Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Christopher Booker, one of Britain’s most prominent climate skeptics, has written a brilliant expose about the shambolic leadup to the Paris COP21 conference. One of the most striking features of Booker’s expose, is just how little money countries have pledged towards the “$100 billion” green fund.
According to the Australian Financial Review;
At the end of this month 40,000 politicians, officials, green activists, lobbyists and journalists from 195 nations will converge outside Paris – at Europe’s largest airport reserved only for private jets – for a conference they hope will change the world.
Their declared aim is to agree on a treaty that commits to such a massive cut in greenhouse gas emissions that the earth’s temperature is prevented from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius higher than when the climate began naturally warming again two centuries ago.
The chief obstacle to such an agreement is exactly the same as it was at Kyoto in 1997, and at that last mammoth conference at Copenhagen in 2009, which so signally failed to get Kyoto renewed. The vast majority of countries have argued all along that, if man-made CO₂ is causing a problem, the fault lies with those “developed” nations that became rich before everyone else by burning fossil fuels to power their industrial revolution.
It is therefore up to the developed countries of the West to make the most drastic cuts, leaving the still “developing” nations to catch up. They say they are prepared to make some contribution to reducing CO₂, but only if they are paid to do so out of a $100 billion a year “Green Climate Fund”, financed by the rich countries that originally created the problem.
…
And what about that Green Climate Fund, supposed by 2020 to be dishing out $100 billion every year to help developing countries to “adapt to climate change”? Firm pledges received so far total just $700 million, leaving $99.3 billion still to go.
…
Read more: http://www.afr.com/comment/climatechange-treaty-will-be-flop-of-the-year-20151101-gkod0l#ixzz3qJ4qIZNu
Obviously $700 million is a lot of money – but consider the cost of hosting the great Paris climate Jamboree.
40,000 politicians and flunkies, being hosted for a week 11 days. I’m assuming they won’t be going for the budget end of Parisian accommodation, and no doubt enterprising Parisian hoteliers will be putting their prices up, in anticipation of the expected influx of guests. So lets allow $1000 / night, for 7 nights.
That immediately puts our budget up to 40,000 people x 11 nights x US $1000 = $440 million dollars.
Of course, we have to add meals to the total. I’ve been to Paris, you can order a decent meal for a restaurant for about US $40, but we know these conference types on an expense account are unlikely to opt for the budget option. Many of the delegates will be armed with big expense accounts, which their host countries will expect them to use to win influence for their agenda. So I don’t think its unreasonable to suggest meals will cost an average of US $500 / day / person.
Cost of food: 40,000 x 11 days x $500 = $220 million dollars.
Then of course there is the cost of flights. This is a little harder to pin down, but its reasonable to assume airlines will see an opportunity to make a quick profit, from such a large influx of people, and that many of the delegates will be arriving on private jets from remote locations. Even if you can’t swing your own private jet, if you have enough pull to get a seat at the COP21, it seems unlikely you will be travelling cattle class.
Shall we say an average of $2000 / delegate, to fly to and from Paris?
Cost of flights: 40,000 x $2000 = $80 million dollars.
And of course, there is the cost of limousine hire. Limousine drivers, like everyone else, will undoubtably charge a premium from their well funded conference clients.
Say $800 / day / delegate
Cost of limousines: 40,000 x 11 x $800 = $352 million dollars.
Finally, there is, how shall we put it, entertainment. France prides herself on her social liberty, the social acceptability of transactional activities which are sometimes frowned upon in stricter countries. What happens in Paris might stay in Paris – but the cost of any nocturnal journeys of personal discovery will undoubtably make its way onto various taxpayer and donor funded expense accounts.
Lets assume that only 10% of the delegates decide to partake on any single night. I think it reasonable to assume that they are unlikely to choose the budget option, so lets say a rather conservative $1000 / night.
40,000 x 11 x $1000 x 10% = $44 million dollars.
There are other costs, such as the cost of hiring the conference facilities – but I doubt that comes to much, compared to the other expenses I’ve identified – lets say $10 million.
Total cost: $1146 million
Its possible some last minute pledges, possibly from delegates who have been especially well lubricated with the most sophisticated entertainment facilities Paris can offer, may drive the green pledge commitment total up a little. On the other hand, perhaps I have underestimated some of the costs – the excitement of all that frantic late night negotiation might drive delegates to expensive excesses far beyond my rather conservative estimates.
And of course, even firm pledges of green cash may wither, if other parties hesitate to fulfil their pledges, or if a change of government forces a reassessment of the budget options.
If you accept my model parameters, it seems no exaggeration to suggest that the cost of hosting the Paris COP21 party conference may match or exceed, the actual money raised for any UN green fund.
