91Èȱ¬

For the first time a new deal to reduce the use of fossil fuels has been agreed by all countries at the UN climate summit, COP28 in Dubai.

The deal calls on all nations of the world to move away from the use of oil, gas and coal - but stops short of suggesting they should be phased out completely, something that many governments wanted.

The burning of fossil fuels is thought to be one of the biggest contributors to climate change and creates green house gasses which prevent heat from escaping the Earth's atmosphere and warms the planet.

Within the deal it says there needs to be a quick and sustained effort to reduce green houses gases if humanity is to limit global temperature rises to 1.5C above pre industrial levels.

COP28 president Sultan Ahmed Al-Jaber said: "Together we have confronted realities and we have set the world in the right direction."

Following the announcement, representatives from different countries were invited to speak at the conference, to give their reaction to the deal.

A first draft of the deal suggested fossil fuels would need to be "phased out" but a later copy of the deal changed the language used.

John Kerry, the USA's climate envoy, says everyone should be pleased with the deal, even if it's not perfect.

"Everyone might have said things a bit differently... but I think this is a cause for optimism," he adds. "I am in awe of the spirit of cooperation."

He says the commitment to move away from fossil fuels is a huge achievement, even though "many, many people" would have used different words, referencing the fact that many nations and groups, including the EU and US, wanted a deal that would promise a complete "phase out" of fossil fuels.

UK climate minister Graham Stuart described the deal as the beginning of the end for the fossil fuel era.

"There are elements here we do not like," he said but adds that it's a "historic moment" that should inspire action across the globe.

"We're now unified in a common commitment to move away from fossil fuels."

But some countries remain critical of the deal, Bolivia was unhappy with the first draft of the deal offered during talks, saying it did not address the question of fairness in how quickly countries are able to afford to stop using fossil fuels.

The South American country's representative also accused richer nations of hypocrisy, suggesting that wealthy countries got rich through decades of burning fossil fuels but want to deny smaller countries from having that same growth.

Meanwhile a delegate from the island nation of Samoa said they were "a little confused" by the approval of the deal before the Alliance of Small Island States were able to join other delegates in the room.

The alliance is a group of 39 island nations who are particularly vulnerable rising sea levels caused by climate change.

In a speech the representative from Samoa said the decision was finalised "when the small island states weren't in the room" and received a standing ovation after reading a statement listing their objections to the text in the deal.

Denmark's climate minister Dan Jannik Jørgensen says European countries would have liked stronger language and "even more solidarity with the developed world".

"Now it finally seems the world has acknowledged the world needs to move away from fossils," he adds.

Asked about countries like small island nations who are still unhappy with the deal, Jørgensen says the world still has work to do address the money needed to help the countries most impacted by climate change.

New Zealand's climate change minister echoed these thoughts, saying it is not the perfect deal and his country "stands shoulder-to-shoulder" with neighbouring Pacific island nations.

"Is there more work to be done? Absolutely... But the countries that are in the room have a consensus position and that takes us forward."

• Money - the text only "notes the need" for more money for poorer nations to move away from fossil fuels and prepare for climate change. There is no requirement for richer countries to provide more support.

A different deal was reached on day one of the summit, where world leaders agreed to provide money to poorer countries, impacted by climate change disasters.

The EU, UK, US and a number of other countries immediately announced contributions, which in total are about $400m (£317m) to pay for the loss and damage from climate-driven storms and drought.

• Fairness - that the language on "transitioning away from fossil fuels" does not also ask developed countries to lead on this. Other countries have said it is not fair that all countries are expected to do this at the same time, when developed countries have benefitted economically for far longer from using oil, gas and coal.

• Methane - there is no promise to reduce methane emissions - methane is one of the most potent of greenhouse gases.

The 91Èȱ¬'s climate editor Justin Rowlatt says the deal is "really significant progress", but a lot depends on how much each individual nation is willing to do.

"For the first time fossil fuels and the need to 'transition' away from them has been included in the text [of the deal].

"But it is true that the agreement is fundamentally weak. Why? Because the strongest language the UAE (United Arab Emirates) could get the world to agree was to 'call on parties to contribute' to a series of actions to tackle climate change.

"Campaigners will say it is too little too late. But the world coming together - will have consequences in the real world," he says, adding that it would be a surprise if a country suddenly announced a new coal-fired power plant after this deal has been announced.