CONCLUSION AND CRITICISMS COP 30
Key decisions:
• Absence of binding targets to end fossil fuels.
• Strengthen Multilateralism and accelerate the implementation of the Paris Agreement.
• For climate finance, a mobilization of at least US$1.3 trillion per year until 2035 was requested, and the need to operationalize and allocate funds according to the Baku-Belém Road Map was emphasized.
• Agreement to triple funding for climate change adaptation in the most vulnerable countries. Uncertainty regarding the financing mechanism.
• A mechanism was created to ensure a just energy transition to clean fuels, taking into account Indigenous communities, workers, and the most vulnerable populations.
• A voluntary commitment was approved to “discuss a roadmap” for the energy transition.
• Fifty-nine global indicators were adopted to measure progress in adapting to climate change, so that financing is more targeted and transparent.
• There were partnership initiatives between governments, the private sector, and local communities for the implementation of climate solutions (more resilient agriculture…).
• Voluntary pledges were made to reduce methane (CH4) emissions in the fossil fuel sector.
• Commitment by some countries to eliminate gas flaring by 2030.
• A “Global Implementation Accelerator” (G.I.A.) was launched to support countries in implementing their NDCs, nationally determined contributions, and adaptation plans.
• The “Belém 1.5 Mission” was established to monitor actions up to COP 32.
• A proposal for analysis was put forward for the alignment between international trade and climate.
Reviews:
• No firm commitments were included regarding the phasing out of fossil fuels.
• Fossil fuel–producing countries, such as Saudi Arabia, exerted strong pressure to ensure that there was no binding mention in the final COP text. The fossil lobby was very present and diverted the Summit from its main Purpose. Around 80 countries pushed in the opposite direction, including the countries of the European Union.
• There was no clarity regarding adaptation financing.
• There is a lack of ambitious actions and clarity concerning a just transition.
Critical voices, coming from Scientists and Activists, are making themselves heard.
COP 30 had a moral choice to make: ‘Protect citizens and life’ or ‘protect the fossil fuel industry.’
The opportunity to establish a clear and gradual plan to lead us towards decarbonization was lost.
This COP was not connected with the reality in which the planet currently finds itself, nor with the ambition to limit warming to +1.5ºC; this goal is moving away from our achievable horizon due to the insufficient measures taken so far.
This was the essential objective of this summit, considering the current balance and the warnings of scientists. Although there were positive aspects, this is essentially a COP of ‘good intentions’ but with little clarity regarding financing and the operationalization of mechanisms.
Hope of reversing the consequences of the constant carbonization of the planet has been frustrated, and the Planet will, indifferently, continue to heat up more and more, with its consequences becoming increasingly visible and destructive.
The criticism is unanimous: Scientists, NGOs, Activists, the Climate Observatory, and others complain that this COP fell far short of the urgency of the Planet.
It is up to us to Unite, to Fight, to Speak Out…
Human life cannot be played on the table of fossil industry interests!!!
References:
UNFCCC – official page
COP 30 final declaration
UN Climate Change Conference Belem Nov 2025.
SUPPORT THE CLIMATE TRUTH ALLIANCE!
JOIN OUR STRUGGLE!
climatetruthalliance@gmail.com
@Gabriela Delgado