EW – The official dates of the Paris conference are November 30th to December 11th, so the calculation has been updated to use 11 days rather than 7 in the costings…
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

You cheated.
You decided what answer you wanted from your ‘model’, then adjusted the input data to get the prescribed result.
No reputable scientist would do that, would they?
Please feel free to substitute your own figures, and produce your own calculation. But do show your working.
Eric
I am sure that many of us would argue that there are more pressing issues for 40000 people to discuss than climate change, but your figures seem unrealistic.
Whilst the politicians will no doubt want expensive hotels (for the couple of days they appear at the end to sign things) the majority of ‘flunkies’ wont be staying in 1000$ a night hotels and neither will they be spending 500$ a day on food without serious questions being asked.
Having said that I would imagine the security bill will be astronomical, as it would be for any high profile international event
tonyb
Surely the preamble meetings in Bonn need to be factored in as a facilitation cost. I’m unsure of the details but undoubtedly the Paris fest would be much longer without them.
Why would he show his working when all you want to do is find fault with it?
the majority of ‘flunkies’ wont be staying in 1000$ a night hotels and neither will they be spending 500$ a day on food without serious questions being asked.
________________________________
The food and entertainment figures are too high. But the hotels, perhaps not so.
The last time I had the misfortune of booking in Paris during some conference, when all the hotels were booked, the charges went through the roof. My little 3-star, that has maximum 2 feet of floor-space around the bed and no fire-escape, went up to an eye-watering £440 a night. In pounds sterling. I was priced out of the city.
R
The example that comes to mind is Bev Oda. She lost her cabinet position in the Harper government because she pigged out on expenses and then tried to hide the fact. Globe and Mail
Again, the Harper government gives us the example of security for a G20 summit costing more than a billion dollars. CBC Mostly it costs way less to host such an event; it was $18 million to $381 million for previous summits.
Commiebob
bearing in mind the recent terrorist atrocities in Paris, the authorities are going to be very nervous and rightly will want to ensure the maximum protection possible for such a high profile event where the PR potential for a terrorist group wanting to disrupt it is considerable.
Bearing mind the possible disruption and the attendant costs, and that this group, above all others, should want to be seen to be green ,it is surprising there is such a large physical presence rather than a largely virtual one.
Perhaps the technology does not yet exist to manage it all?
tonyb
Eric,
Did a quick Expedia search and found that 5 star hotels are increasing their normal room rates by about 800% during that time period. See post below 11-2@8:28
Bryan
True, but it’s an estimate. I think that it’s an overestimation for food, but an underestimation for travel and entertainment. While your average reporter won’t be living it up, there are significant numbers of personnel that will be chartering trans-oceanic flights at up to ten times that amount.
For entertainment, the estimate comes to 100 dollars per person per night. A single theater ticket will cost that much or more, with box seats or private shows costing up to ten times that.
Also, this ignores costs for security, which I am guessing will be in the 8-digit range, and the sheer numbers of bribes that will be flung about, which will almost certainly number in the hundreds of millions.
I question the final number’s accuracy, but unfortunately it does seem to be on the right order of magnitude.
Just did a quick Expedia check Nov 29 to Dec 12
Business class to Paris average $5500 – $8500
First class ticket to Paris average $12000 – $21000
Hotels running from low $166 per night to $2636 with 24 highest priced hotels sold out
Oh, and that $2636 per night hotel is $387 per night the prior week
Another cost is fuel. Presuming that all the delegates managed to get every available first class and business class seat on the fewest flights possible, the typical 747 has 12 first class seats and 28 business class seats, 40 seats per flight. 44,000 delegates equates to 1,100 flights though COP15 had 140 private jets and 1200 limos
I see what you did there, sonofametman.
sonofametman You cheated.
You decided what answer you wanted from your ‘model’, then adjusted the input data to get the prescribed result. No reputable scientist would do that, would they?
Don’t know if we are talking “reputable scientist”, this is IPCC after all. And if he wanted to get a prescribed result, the late edition to the story would have been included
November 30th to December 11th
So the True Estimated cost, with the required range is 1,130 to 1,211 million. Now that is an adjusted prescription.
Neglected in the accounting is the purchase cost of Xmas gifts that you can be sure will acquired by the 40,000 attendees. Even the cheapskates will end up with around $250.00 in credit card gift deductions for souvenirs, presents, jewelry, adding a cool Ten Million Dollars to the estimate.
France ends up being the big winner, which is why M. Hollande is desperately trying to keep it all intact!!!
Reblogged this on Climatism and commented:
One of the basic tenants of the UN and that of most ‘catastrophic global warming’ believers, is that we should all curb our carbon footprints to live “Sustainably” so that Malthus would be proud.
