Banner photo: “Closing Plenary” by UNclimatechange, CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

COP30 ended, as expected with a whimper, with the wishes of the vast majority of the world’s countries’ desires being frustrated by opposition from the petrostates. Prior to its opening, COP30 was being hailed as the moment of truth and action. It was the COP of implementation, the COP to copper fasten the protection of the rainforest and the COP to provide a roadmap for the elimination of fossil fuels. Despite the best efforts of the President, who did a lot of groundwork in advance of the meeting, none of these projected outcomes were evident to any extent in the final analysis.

At 3am of Thursday, the Presidency published the first draft of a final agreement. Even then it was clear that it was a document that reflected the least common denominator, designed to offend no one, essentially a continuation of the status quo. This was quickly rejected by most of the parties, including the EU and most countries of the global south. Intense overnight negotiations produced a revised document, but still the main objectives of the COP were stifled. For the EU, additional finance for adaptation was offered, but still the impasse continued.

The final plenary to approve the outcome was a feisty affair. Most of the criticism of the Brazilian chair came from his fellow South American countries. Among the most vociferous was Colombia which raised cheers throughout the hall for its damning indictment of the absence of a plan for fossil fuel phase out. 

What for this writer was most telling in the final plenary was the silence of China. Indeed, the silence of the world’s biggest greenhouse gas polluter was clearly a strategic move. In the absence of the US, many looked to China to provide leadership. But China rides two horses simultaneously: one as a major and increasingly developed member of the global north, with per capita emissions significantly greater than the EU, and secondly as a result of its history as de facto leader of the Group of 77 developing nations. This conflict of interests meant China kept a low key throughout the COP. To make matters worse, the alternative leadership people hoped for from the EU was also absent. Internal divisions within Europe led by the far right wing populist party of Georgia Meloni of Italy and the coal based economy of Poland contrived to scupper the efforts of the EU to present a united front almost to the end of the conference. Into this vacuum of leadership the countries wanting a ‘no-score draw’ held the line.

The real winner from COP30 sits in the Oval Office. Prior to the event, President Trump welcomed Mohammed bin Salman to Washington. No doubt he would have been pleased with the Saudi performance at COP. Once again the highly-skilled Saudi team were effective in removing any mention of fossil fuels in the final agreement. Of course, they were aided by other petrostates such as Russia and the UAE, but having a COP outcome on implementing the pledges made at Paris 10 years ago without involving mention of fossil fuels is essentially meaningless.

The COP President, André Corrêa do Lago, was clearly under pressure, and matters were made worse by an angry intervention by Colombia which claimed a point of order had been missed by him before gavelling through an agreement. This resulted in a suspension of the plenary while lawyers and others discussed how to proceed. Eventually it was decided to uphold the previous decision, something that killed off the last hope of prolonging the negotiations towards a more sensible outcome. The President claimed his lack of sleep and advanced years were to blame for the oversight and offered to develop new wording under his individual authority for consideration in coming months. Naturally the Saudi delegation jumped in quickly to obtain a confirmation that no revision of the decision would be attempted over the next year.

It is clear that Cop30 failed to signal the end of the fossil fuel age and provided no convincing roadmap to end to deforestation. But there was no walkout and 194 countries are still talking to each other. Perhaps one of the optimistic outcomes is a plan for a global conference being organised by Colombia and the Netherlands next year to gain commitments from the countries committed to developing a plan for the phase out of fossil fuels. In a sense this represents the best way forward, perhaps leading to the inevitable Fossil Fuel Non Proliferation Treaty. It is also an indictment of the failure of the COP process itself. Once again the clamour for reform surfaced at the commencement of the conference. Voting, agenda simplification, a focus on delivering the NDCs – all were briefly discussed and came to nothing. There is no doubt COP has become a jamboree and is clearly not fit for purpose in its present form. But what to replace it with is not at all clear.

On an optimistic note some progress was made in other areas. Countries agreed to a a tripling of adaptation finance by 2035. A good compromise was also reached on Loss and Damage finance. Brazil, China and the UK also co-led a summit on methane, pledging to “accelerate global action” on non-CO2 greenhouse gases. But the overall lack of progress on phasing out fossil fuels was the defining memory of this COP.

As many will be aware there was a fire in the COP venue on Thursday. It resulted in all the national pavilions being closed and the side events within them being cancelled. But what was striking was the way in which the authorities got the blaze under control and evacuated tens of thousands of delegates smoothly and efficiently. Participants from all nations cooperated and helped each other. This was an emergency response. Pity this spirit of collective unity did not spill over into addressing the climate issues the next day. But then again maybe climate is not an emergency, or is it? Perhaps we should ask our politicians.

---

Emeritus Professor John Sweeney has been a member of the Geography Department at Maynooth University since 1978. He contributed to the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007. He has published over 100 scientific papers and authored/ edited/co-authored 4 texts on various aspects of climatology and climate change in Ireland. He has served as President of the Irish Meteorological Society, the Geographical Society of Ireland and An Taisce, the National Trust for Ireland. He has been Editor, Treasurer, Secretary of several national associations as well as being the Irish representative on a number of European academic bodies. He has been involved in a number of international research projects and has led a number of nationally funded research projects examining various aspects of climate change in Ireland