COP30 begins with anti-fossil fuels tone but nothing concrete
Held just before COP30, which kicks off in Brazil today, the Leaders’ Summit pointed to fossil fuels, forests, and financing as priorities for the conference.
(Belem, Brazil) — Under the heat and humidity typical of the Amazon, COP30, the 30th United Nations climate conference, begins today in Belém. It follows the Leaders’ Summit, an event where leaders and national representatives align priority themes and set the tone for ambitions in the negotiations.
Considered a “political barometer,” the Leaders’ Summit is usually held simultaneously with COP30. Exceptionally this year, it took place on November 6th and 7th, almost a week before the conference, due to the accommodation crisis underway in the host city. At the end of the two days, three themes stood out as priorities: forests, financing, and fossil fuels.
Incisive speeches on fossil fuels marked the summit. At the opening, Brazilian President Lula da Silva stated that the world needs “roadmaps to fairly and strategically reverse deforestation and overcome dependence on fossil fuels.” Following this, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, António Guterres, stated that corporations are increasingly profiting from climate devastation.
For observers, it was unclear whether Lula would mention fossil fuels, especially given the authorisation granted to Petrobras to conduct oil exploration in the Amazon River estuary, announced weeks before COP30.
“Despite the contradictions, Lula managed to set a good tone for the conference,” said Natalie Unterstell, president of the Talanoa Institute, a Brazilian climate policy think-tank.
But the topic remains off the formal agenda of the negotiations. “The international community receives Lula’s speech as it receives Guterres’ speech: as information from a discourse, which we don’t yet see reflected in practice,” said John Wurdig, an energy transition manager at the Arayara International Institute.
Wurdig and other experts criticise President Lula’s rhetoric, according to which the profits of the fossil fuel industry will finance the energy transition. Besides worsening the climate crisis while delaying its solution, this rhetoric rarely materialises. In Brazil, only 0.06% of oil and gas revenues are allocated to this purpose.
On the one hand, the Brazilian president’s speeches are seen as an important political message. “The topic of fossil fuels is open for debate. If anyone wants to bring it up, they will have the backing of President Lula,” said Claudio Angelo, international policy coordinator at the Climate Observatory.
On the other hand, some consider it too little, too late. “The clear message is that there is no maturity or political awareness about the impacts of climate change,” said Karla Maass, advocacy advisor for the Climate Action Network Latin America. “If there were, we would already have a clear roadmap for moving away from fossil fuels on the table.”
Many announcements, little concrete action
Of the more than 140 delegations present at the Leaders’ Summit, only 57 included heads of state. Among the notable absences were the leaders of the three largest emitters of greenhouse gases: the United States, China, and India – although the latter two did send ministerial representatives.
Angelo says that because the summit was brought forward, there was a lack of monitoring by civil society, but even more “worrying were the Brazilian technical failures in the transmission of the event, which was cut off every time President Lula finished speaking,” he said.
One of the main announcements at the Leaders’ Summit was the launch of the Tropical Forests Forever Fund (TFFF), proposed by Brazil in 2023, during COP28 in Dubai. The mechanism proposes that countries be financially rewarded for preserved forest areas. Added to the US$1 billion announced by Brazil during New York Climate Week, the promised contributions reached US$5.5 billion.
“The TFFF’s diagnosis of the problem is correct: we need to value standing forests,” said Unterstell. Even so, she joins experts who expected more concrete announcements regarding climate finance.
“Financing is not limited to its own agenda. It will be present in all negotiating rooms,” says Maass. Like Unterstell, she points to Donald Trump’s return to the White House as a negative milestone.
Both believe that his cuts in international financial aid set the tone for COP30. “With the American withdrawal, the other countries were left in a difficult position,” said Unterstell.
The Leaders’ Summit also featured a series of other announcements: the Belém Commitment, which aims to quadruple the use of sustainable fuels by 2035, the Open Coalition on Regulated Carbon Markets, and declarations on Combating Environmental Racism and on Hunger, Poverty and People-Centered Climate Action.
“I understand that these are important issues, but these discussions overburden an already very complex agenda. Furthermore, they divert attention from the ‘white elephants’: the transition away from fossil fuels, climate finance, and the future of the Paris Agreement,” says Maass.
Two themes considered as parameters for success at COP30 were sidelined: the adaptation agenda and the gap between national climate targets and the Paris Agreement’s goal of limiting warming to 1.5°C. This was addressed in an “urgent call to action,” a document published on the conference’s official website.
According to Angelo, the approach was generic and weak, but well-structured around topics that demand attention—a positive sign. “There is a possible future for the Paris Agreement and for COP30,” says Angelo. “We are not defeated yet.”
(Writing by Amanda Magnani; editing by Sophie Davies)