🔗 Share this article

When dawn illuminated the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, delegates remained trapped in a windowless conference room, oblivious whether it was day or night. They had been 12 hours in tense discussions, with numerous ministers representing various coalitions of countries ranging from the least developed nations to the most developed economies.

Frustration mounted, the air thick as exhausted delegates faced up to the grim reality: they would not reach 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 well over a century, the carbon dioxide produced by burning fossil fuels is warming our planet to dangerous levels.

Yet, during nearly three decades of regular climate meetings, the essential necessity to halt fossil fuel use has been referenced only once – in a agreement made two years ago at Cop28 to "transition away from fossil fuels". Officials from the Middle Eastern nations, Russia, and a few other countries were determined this would not happen again.

Increasing pressure 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 developed a initiative that was attracting expanding support and made it apparent they were willing to stand their ground.

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

Critical moment

In the pre-dawn period of Saturday, some delegates were willing to leave and force a collapse. "The situation was precarious for us," commented one government representative. "I was ready to walk away."

The critical development came through negotiations with Saudi Arabia. Shortly after 6am, key negotiators separated from the main group to hold a confidential discussion with the chief Saudi negotiator. They pressed text that would indirectly acknowledge the global commitment to "shift from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Unexpected agreement

As opposed to explicitly namechecking fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the UAE consensus". Upon deliberation, the Saudi delegation surprisingly agreed to the wording.

The room collapsed into relief. Applause rang out. The deal was finalized.

With what became known as the "Amazon accord", the world took another small step towards the gradual elimination of fossil fuels – a hesitant, insufficient step that will barely interrupt the climate's ongoing trajectory towards disaster. But nevertheless a significant departure from complete stagnation.

Major components of the agreement

• Complementing the subtle acknowledgment in the formal agreement, countries will begin work a plan to phase out fossil fuels
• This will be mostly a voluntary initiative led by Brazil that will report back next year
• Addressing the essential decreases in greenhouse gas emissions to not exceed the 1.5C limit was also put off to next year
• Developing countries secured a tripling to $120bn of annual finance to help them adapt to the impacts of climate disasters
• This funding will not be fully available until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "just transition mechanism" to help people working in high-carbon industries move toward the renewable industry

Mixed reactions

With global conditions approaches the brink of climate "tipping points" that could destroy ecosystems and force whole regions into chaos, the agreement was insufficient as the "giant leap" needed.

"The summit provided some small advances in the right direction, but in light of the magnitude of the climate crisis, it has not met the occasion," cautioned one climate expert.

This imperfect deal might have been the best attainable, given the political challenges – including a American leader who shunned the talks and remains aligned with oil and coal, the rising tide of rightwing populism, continuing wars in different locations, unacceptable degrees of inequality, and global economic volatility.

"The climate arsonists – the oil and gas companies – were at last in the crosshairs at the climate summit," says one climate activist. "We have crossed a threshold on that. The platform is open. Now we must convert it to a actual pathway to a safer world."

Major disagreements revealed

While nations were able to welcome the official adoption of the deal, Cop30 also exposed major disagreements in the sole international mechanism for confronting the climate crisis.

"Climate conferences are consensus-based, and in a period of international tensions, agreement is ever harder to reach," stated one international diplomat. "I cannot pretend that these talks has achieved complete success that is needed. The difference between present circumstances and what science demands remains concerningly substantial."

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