The dust has barely settled in Belém, Brazil, after the conclusion of COP30—the thirtieth United Nations climate summit—and the city is already grappling with the aftermath. The event, which drew more than 56,000 delegates from around the world, was hailed in some quarters as a step forward for climate finance and adaptation, but critics say it left behind a trail of broken promises, environmental scars, and a fair share of controversy.
In the months leading up to COP30, Brazil’s government made a striking decision: to cut a new four-lane highway through tens of thousands of acres of protected Amazon rainforest. As reported by the BBC in March 2025, the official rationale was to “ease traffic” into Belém, the bustling capital of Pará state and host city for the summit. The Lula da Silva administration pointed to “solar lighting” and “cycle paths” as eco-friendly features of the project, while organizers promised that the summit would ultimately result in “cleaner air.” Yet, the construction itself burned through carbon emissions, supported future traffic, and destroyed the very trees that help produce oxygen.
Belém, a city of 1.3 million with established highways, rail service, an international airport serving over 3 million passengers annually, and even a military air base, arguably didn’t need the new road at all. The project was widely seen as catering to the comfort and convenience of world leaders and climate activists descending on the city. As one commentator from Hot Air put it, “World leaders can’t be inconvenienced by using a workaround to save the rainforest.”
The summit itself, which wrapped up on November 25, 2025, saw a flurry of high-profile pledges and declarations. The so-called “Belém package” included commitments to triple adaptation finance for developing nations by 2035, aiming for $300 billion a year, and to launch the Tropical Forests Forever Facility—a sovereign finance mechanism designed to protect rainforests, with an initial capitalization of more than $6.6 billion and support from 53 countries. The agreement also called for a massive increase in climate action funding: $1.3 trillion annually from 2035 onward, with developed countries expected to shoulder the bulk of the cost.
But when the last private jet departed and the floating five-star hotels emptied, many locals and observers were left asking: what did COP30 really achieve for Belém and the Amazon? According to Hot Air, the city’s longstanding environmental woes—raw sewage in the streets, persistent poverty, and unchecked deforestation—remained unaddressed. The newly built “Freedom Avenue,” intended as a symbol of progress, quickly became a smuggling route for illegal timber and cocaine. The summit’s price tag? A staggering $2 billion, plus a 13-kilometer scar through the rainforest that, according to Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research (INPE), has already driven deforestation alerts up by 15%.
Days before the conference began, Brazil approved new oil drilling at the mouth of the Amazon River, further fueling accusations of hypocrisy. Indigenous leaders stormed the venue, children staged a mock funeral for fossil fuels, and banners proclaimed, “Our forest is not for sale.” Yet, as one critic noted, “The chainsaws are louder than ever and Belém remains forgotten.”
On the diplomatic front, the summit was marked by both progress and disappointment. As reported by ANI, the final agreement, pushed through by Brazil after two weeks of tense negotiations among representatives from over 190 countries, expanded financial support for developing nations but notably avoided any reference to phasing out fossil fuels. The United States, a major player in previous climate talks, did not send an official delegation—a move that drew criticism from German Ambassador to India Dr. Philipp Ackermann. “There was one country lacking at this COP, that’s the US, and they had been a big pledging country before. So that’s a problem,” Ackermann told ANI.
Germany, for its part, pledged significant funds and reiterated its commitment to exiting fossil fuels. The country is also working closely with India through the Green and Sustainable Development Partnership (GSTP) to find new ways to adapt to and mitigate climate change. “I think COP30 came up with some good results, some of them fell short of our expectations, but... the negotiation generated some good results and also binding results,” Ackermann said. “We could have imagined a bit more, but in general, I think it was a good COP.”
Despite the financial pledges and diplomatic choreography, the summit’s outcomes fell short of the ambitions set by many climate advocates. As BBVA reported, the final agreement lacked any explicit commitment to a progressive phase-out of fossil fuels—a step that had only been achieved at COP28. Instead, more than 80 countries supported Brazil’s initiative to develop a roadmap for a “just, orderly, and equitable transition” away from coal, oil, and gas. Colombia and the Netherlands announced plans to organize a conference in 2026 focused on phasing out fossil fuels, but for now, the world’s reliance on them remains largely unchallenged by binding international agreements.
The summit also saw the presentation of the Principles for Taxonomy Interoperability, an initiative to harmonize sustainable finance definitions and reduce market fragmentation. This “super taxonomy” is meant to help financial institutions deploy sustainable capital globally, though experts caution that more clarity is needed on how these instruments will work in practice. “The decisions were pushed into a two-year work program, prolonging uncertainty in an area that is crucial to mobilizing private capital at scale,” Antoni Ballabriga, Global Head of Sustainability Intelligence at BBVA, explained.
Meanwhile, 122 new national climate plans—known as nationally determined contributions, or NDCs—were presented at COP30, covering 70% of global greenhouse gas emissions. However, experts agreed that these plans still fall short of preventing global warming beyond 2°C, the threshold widely seen as critical to avoiding catastrophic climate impacts.
For many, the summit’s legacy is a mixed bag. On one hand, there’s hope in the new financing mechanisms and the renewed commitment to multilateral action, even amid a turbulent geopolitical landscape marked by wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, economic headwinds, and rising public skepticism. On the other, there’s frustration at the lack of binding commitments, the environmental cost of hosting such a massive event in the Amazon, and the failure to deliver concrete improvements for the people of Belém.
“Being resolute in addressing the transition away from fossil fuels is the only way to deal with the climate change we are already enduring in the form of torrential rains, heatwaves, and wildfires,” said Mar Asunción Higueras, Head of the Climate and Energy Program at WWF Spain, during a post-summit event. Yet, she lamented, “Once again, we are walking away without having finished our homework.”
With COP31 scheduled for Türkiye in late 2026, the world’s eyes will soon turn to the next round of climate negotiations. For Belém and the Amazon, however, the scars—literal and metaphorical—left by COP30 may linger far longer than the headlines.