Their holy advice on how to achieve this includes – switching from red meat to bugs and insects, no AC, sleeping with pets for warmth (Gillard AU Gov), even cutting back on vacations. etc etc etc.
If the global warming zealots, those organising and attending the Paris gabfest, are so convinced that Mother Earth is going to hell in a hand basket, WHY don’t they use conference technology like Skype to help “save the planet”?! And I’m not being facetious.
Practice what you preach UN, UNEP, IPCC, WMO, Sierra Club, Greenpeace et al.
One word: Hermes.
At an easy $1000 per delegate….
This is utterly ridiculous. I live in France and know what hotels and food cost in Paris. $1000/night and $500/meals/day and assuming $800/person/day for a limoosine for a green activist? Come on get real! Maybe those numbers apply to the highest officials but not for Tom, Dick and Harry attending the conference.
Happy to see your alternative calculation. Remember prices will be higher during the conference. Its not difficult to spend $1000 / night on a luxury hotel room in big European cities, nor is it difficult to spend $500 per day on breakfast, lunch and dinner at expensive restaurants (including wine bill). The most expensive single meal I ever ate in France was $200 each for a delicious 9 course meal in Montreuil-Sur-Mer, which is a country town compared to the glorious luxury of Paris.
Check the Rack Rate that is often posted on the hotel room door with the fire exit instructions. This can easily be twice what you paid.
Did a quick Expedia search and found that 5 star hotels are increasing their normal room rates by about 800% during that time period
Most high end hotels are already sold out
Hotels like:
Hôtel San Régis
Shangri-La Hotel Paris
Hôtel de la Trémoille
Hôtel Plaza Athénée (nice place)
https://www.expedia.com/Paris-Hotels-Hotel-Plaza-Athenee.h27528.Hotel-Information?chkin=11%2F29%2F2015&chkout=12%2F12%2F2015&rm1=a1&hwrqCacheKey=df11b5ba-fd09-49ca-9f43-5c0e1330fbe2HWRQ1446486899487&c=f567282f-edba-4425-9edc-af962a4dbec1&&price=2%2C636&ts=1446486903004
Though still available for $2600 per day it is only $990 the prior week
And what are the chances that all those vegetarian vegan PITA (pain in the as*) parasites won’t decide to have a little duck confit or foie gras?
Do you seriously believe that these, no doubt virginal, conference attendees and protestors would refuse to order quality top CRU Cognac, Burgundy or Champagne along with their meals?
Plus every one of those visitors would deny themselves a few beignet, crullers, Éclairs or Profiterole to help them drink a few French pressed Café au lait?
Who could visit gay Paris without visiting and enjoying a lunch at the Louvre? Surely not these world traveling burlap wearing honest ascetics? Burlap couture sourced from the finest Parisian second hand shops, of course.
No one can visit Paris and ignore visiting a few chocolate shops. Why they might even hop a train down to Lyons to visit ‘Bernachon’s chocolate house’ while completing their burlap complementing apparel purchases.
Remember, these conference attendees are parasites. We are their sources of money. They haven’t shown us any consideration yet, why would they start in Paris?
I just checked on Booking.com and found many 3 and 4 star hotels in Paris for about 300 Euro/night.
Do you really think there are 40,000 limosines available in Paris at a day rate of 800$? Most attendents will probably take the metro anyway. I am ashamed to admit that my son went to the Copenhagen meeting in 2009 representing one of those NGO’s and I can assure you he was not staying in 5 star hotels.
ATheoK parasite or Parisite
Bryan A:
Do Parisites suck blood and hoover up money too?
But in France, the refugees from Syria (now called “les migrants”) travel in private jet, 5 refugees at a time, for 1.5 millions € per year:
http://www.europe1.fr/societe/calais-quand-letat-transfere-les-migrants-en-jet-prive-2532519
Michel Sapin, minister of finances, said: “why would only CAC40 executives travel in private jets?” The French minister of finances apparently wants syrian refugees to live the life of CAC40 executives.
“It’s free, the State pays” as François Hollande once said.
Last week, one of the prisoners from Guantamano was returned to the UK by private jet at a cost to the UK tax payer of £70,000.
This jamboree is being held at an airport, you can bet your bottom dollar there will be lots of private jets and helicopters.
Not grubby green activists but politicians – COP21 is a political event. I too live in Paris and indeed can see preparations going on all around me. Not a centimes being spared.
