International climate negotiations in Belém have failed to secure new measures to address fossil fuels as the process wound to a close amid a storm of opposition and infighting.
The process closed on Saturday morning local time, (Sunday, in Australia) after negotiations on the final text stretched through the night and the final plenary was delayed before starting two hours late.
What had been framed as a “COP of Truth” and the “implementation COP” that would recognise the science and inspire hope in the process largely failed to deliver, with the COP30 President André Corrêa do Lago stripping out any mention of fossil fuels or the binding agreement for a phase out of oil, gas and coal from the final text.
This agreement was gavelled through despite the opposition of at least 80 countries and despite an eleventh hour challenge by Panama and Colombia over procedural concerns and the failure to mention a phaseout.
Acknowledging this failure, Lago announced in the final plenary that he would use the rest of his presidency to put together two roadmaps, one to stop deforestation and another to phase out fossil fuels. Neither were gavelled, meaning they were not included as a formal part of the COP process, but were voluntary undertakings.
“They will be led by science, and they will be inclusive,” he said. “With the spirit of the Mutirão, we will convene high level dialogs, gathering key international organisations, governments, from both producing and consuming countries, industry workers, scholars, civil society, and will report back to the COP.
“We will also benefit from the first international conference for the phase out of fossil shoes, scheduled to take place in April in Colombia.”
Whether or not these proposals amount to anything remains to be seen as their inclusion into the broader COP process depends on whether future Presidents ignore them, acknowledge them but take no further action or incorporate them at future meetings.
It ground to a halt when an objection by Colombia forced a lengthy suspension of the final plenary but was resolved on a technicality that meant issues raised by the two countries would be pushed forward to an upcoming meeting in Bonn, Germany later next year.
Following this, conflict delayed the process further with Russia and India, two countries along with Saudi Arabia who had been obstructive to the process throughout, attacking the South American countries and warmly thanking Lago for the outcome.
Intervening in Spanish, a Russian delegate accused the Latin American countries of behaving like children “who want to get their hands on all the sweets and stuff them down their throats”. India accused Colombia of extremism over its demands for a fossil fuel phase out.
On Thursday, Colombia announced the creation of a bloc of countries that would meet outside the COP process to discuss the phase out of oil, gas and coal with the first meeting to be held in April next year – Australia among them.
The result at COP30 had little to show in the way of real advancement. It created the Just Transition Work Program (JTWP), securing more scrutiny of fossil fuel producers, some money for forests and adaptation, and a new emphasis on trade and implementation.
However, the binding commitment countries undertook in Dubai at COP28 in 2023 to work towards phasing out fossil fuels in line with the best available science – wording that was suggested by Australia and the Pacific – was only referenced twice in the document and treated as a voluntary commitment.
The result brings to a close a dramatic process where delegates struggled with flooding, fire, heat. The United States, responsible for around 15% of the world’s emissions, was absent from COP30 but its negotiators were still present under badges from other organisations, and China took up an increasingly prominent role.
Climate scientist Bill Hare and founder of Climate Analytics said the outcome showed “the traditional COP model is under serious strain in a fractured, multipolar world”, particularly from countries heavily associated with “fossil fuel interests”.
“The talk of the COP has been to ‘embrace science’ and move away from negotiations to focus on implementation,” he said. “However, there is a massive risk that the outcome of COP30 will just leave countries to ‘implement’ policies that will warm the Earth to 2.6°C.
“There is no point in ‘embracing the science’ if it’s not acted on, just as there is no point agreeing to global energy goals if they’re not implemented.”
Denise Cauchi, CEO of Climate Action Network Australia said that notwithstanding the outcome, “huge momentum” had built throughout the conference.
“Australia’s Climate Minister Chris Bowen now has his priorities clearly set out for him in the lead up to COP31: deal with the cause of dangerous overheating at the source – coal, oil and gas – and deliver climate finance to enable transition for all,” he said.
Speaking at a press conference after the plenary with his Turkish and Pacific delegates acknowledged that his role as COP President for negotiations would be challenging in the current global political environment.
“This won’t be an easy negotiation, COP31,” Bowen said. “No one should pretend it will be. In one way that’s why I’m looking forward to it so much because hard negotiations can lead to very good outcomes as recent days have shown.”
When the text of the arrangement was published on Friday outlining the division of responsibilities around hosting COP31, there was some suggestion in international media that Australia had negotiated itself a weaker role in the process than it first represented.
Dean Bialek, a former climate negotiator said the artful vagaries of diplomatic language and convention were easily misunderstood, and Australia had actually managed to take control of the most important functions of the COP Presidency.
“It’s a significant role,” Bialek said. “It’s a very disappointing outcome, and many in Australia will see it as a significant step back from the original intention and expectation.
“That being said, the way that the partnership document is constructed, I think, makes it pretty clear that Chris Bowen will have a pretty much unfettered authority.”
There was also some suggestion that if it works, the hybrid model could prove beneficial. Vanuatu’s Minister for Climate Change, speaking alongside Bowen and counterparts from Palau and the Solomon Islands described it as “unique” and “unprecedented”.
“I believe there will be many more to come because it is a great model, especially for smaller countries who can’t afford to host a COP but would like to be involved in the agenda setting which for us is the most important thing,” he said.
