Climate Talks: Big Promises, Small Steps

Belém, BrazilSat Nov 22 2025
The recent global climate summit, COP30, ended with a new agreement, but it didn't include a clear plan to cut fossil fuel use. This was a big letdown for many countries that wanted stronger action. The summit started with high hopes. Over 80 countries wanted to agree on a strong plan to move away from fossil fuels. But after lots of arguing, the final deal didn't include any specific steps to do this. The agreement does say that countries still support the goal of limiting global warming to 1. 5C. But it also says that this goal might not be met right away. The deal talks about making sure that if temperatures go above 1. 5C, it won't be by much or for too long. The summit wasn't all smooth sailing. There were protests, a fire, and even some delegates got hurt from the smoke. Despite all this, the talks went on. China played a big role at the summit. They brought pandas and fans to their pavilion, which was very popular. But when it came to the talks, China didn't push for strong action on fossil fuels. Instead, they supported countries like India and Saudi Arabia, who want to slow down the transition away from fossil fuels. The European Union and the UK wanted a stronger deal. They were not happy with the final agreement. The EU even said they "very grudgingly accepted" it. The deal does mention increasing money for poorer countries to deal with climate change, but not as much as they wanted. The summit was led by Brazil. The Brazilian president, André Corrêa do Lago, had a tough job. He had to get almost 200 countries to agree on something. In the end, the deal was passed with chants and applause. But many people are still not happy with the results.
https://localnews.ai/article/climate-talks-big-promises-small-steps-e1e5c3d8

questions

    If the 1.5C target is like a diet plan, does the new deal mean we're just going to cheat a little and then try again later?
    How effective are the current commitments in the deal likely to be in reducing global carbon emissions?
    Is the removal of language on fossil fuels a deliberate attempt by certain countries to derail meaningful climate action?

actions