A draft agreement on climate change under discussion at the United Nations climate summit in Brazil fails to mention fossil fuels, the primary factor driving global warming, drawing outrage from many countries and environmentalists.

Here’s a clear, concise explanation of the situation you described:

The draft agreement being circulated at the UN climate summit in Brazil (COP30) has triggered strong backlash because it does not mention fossil fuels at all — despite coal, oil, and gas being the leading drivers of global warming.

Why this is causing outrage

Many countries, especially climate-vulnerable nations, say the omission is unacceptable. They argue that any credible climate agreement must explicitly call for a phase-out or at least a phase-down of fossil fuels.

Environmental groups accuse the COP30 presidency of watering down the text under pressure from major fossil-fuel-producing states.

Critics say leaving out fossil fuels makes it impossible for the agreement to be consistent with limiting warming to 1.5°C, the key temperature goal of the Paris Agreement.

What’s missing from the draft

No reference to fossil fuels — not even indirectly.

No roadmap or timeline for reducing dependence on oil, gas, or coal.

No commitments for countries to set more ambitious emissions-cutting targets.

Why this matters

Without clear language on fossil fuels, the agreement risks being seen as symbolic rather than substantive, weakening global momentum on climate action. Many negotiators are calling for “major revisions” before the text can be accepted.

If you want, I can also summarize the specific objections from different countries or groups—or explain how this compares to past COP agreements.