COP30 ends in acrimony as developed nations push for fossil fuel phase-out – without promising funds

At the 30th Conference of the Parties of the United Nations’ Climate Change Conference in the Brazilian city of Belem, as diplomats negotiated behind closed doors, civil rights groups chanted “fossil fuels out”, holding a separate “people’s plenary” to express their anger at the slow progress by participants on making commitments on measures to slow climate change and mitigate its effects.

Among the protestors was Tariq Mustafa, a Palestinian from Gaza who has lost 77 members of his extended family in the conflict.

“We cannot greenwash genocide and bomb our way to a livable planet,” he said,

Mustafa was pointing out that the world spends $2.7 trillion a year on war but the funding from rich countries to developing countries to phase out fossil fuels – the main cause of global warming that is causing climate change – is not even a tenth of that.

It has long been an accepted principle that countries that have grown affluent over the decades by using carbon-intensive technologies should pay for developing countries to make the transition to clean energy and help them adapt to the effects of climate change that endanger human survival.

The 12-day conference – an annual forum for governments to negotiate measures to contain the climate crisis – ended on Saturday with participants divided, exposing the acrimony between rich and poor nations on climate action.

Fossil-fuel debate

While developed nations such as the United Kingdom, Germany and France pushed for a fossil fuel phase-out, developing countries, including India, China, Bolivia, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, advocated instead for a phase-down. They want fossil fuel use to be reduced but did not agree to eliminate it entirely since their economic growth depends heavily on coal and petrol.

These nations also demanded legally binding commitments from developed countries on climate finance that would make transitioning away from fossil fuels possible. Major differences remained, especially on a roadmap to phase out fossil fuels and on adaptation finance to help vulnerable countries cope with the impact of climate change – intensifying droughts and floods, among them.

The commitments that were agreed to at the end of COP30 fell short, critics say

“Adaptation is not a choice for developing countries and providing adaptation finance is a legal obligation of the developed countries,” said Suman Chandra, a director in the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy and a negotiator from India at the COP, at the closing plenary. “But over the last many years, we have seen attempts to dilute the legal obligations on adaptation finance.”

Instead, he said, the conference has seen requests for proposals that change commitments agreed in 2015 and which infringe on national sovereignties.

Voluntary roadmaps

COP President André Corrêa do Lago announced two voluntary roadmaps under his presidency – one on halting and reversing deforestation and another on transitioning away from fossil fuels in a just, orderly and equitable manner.

However, these roadmaps have no force under the United Nations framework convention as they were not formally adopted and were only supported by 90 of the 195 countries participating in COP30.

A negotiator told Scroll on condition of anonymity that developed nations which had used the planet’s carbon budget while building their economies, are wagging their finger at developing nations to phase out without paying their share. He added that India’s per-capita fossil fuel consumption is even lower than Ethiopia’s.

“India’s high tax rates on fossil fuels fund subsidies that help poor households access energy without relying on firewood, which causes deforestation,” he said. “This is not luxury, it is poverty eradication. Developing countries demand equity and social justice.”

Beyond the fight over fossil fuels, COP30 delivered mixed results in adaptation, Just Transition, and Loss and Damage – issues that determine how climate impacts are managed and the flow of climate finance from developed nations to developing ones to adapt to the effects of global warming.

Developing countries demanded a tripling of the finance to help them adapt to more extreme weather and rising sea levels to $120 billion a year by 2030, but this was pushed to 2035. While many wanted adaptation finance to be over and above the $300 billion climate finance provided by developed countries, which was decided last year at COP29 in Baku, the final text did not guarantee that.

Adaptation finance will help people in India cope with fast-rising climate risks – for instance, farmers who lost their crops this year to drought and floods.

‘A mirage’

A Just Transition mechanism – moving away from fossil fuels to renewable sources of energy – was agreed in the formal document, a step welcomed by both civil rights groups and countries. But the document does not guarantee any funding for this yet. The same for Loss and Damage that advanced the idea of including operational steps towards this goal but without any new finance.

“We leave Belém with a historic victory for people power, but a devastating failure of political will from the Global North to deliver climate ambition and finance,” said climate activist Harjeet Singh, the founding director of Satat Sampada Climate Foundation. “Without a concrete commitment to robust public funding, the transition to a greener future remains a mirage.”

As negotiations dragged on, members of civil rights groups from Sudan, Palestine, and other conflict-affected regions continued to demand climate justice and indigenous rights.

Roaa Ahmed Elobeid Dafaallah from Sudan received a standing ovation after she spoke about losing her home during the civil war and the 12 million people who have been displaced. Mustafa spoke about climate change and warfare creating a “layered environmental catastrophe”. He said that all of Gaza’s water sources are either contaminated or dry. Agricultural lands have been destroyed and the air and soil polluted.

“Militarism is the biggest emitter, and it is protected by the same powers that profit from both fossil fuels and warfare,” he said, adding that the same states preaching net-zero are dropping white phosphorus on people.

“Climate negotiations risked being disconnected from climate reality and the action that is already happening,” said Arunabha Ghosh, South Asia climate envoy to the COP30 Presidency and CEO of Council on Energy, Environment and Water. “At COP30 in Brazil, the real world finally came back into the room. In a year where climate multilateralism has been challenged, getting a good deal was better than failing to get any deal in pursuit of the best deal.”

Simon Steill, the executive secretary of the United Nations’ Framework Convention on Climate Change, struck a more optimistic note.

“COP30 showed that climate cooperation is alive and kicking, keeping humanity in the fight for a livable planet, with a firm resolve to keep 1.5 within reach,” he said. “I’m not saying we’re winning the climate fight. But we are undeniably still in it, and we are fighting back.”

COP30 negotiations raised the question: can a divided world really negotiate climate action? Progress continues incrementally – the just transition mechanism was formalised, and over 80 countries signaled commitment to transitioning away from fossil fuels, even if only voluntarily.

Cheena Kapoor is a Delhi-based independent journalist and photographer focusing on health, environmental, and social issues.

This story was produced as part of the 2025 Climate Change Media Partnership, a journalism fellowship organised by Internews' Earth Journalism Network and the Stanley Center for Peace and Security.