Chris, these are average figures. Whilst some activists will spend less, you can be sure the big players will spend MUCH more than $1000/night for hotels and $500/meal http://www.therichest.com/luxury/most-expensive/the-20-most-expensive-hotels-in-paris/20/
commieBob November 2, 2015 at 6:09 am
Again, the Harper government gives us the example of security for a G20 summit costing more than a billion dollars. CBC
===========
You’ve hit the nail on the head. Post 911 it is security that costs the money. What with Al Jazeera claiming that 400,000 people are killed each year by climate change, what better way to gain world attention than an Al-Qaeda style bombing attack.
All the world leaders from the industrialized west are going to be there, pressed together in a small space. All of them. Imagine the temptation for ISIS to take them all out, claiming that they are saving the world from climate change caused by the corrupt, immoral, godless west.
This would be the biggest terrorist opportunity in history, dwarfing 911, and it would likely be cheered by billions worldwide. So you have to think that security is going to cost a bundle. This could have all been avoided if the delegates had simply used the Internet to teleconference. Security costs would be near zero, and there would have been tens of thousands of tones less CO2 created.
Teleconferencing! But doing that would indicate an actual belief in the things they proclaim, and we cannot have any of that, can we? ;->
/snark
There is no “Tom Dick or Harry”going to this talk fest.Only Greenies,trying to save the planet from us “Plebs”
So you live in France and are unaware that prices for hotels and food go up during these events. Right now you can still get a room for a fair price, in 5 days you wont find a hotel room in the city for less than $750. In 10 days you won’t find one for less than $1250 and the day before the start of the conference you won’t find one available for less than $2500 and that’s at a flop house.
The price for food goes up by as much as 1000% during these events, if you lived in France and had been through Paris during one of these things, then you would know that. So, if you do live in France, I suggest avoiding Paris and the surrounding area from the 28th of November through the 13th of December.
Kyoto 97, and the agreement to stop global warming. 97 was the year global warming stopped. Well done Kyoto. So who needs Paris 2015?
Irony would be if this conference signals a sudden drop in global temperatures.
Sorry, but global warming did not stop in 1997. Just because you folks refuse to include anything prior to 98 doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. Change the start date of your graph to January 1, 1900 and then tell me where global warming stopped.
You forgot the cost of “entertainment”-bands, hookers etc. Really, you can not be serious to expect the esteemed delegates who are there to save the planet to “go without” for 11 days. Really. No low grade street hookers for these VIPs. Top grade $1,000 an hour girls thank you.Good 20 million here- being very conservative.Could get up to 150 million for this “entertainment.” Since the issue of gay marriage would appeal to a lot of the delegates, I am assuming there are a number of delegates who would “not be interested” in the hookers, if you get my drift. Anyone who claims the men will seek out the female delegates- if they are anything like Christiana Figuerres,…. I think my point about the hookers is quite valid.
Security as well. There are the Muslim hordes imported to destroy Europe to keep away as well as those horrible climate deniers.
There will be multi-million dollar public fireworks as well. These “saviours of the planet” need to be honoured and welcomed.
It would be really good if the monies raised did not even cover the cost of staging the big junket. I have not even factored in the “carbon cost” of the plane flights and big gas-guzzling limousines. It would be really good if the People see this and see the irony-taxes on air to fund a spectacularly self-indulgent party, with nothing left to “save the planet.”
May Paris fail miserably.
I have been told that the ministry of external affairs used to have a civil servant in charge of keeping a list of “bar à hôtesses” for visitors from emirates…
Good, “stimulus” money for Paris! (paid in significant part by the taxes of the Parisians)
“financed by the rich countries that originally created the problem.”
Er, what problem!
Leigh
The crops grow too well for the sack-cloth wearers . . . .
Auto – not even hitch-hiking to Paris.
The daily subsistence rate commonly called DSA for Paris is 245 euro. The official delegation from developed countries is very small, normally one or two persons with one person paid for for UN or one of its agencies and another one normally paid for by the government. The delegation becomes big as a number of NGOs would like to insert their members into the official delegation of a UN member country so that their member will have the privilege of going to various meetings including negotiations. Normally NGO .access is very limited to side events, and general meetings, Press have additional access to briefing rooms and to the delegate’s room if they are invited by a delegate for an interview. As the Paris meeting is a culminating meeting of all the meetings to replace Kyoto, some head of states and ministers may come. The average would be something like 300 euro per person per day and that includes the transportation and everything. I know from experience.
“….some head of states and ministers may come. The average would be something like 300 euro per person per day and that includes the transportation and everything.”
/////
One thing is sure is that that expense does not apply to Ministers, still less to Heads of State. These guys do not drink bottles of wine at less than €300.
In fact, what is the security budget if senior Ministers and Heads of State attend?
300 euro a day ! good luck with getting anything other than a room for that .
Meanwhile many of these governments will tapping into UN funds for all of their people , including the ‘hangers-on’ looking for free holiday .
