What COP30 could mean for Global Fossil Fuel Phase out?

Nations Climate Change Conference COP30 in Belém, set for 2025, is expected to cast the world on its right side in the fight against climate change. This summit is the sequel to COP28 in Dubai, which left a diplomatic legacy when fossil fuels were included in the final agreement for the first time. But that breakthrough, even while symbolically significant, did not extend beyond the general call to “transition away” from using them without setting specific commitments or timelines. Now, Belém has to flesh out that vague commitment with a clear step toward ending the fossil fuel era.

The point of doing this is scientific. Existing climate commitments would bring temperature rise by the end of the century to 2.8°C, well above the critical 1.5°C limit enshrined in the Paris Agreement, according to current policy projections. This sobering discrepancy has prompted the UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, to call on countries to table NDCs that are significantly more ambitious in advance of COP30. In that context, Belém is not like a summit among others: it’s the last chance to put us on track to stop climate collapse becoming irreversible.

The development of diplomatic language in previous COPs certainly demonstrates this ramping-up tension. In 2021, in Glasgow, COP26 focused solely on coal, with its “phasedown” promoted as a compromise. Two years after that, it broadened the scope to all fossil fuels but with evasive language: “transition away.” Opposition-held Belém, in contrast, is set to make the definitive leap towards a global “phase-out”, the end of fossil fuel production and consumption altogether. And it is this commitment by which the summit will be judged. Without it, the review would fail to deliver on the scientific purpose of the first Global Stocktake (GST). But to get there, they will have to overcome a structural barrier: climate finance. The G77 and China have been outspoken that they will not agree to faster decarbonization if it comes at the expense of their economic development.

The deal at COP29, which pledged $300 billion a year, was immediately derided as inadequate. But if Belém fails to commit to a “tangible and robust” financial solution, the phase-out agenda could crumble before it even begins. COP30 also will be the platform to determine whether countries have answered the GST call. The 1.5°C target remains achievable, but global emissions need to fall by 43% by 2030 in order to stay on a trajectory consistent with this goal. Instead, the NDCs 3.0, due in 2025, will function as its thermometer. But promises won’t be enough; clear, verifiable, and binding implementation mechanisms will be necessary.

Concurrently, there will be a semantic battle fought over the language of the final agreement. The distinction between “phase down” and “phase out” is crucial; it’s the difference between managing decline and ending it. To that you can add the disagreement about “unabated” fossil fuels, whose omission would permit their continued use if technologies such as Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) were used. Although appealing in theory, this approach has been strongly criticized because of high economic cost and the possible lock-in to hydrocarbon dependency.

In the end, COP30 can't just signpost the conclusion of the fossil fuel age. It must do so through climate justice, political ambition, and mechanisms for getting it to work. The world is watching closely. And the clock on climate keeps ticking.