What you need to know: 5 key takeaways from the polarizing COP30 climate summit

DCM Editorial Summary: This story has been independently rewritten and summarised for DCM readers to highlight key developments relevant to the region. Original reporting by BBC, click this post to read the original article.

If you’ve been following international climate talks, you’ll know COP30 in Belém, Brazil, will be remembered as one of the most contentious. After three decades of global climate summits, this year’s event ended without any mention of fossil fuels, which are the main contributors to global warming. That omission angered many nations, especially those pushing for a transition away from fossil energy. On the other hand, countries that benefit from oil, gas, and coal production felt validated. The meeting served as a stark reminder that finding global agreement on climate issues is more difficult than ever.

You’d expect Brazil, the host, to lead with clarity, but internal disagreements between President Lula and COP President André Corrêa do Lago led to confusion and disappointment. While Lula spoke passionately about moving away from fossil fuels, do Lago prioritized consensus over confrontation, even if it meant watering down the outcomes. Attempts to push forward strong language on fossil reduction were met with resistance. As negotiations faltered, Brazil introduced vague roadmaps that exist outside official COP agreements, yet their legal authority remains questionable.

If you’re in Europe or following EU climate policy, you’d have noticed that the European Union didn’t come out strong this year. Although they championed the idea of a fossil fuel roadmap, they found themselves cornered over funding commitments for climate adaptation. Developing nations weren’t swayed by EU calls for fossil reform since the EU had already agreed to triple adaptation finance, leaving them with little leverage. The result? The EU had to compromise and gained minimal ground on core climate goals.

You might wonder if these climate talks still serve a purpose. COP30 raised real doubts about the format’s relevance, particularly as energy and climate challenges grow more urgent. With marathon sessions at odd hours and agreements that rarely reflect the needs of ordinary people, critics argue the COP model is outdated. Brazil made efforts to focus on “implementation” and the “energy agenda,” but you’d find few who could clearly define what that meant.

Lastly, trade became a climate topic like never before. If you’re involved in international business or trade, the EU’s plan to place a carbon border tax on carbon-intensive imports—like steel and cement—has big implications. Trading partners like China, India, and Saudi Arabia weren’t pleased, calling it unfair. The EU defends the tax as an environmental measure, not trade protection. In the end, COP leaders agreed to continue discussions on climate and trade in future sessions, showing that change won’t come quickly but is, at least, on the agenda.