The numbers may be OTT, its a ‘ton of taxpayer cash ‘ which going to be required to fund this event.
I recall that our beloved Department of Energy and Climate Change (UK) sent some 35 delegates to the Lima jamboree.
EO, while that would be a good estimate for a reporter or anyone on modest means traveling on their own dime. We aren’t talking about normal personnel, but people of wealth, privilege, and power, as well as those who wish to influence them. This has one meaning: bribery. Due to laws against such things, these bribes tend to take the form of expensive entertainment, lavish parties, and bottles of wine more epensive than my entire wedding.
While I think that the original post is probably overestimating quite a bit, my back of the envelope is that he might be double the actual cost, not adding zeroes.
some head of states and ministers may come.
==================
It is reported that Obama and Trudeau are scheduled to lead their delegations. Hard to see any leader giving this a pass. They would be criticized for not wanting to save the world. I expect they will all be there, falling over each other trying to outbid the other for how much their country will pledge.
http://www.inquisitr.com/2521797/paris-climate-change-conference-obama-trudeau-to-lead-delegations-catholic-leaders-call-for-change/
If O goes, there’s Air Force 1 and a backup, the Navy on the move, F14s and F15s with refueling tankers for protection while airborne, numerous cargo planes for the ground vehicles, whole floors of hotels and a food and drink supply for all the butt kissers tagging along. Not to mention the “entertainment”. I could imagine an easy $300-350 million above board and who knows how much more under the table we will probably never know of. This man does not travel on the cheap.
PS: How many businesses will be affected when the streets get closed?
Our esteemed Prime Minister(whom we never got to vote for)Malcolm Turnbull,Julie Bishop,Greg Hunt and who knows what other “Flunkies”are going to this Gab Fest,are ready and willing to sign our lives away.
If Obama goes, he will be flush with cash from the budget deal just passed. And we know the kind of entertainment expenses his secret service detail can rack up.
How much does a top class Paris hooker/Toyboy with impeccable Green credentials cost these days – I think we should be told…
yes, relevant.
Irrespective of whether these figures are correct or not, we can be sure the overall costs of this jamboree is going to be in the region of hundreds of millions of dollars. Funnily enough if you think about it, not far from the sum pledged to the Greenwash Fund. How ironic.
Somebody doesn’t understand. Ratcheting up the expense account with fancy hotels, food & drink (and sundry) enables the intrepid delegates to digest the enormous burden of climate guilt they must shoulder for the rest of us for an intense 1 1/2 weeks! Have some compassion for the front line climate warriors!
First, it seems to me that the number of days should be 12, not 11 (Nov 30, Dec 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11), so multiply your totals by 12/11. Second, an occasional apostrophe would help: “Let’s” for “Let us” and “it’s” for “it is.” Contractions do take apostrophes, and those words without the apostrophes are different words: The word “lets” is the singular form for “permits”, as in “This stratagem lets him skip the next payment” or “She only lets [leases] this room to people she knows well.” “Its” is the neuter singular possessive pronoun, as in “The poor goose lost its way back to Canada.” There are no apostrophes in possessive pronouns (no one writes “hi’s” or “he’r” or “m’y”).
Aside from that, I found the article interesting. I shall avoid Paris during those dates.
Good play. There will be no room at the Inn.
John, thanks for the lesson, please keep in mind that English is a foreign language to us.
Wel dontn’t know abut yu but my schoolin’ herin tha US were nearin perfect.Ta bad is becamin’ tha new way.
I just put in the COP 21 dates into Booking.com and I can get 11 nights in a suite at the 5 star Grand Hotel for £5570 down to 11 nights for a 2 star for £600. So room costs which you can still book today, vary from about $780 per night for top luxury to about $85 for a reasonable room. So Paris isn’t full and plenty of rooms available for a range of prices. But you can try it yourself
Where do you find a “reasonable room” for <100€ in Paris?
What do you call "reasonable"?
http://www.hotels-libertel.com/fr/austerlitz-jardin-des-plantes/
Clean, well located, nice place.
Lots of places under 200 euros, and still places under 100. http://www.cop21.b-network.com/default.aspx?SortExpression=PriceFrom%2C%20Name
Yeah right, ’cause Mike Mann and the Team are all going to be staying 2 star. Pull the other one, it’s got bells on it.
A couple of weeks back, I saw an article in the French press which claimed that the cost of holding the event was €185 million, and that the French government was seeking to persuade business to contribute 40% of that sum. The balance presumably being paid by French tax payers.
Of course, holding the event in Paris, especially shortly before Christmas, will generate a lot of business/service so will be good for the local economy and thus some of that expense will be retrieved through the back door.
