The COP30 climate summit is moving toward a tense and dramatic finish as countries remain deeply divided over the future of fossil fuels and climate finance. As negotiations enter their final hours in Brazil’s Amazon city of Belem, demands for a clear roadmap to transition away from oil, gas and coal have intensified.
Draft Deal Drops Fossil Fuel Language, Sparking Backlash
A new draft deal released before dawn removed all references to fossil fuels. Earlier drafts had included different options on how countries could move away from fossil fuels. The complete removal of these references sparked immediate criticism.
A coalition of more than 30 nations swiftly objected. They sent a letter insisting that any final deal must include a commitment to create a roadmap for transitioning away from fossil fuels. Their response has set the stage for a showdown as the summit nears its scheduled conclusion.
Growing Concerns Over Lack of Ambition
Delegates expressed disappointment with the revised text. They argued that the proposal lacked ambition, especially on emission cuts. Many nations believe the summit must deliver a strong message on climate action to remain credible.
Countries are expected to share their views at a public plenary session. The draft deal still requires consensus for adoption, and talks often extend beyond official deadlines. Previous climate conferences have pushed negotiations into overtime to reach compromise.
Fossil Fuel Roadmap Remains the Most Contentious Issue
Debates over fossil fuels have overshadowed much of the two-week summit. Burning fossil fuels remains the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. Dozens of nations want a detailed plan explaining how countries should fulfill the promise made at a previous summit to transition away from fossil fuels.
However, major oil-producing nations strongly oppose this idea. They argue that a roadmap could threaten their economic stability. Other countries, particularly developing ones, fear that discussions on fossil fuels are overshadowing their urgent concerns about financing and support.
A negotiator from one developing nation said their country is open to discussing fossil fuels. Yet, they feel other priorities such as finance are being ignored. They stressed that outcomes must reflect the needs of both developing and developed nations.
Supporters of a Roadmap Raise the Pressure
Countries backing the roadmap include Colombia, France, Germany, Kenya, Mexico, South Korea and the Marshall Islands, among others. They argue that the current draft fails to meet the minimum standards for a credible deal.
Their letter called for a “just, orderly and equitable” transition away from fossil fuels. They warned that they cannot support an outcome that excludes such a roadmap.
Climate Finance Emerges as a Major Sticking Point
Another critical issue is climate finance. The draft calls for efforts to triple the financing available for adaptation by 2030, compared to 2025 levels. However, the proposal does not clarify whether wealthy nations will provide this money. It also leaves open the possibility of relying on development banks or private investors.
This uncertainty worries many poorer nations. Adaptation investments, such as upgrading infrastructure or strengthening buildings against extreme weather, often do not yield financial returns. Because of this, private investors rarely fund them. Developing nations want stronger guarantees that public financing will be available.
Trade Discussions Set to Expand at Future Summits
The draft also proposes launching a new dialogue on trade at future climate summits. This move is important for nations that have long pushed for trade issues to be considered within climate negotiations. Some countries want these discussions to address major policies such as carbon border levies.
While this may satisfy some, it may also create challenges. Certain regions have criticised such levies, arguing they could harm developing economies.
A Critical Moment for Global Climate Action
As COP30 approaches its final hours, disagreements remain sharp. The clash over fossil fuels has become the symbol of broader tensions between ambition and feasibility, between climate responsibility and economic pressures.
What happens in the final round of negotiations will determine whether the summit delivers a meaningful step toward climate action or ends in disappointment. Delegates now face the challenge of finding common ground in a deeply divided room.
