COP30 Draft Removes 'Fossil Fuels' Language as Talks in Belém Reach Critical Stage

A draft agreement circulated at COP30 in Belém on Friday omits any reference to fossil fuels, despite an earlier draft that included a roadmap for a 'transition away from fossil fuels.' The omission has intensified diplomatic tensions as delegates rush to secure a final text.

COP30 brings together nearly 200 countries to negotiate collective action on climate change. Negotiators say delegations from Saudi Arabia and several other Gulf states, along with Russia and India—economies closely tied to fossil fuel production or heavy fossil fuel use—have pushed back against language that would explicitly curb fossil fuel consumption.

Some countries that favor keeping explicit fossil-fuel language in the text threatened to walk out of the talks, which have been under way for two weeks. In a coordinated move, Brazil, Britain and at least 27 other nations delivered a letter to the COP30 presidency warning they would block any final agreement that does not include a commitment to phase out fossil fuels.

"We express deep concern regarding the current proposal under consideration as a 'take it or leave it.' We cannot support an outcome that does not include a roadmap for implementing a just, orderly and equitable transition away from fossil fuels."

Observers point to COP28 in Dubai (2023), when leaders first agreed language endorsing a transition away from fossil fuels as part of a broader push to meet the Paris Agreement's goals. That COP28 language was widely seen as a milestone, but it stopped short of delivering a timeline or specific mechanisms to achieve full decarbonization. At COP29 the following year, parties failed to reconfirm a unified commitment to reach net-zero emissions, leaving momentum uneven.

Frustration is mounting among countries and campaigners pressing for a clear phaseout plan. Catherine Abreu, director of the International Climate Politics Hub, said negotiators pushing for stronger language are determined to secure an ambitious package before the conference ends.

"It's clear that a growing group won't leave Belém without an ambitious package deal," Abreu said. "The question is whether the Brazil presidency will choose to listen to them, with time running out on the meeting."

With the talks entering their final hours, outcomes range from a watered-down text acceptable to major fossil-fuel producers to a standoff that could delay any new global commitments. Negotiators and observers will be watching whether compromise language—such as references to 'transition' without naming fossil fuels—can bridge the gap between competing political and economic priorities.