Of course, government estimates are usually out by a factor of 2 or 3, so it is likely to end up more than the official €185 million. Further, some of the items that you have set out are probably not in the government accounts since some of those expenses will be viewed as being paid by others.
It is clear that it is a complete waste. Why 40,000 delegates? The more there are, the more unwieldy the process becomes, especially as it was intended that almost everything would be agreed in advance.
Surely 2 key negotiators from each country is all that is required. That would put the number of people required at 400. The 2 key negotiators could be backed up by backroom staff who would remain in their own country and could be contacted by phone, email or even video link.
I think that the public would be horrified by the amount of money wasted, and it would be good to get this into the MSM.
Very interesting. Maybe I underestimated the venue cost.
richard verney:
I agree with everything in your very fine post but write to comment on your conclusion that says
Yes, but despite all your excellent points, I think the figure of the cost to publicise is the ‘official’ €185 million. This is because that low estimate cannot be seriously challenged as being an exaggeration. Indeed, if it were challenged as being an exaggeration then that challenge would invite responses which make the points you have made.
Publicising any higher figure other than the ‘official’ €185 million invites rebuttal of the kinds seen in this post where arguments concern the validities of different calculations of the cost. Such arguments could not be used to obscure publicity that says the ‘official’ €185 million cost of the Conference is comparable in magnitude to the total $700 million of pledges which is an insignificant response to the desired $100 billion of pledges.
The purpose of the warranted publicity is to inform the public that the Conference is a waste of money and, therefore, making that message clear requires publicising the low but ‘official’ €185 million estimate of the cost: explanation of why the estimate is low can wait until needed.
Richard
Richard
Your observation that “…the total $700 million of pledges which is an insignificant response to the desired $100 billion of pledges…” is the crux.
If one was sane and wholly accepted cAGW (a contradiction in terms), one would nonetheless seek to postpone Paris given the economic backdrop of the world. Any sane person can see that it is doomed to failure because the developed West simply does not presently have the money to throw €100 billion PER YEAR, at this issue, and why push ahead with something that is bound to end in failure. Once you have failed once, it is more difficult to succeed a second time round. Paris should be staged when there is a realistic prospect of success.
However, Paris really is the last chance saloon for cAGW because of growing storms. There will be no quick way out of the present economic doldrums which the developed West face since China is slowing down and may be heading for a hard landing, and the mad energy policy which has driven up the cost of energy is just beginning to bite and will soon get far worse. The developed West is already seeing the impact of this with the steel closures, and in the UK, the government may be paying business to reduce its working hours if the national grid becomes strained due to the recent closure of many fossil fuel plants. To add on top of these problems is the recent influx of migrants into Europe which will only get worse, and which will reap havoc on Europe given that in many European countries youth unemployment is already circa 50%. Europe can’t employ its own people, so how is it going to cope with the influx of migrants? Not only will there be an increasing welfare bill, regretfully there is likely to be social problems with a lot of unemployed migrants and a lot of unemployed youths. Adding on top of that is the healthcare problem and expense of obesity, old age, and alcoholism which are increasingly being felt and which can only get worse, and only partly set off by a reduction in smoking. The finances of the developed West are becoming ever increasingly strained so it may be decades before it is in a position to throw $100 billion Per year on this.
But Paris can’t be postponed since many experts privately accept that there may be no resumption to warming before 2030 and natural cycles are stronger than have been given credit. Even Julia Slingo (chief scientist at the UK Met Office) stated that there may be no resumption to warming before 2030.
Thus, if the current strong El Nino does not result in a step change in temperatures 9as was seen coincident upon the Super El Nino of 1997/8), we can easily see that the high temperatures of 2015/early 2016 will be a mere blip which will be counteracted by a following La Nina such that the ‘pause’ will continue into 2019 when AR6 is being prepared. Indeed, if solar and/or ocean cycles dominate, then there may well be cooling coming into 2019. As you are aware, the satellite data suggests slight cooling (not statistically significant) this century, and the ‘pause’ will by the time AR6 comes around be over 21 years in duration.
But it is not the length per se of the ‘pause’ but rather what it says about Climate Sensitivity and model projections that is significant. As the ‘pause’ continues Climate Sensitivity must be less and less. And as the ‘pause’ continues, the discrepancy between model projections and reality widens.
The upshot of this is that more and more papers will be published with ever lowering Climate Sensitivity. All these papers will be suggesting a Climate Sensitivity of less than 2 degC, and most under 1.5degC. All the models will be outside their 95% confidence band (have a look at the few models that are running coolest and how these project rapid warming as from 2018). this will cause insurmountable problems for the IPCC and AR6.
