delegates were willing to withdraw and trigger failure. "It was on the edge for us," remarked one energy minister. "I was prepared to walk away."

The critical development came through talks with Saudi Arabia. Around 6am, senior representatives split from the main group to hold a private conversation with the chief Saudi negotiator. They encouraged language that would subtly reference the global commitment to "shift from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Surprising consensus

As opposed to explicitly mentioning fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the UAE consensus". Following reflection, the Saudi delegation surprisingly accepted the wording.

The room expressed relief. Applause rang out. The settlement was completed.

With what became known as the "Amazon accord", the world took another small step towards the systematic reduction of fossil fuels – a faltering, inadequate step that will scarcely affect the climate's continued progression towards disaster. But nevertheless a significant departure from complete stagnation.

Key elements of the agreement

• In addition to the indirect reference in the official document, countries will commence creating a roadmap to systematically reduce fossil fuels
• This will be primarily a non-binding program led by Brazil that will deliver findings next year
• Addressing the required reductions in greenhouse gas emissions to remain below the 1.5C limit was likewise deferred to next year
• Developing countries obtained a tripling to $120bn of regular financial support to help them adapt to 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

Varied responses

As the world teeters on the brink of climate "irreversible changes" that could eliminate habitats and plunge whole regions into disorder, the agreement was far from the "significant advancement" needed.

"Negotiators delivered some modest progress in the proper course, but given the scale of the climate crisis, it has not met the occasion," stated one policy director.

This imperfect deal might have been all that was possible, given the international tensions – including a US president who ignored the talks and remains wedded to oil and coal, the rising tide of rightwing populism, continuing wars in multiple regions, unacceptable degrees of inequality, and global economic volatility.

"Fossil fuel corporations – the oil and gas companies – were at last in the crosshairs at these negotiations," notes one environmental advocate. "We have crossed a threshold on that. The political space is available. Now we must convert it to a genuine solution to a safer world."

Significant divisions revealed

While nations were able to welcome the formal approval of the deal, Cop30 also highlighted major disagreements in the primary worldwide framework for confronting the climate crisis.

"Climate conferences are unanimity-required, and in a era of geopolitical divides, consensus is increasingly difficult to reach," commented one senior UN official. "We should not suggest that this summit has delivered everything that is needed. The disparity between where we are and what evidence necessitates remains concerningly substantial."

When the world is to avert the worst ravages of climate collapse, the international negotiations alone will fall far short.