| Key questions that remain unanswered in the final swing of the summit include what to do about the transition away from fossil fuels (which countries belatedly agreed was necessary at Cop28 last year), and whether a deal on highly contentious rules to govern carbon offset markets can be finalised. But the big one is climate finance. Baku has been billed as the “finance Cop”, and countries are aiming for a deal on what the wealthy will pay to help developing countries build clean economies, adapt to inevitable change and repair the escalating damage from climate breakdown. In the arcane world of UN lingo they are aiming for a “new collective quantified goal on climate finance”, or NCQG. This is not charity. It is an acknowledgment that those most responsible for the CO2 pollution fuelling worsening extreme weather have a responsibility to those who have emitted comparatively little, and in some cases virtually nothing. You broke it, you do what is possible to fix it. As always, there is a fight over who should contribute – and how much. Nearly everyone agrees in principle that rich nations need to stump up much more than they have in the past, but so far they have not put numbers on the table, leaving it unclear whether they did their homework before flying in. And, as always, there is an argument over the level of responsibility of countries that were classed as developing nations in the early climate treaties of the 1990s but are now big economies – not just China, but also Saudi Arabia and other oil-rich gas states. There is also an argument over what other sources of finance could be called on beyond public funding. It could include multilateral development banks, “innovative” taxation on things such as shipping and aviation, and private capital – though quite how it could be guaranteed that private investors would kick in at the level required is unclear. Finally, but most importantly, there is the actual sum. An expert group of senior global economists suggested a goal of up to $1tn a year by 2030 and $1.3tn by 2035. Campaign groups say it should be $5tn a year, and argue that sum would be easily achievable if fossil fuels and high-carbon activities were taxed properly. A draft agreement for further negotiation released early on Thursday left this key question unanswered, marking the spot where the dollar figure should go with a simple “X”. Mohamed Adow, the founding director of the environmental justice group Power Shift Africa, said that while the text otherwise included encouraging elements – correctly diagnosing the climate problem and the need for finance – the failure to outline how much rich countries were prepared to commit was a glaring omission. “We came here to talk about money. The way you measure money is with numbers,” he said. “We need a cheque, but all we have right now is a blank piece of paper.” As with everything in the battle against the climate crisis, we don’t have much time, but we’ve got a long way to go. Read more from Cop29: | 