AR5 simply ignored the problems, but of course could not attribute a consensus view on climate Sensitivity. But when AR5 was produced there were only a handful of papers suggesting modest Climate Sensitivity, and therefore it was easier to ignore these. That will not be the position for AR6. It is difficult to see how the IPCC will be able to simply ignore the recent papers on Climate Sensitivity 9and more will be published in 2016, 2017 and 2018 with ever lowering figures).
IF, and this is a big IF, there is not a step change in temperatures coincident upon the current strong El Nino, it is easily foreseeable that the ‘pause’ will probably extend and run through to 2019 when AR6 is being prepared with significant problems for the IPCC. This is why Paris is the last chance saloon. If no firm agreement can be reached at Paris, the real world observational data is likely to be so convincing that Climate Sensitivity is not a ‘scary’ 2 degC (let alone the ridiculous 4.5deg C or even 6 degC sometimes mentioned), that it will prove impossible to make a binding deal acceptable to the greens. The issue will fade out with a whimper. If Paris results in a binding agreement, the IPCC and AR6 may quietly be dropped since to go ahead with it would be an embarrassment, and there would be no point to it, since a binding deal had been made at Paris.
richard verney:
It seems that you and I have been agreeing on much recently. And we agree again now.
As you say
Yes, indeed so. And the Paris CoP being their “last chance saloon” is why we need to be effective in publicising how and why the Paris CoP is a waste of money.
I suspect you remember my views following the Copenhagen CoP but I repeat them here for newbies.
The AGW-scare was killed at the failed 2009 IPCC CoP in Copenhagen. I said then that the scare would continue to move as though alive in similar manner to a beheaded chicken running around a farmyard. It continues to provide the movements of life but it is already dead. And its deathly movements provide an especial problem.
Nobody will declare the AGW-scare dead: it will slowly fade away. This is similar to the ‘acid rain’ scare of the 1980s. Few remember that scare unless reminded of it but its effects still have effects; e.g. the Large Combustion Plant Directive (LCPD) exists. Importantly, the bureaucracy which the EU established to operate the LCPD still exists. And those bureaucrats justify their jobs by imposing ever more stringent, always more pointless, and extremely expensive emission limits which are causing enforced closure of UK power stations.
Bureaucracies are difficult to eradicate and impossible to nullify.
As the AGW-scare fades away those in ‘prime positions’ will attempt to establish rules and bureaucracies to impose those rules which provide immortality to their objectives. Guarding against those attempts now needs to be a serious activity.
The Paris CoP is the “last chance saloon” attempting to establish the $100 billion a year “Green Climate Fund” that will fulfill the objectives of those promoting the AGW-scare after the scare has faded away. The total of $100 billion a year cannot be obtained and, therefore, the Paris CoP is a waste of money.
However, countries that agree to the “Green Climate Fund” will establish their internal rules and bureaucracies to raise and operate their agreed parts of that fund. So, the effect of any agreed “Green Climate Fund” can be expected to be similar to – but more severe than – the existing effect of the LCPD on the UK.
I stress that we need to be effective in publicising how and why the Paris CoP is a waste of money.
Richard
Its interesting to compare this bean feast with a real conference that carved up the world for the next 40 years.
At Yalta in 1945 the main players were
USSR
Joseph Stalin
Vyacheslav Molotov
USA
Franklin D. Roosevelt
General George C. Marshall
Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy, USN
UK
Winston Churchill
Field Marshal Sir Alan Brooke
Admiral of the Fleet Sir Andrew Cunningham
Marshal of the RAF Sir Charles Portal
In total around 700 diplomats, military leaders and support staff attended a series of meetings that lasted 8 days and the venue was a city that still had large amounts of war damage and unexploded bombs. One attendee discovered a steel helmet in the street which still had the unfortunate wearers skull inside.
Ah, yes Keith; but remember those were the days when reasonableness was the norm.
I think that getting these “Expenses”to be reported by the MSM will never happen.
Paris will be a blast – I’ve already imagined it
This deserves to go viral on Youtube.
Brilliant.
richard verney
Admad’s video would be “Brilliant” if it were amended to replace all the pictures of Southern France with pictures of Paris.
At present it can be attacked as being misleading propaganda.
Richard
richardscourtney is entitled to his opinion.
As am I.
Admad:
Of course you are entitled to your opinion.
But rejection of constructive criticism of your video does not help your video to convince others of your opinion.
I repeat, your video would be “Brilliant” if it were amended to replace all the pictures of Southern France with pictures of Paris.
At present it can be attacked as being misleading propaganda.
Richard
Absolutely fantastic, made my day!
I consider that some of these figures excessively high, and I doubt that there are 40,000 limos in Paris. Most delegates will use taxis, obviously some will use limos, and some rides will, of course, be shared and not met individually.
But even if hotel, food, and subsistence is taken down to around $500 to $700 a day, and the budget for cars taken down to $150 per day (the airport is out of town so there will in effect be 2 city centre transfers), one can see that it all adds up to mega bucks.
You have not included the venue hire. Presumably that is a commercial operation and it will charge the government for its use. Also, there will be the cost of purchasing carbon credits. There will be a lot of CO2 emitted to stage, attend, and incidental to this jamboree and we know that Big Green will want to be carbon neutral so it will have to purchase carbon credits.
In my above post, I mentioned the official figure of €185 million. I think that was the hosting cost and did not include airfares. When I saw that, I thought that that was an outrageous amount to spend. Having thought about this post, I can now see that it is unlikely to cost less than €400 to €500 million. Wow, what a waste of good money. That is enough to build a hospital or do something else worthwhile.
It would be good to see a series of posts in MSM setting out what could be done with this money if it was not wasted on this jamboree. Eg., one day it would detail the number of hospitals that could be build, another day, the number of schools, another day, the number of doctors and nurses that could be employed, another day, the number of policemen, another day, the number of starving Africans it could feed, another day, the number of Africans that could be given access to clean water, Another day, the number of African children that could be given basic medicine etc etc.
When you stop and think about the waste, it truly is depressing.
I recall that for the Copenhagen conference there were around 1200 limousines that had to be brought in from across Europe. The normal number of limos working in Copenhagen was just 12. The French delegation alone required 42. Their were just 5 electric/hybrid cars booked by attendees. So many private jets flew in that there was insufficient space for them at Danish airports so that after dropping off their passengers they had to fly to other European destinations to refuel and park up. The standard hotel rate for most was $1000 per night This conference was less than half the size of the Paris jamboree with only 15,000 delegates.
All of the hot air of political operatives will over heat Paris and cause the asphalt roads to melt! :0
Most of the 40,000 will take the Metro, it is much fast than going by taxi during busy times, and far cheaper. I agree many of the senior officials will have limos or taxis, but not the masses.
The metro is filled with dangerous particulates:
http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2014/01/14/l-air-du-metro-pollue-lui-aussi_4347287_3244.html
reports for PM10:
200 µg/m3 for métro
500 µg/m3 for RER
http://www.ratp.fr/fr/ratp/r_6167/la-qualite-de-lair-dans-les-espaces-souterrains/
gives for last week a reading of PM10 >800 µg/m3 (oct-19 17:00 à 18:00) at Châtelet L4 (Châtelet is the center of the métro network).
The whole focus of the conference seems misplaced.
The Oil and gas Industry is far larger than the Arms Industry. So why pick a fight that’s harder to win? Instead of abolishing fossil fuels the world should come together to abolish War.
• This has less entrenched opposition.
• This is substantially cheaper in terms of damage to the economy.
• This is more urgent – we already have war refugees.
• And it’s just as feasible.
If all the world can come together to make a deal on climate then they can make a deal on War.
Especially as some countries will benefit from a warmer climate but no-one benefits from more War.
Could not agree more! As I had noted not too long ago:
On the “climate change” vs unmet needs of an alarmingly increasing number of refugees front, so to speak … Here’s a radical thought exercise …
Can you even begin to imagine how much better off all these refugees would be if the UN had decided to forgo even half of the glitzy “climate change” gatherings of thousands over the last 20+ years? So that the funds expended could have been re-directed towards meeting the immediate needs of the real refugees that the UN’s bureaucratic and highly paid personnel have – in no small measure – in effect, created and perpetuated.
At the very least, surely serious consideration should be given to cancelling the next BIG gathering in Paris,
But, France’s President Hollande evidently has convinced himself that:
Not to mention that the UN’s very own Charter (and mandate) makes absolutely no mention whatsoever of “climate” or anything remotely connected thereto – as I had discovered sometime within the last year or so!
P.S. Speaking of the UN … There’s an excellent exposé, docu-flick, called “U.N. Me” made by Ami Horowitz. Great C-Span interview with Horowitz (long, but well-worth the watch, and includes some excerpts) which I had captured last year.
MCourtney, Thank You!
War is just the odd human’s ruthless competitive nature and desire to reform others in their “image” taken to an extreme at an international level. Afraid history doesn’t agree, even today, that such a thing as canceling war is possible. Best anyone can hope for is to avoid the big one and since, eventually, even the small and nastier guys will have city busters, good luck with that.
So you’re suggesting that a Global Deal of all Nations is improbable?
Won’t matter about the “civilized” nations as they will just try to avoid the “big one” with each other. Jeez, look at all the recent “small” scale wars by the likes of the US/Europe &Russia. And as long as there are the 10 to 20 per-centers who no one can correct (50 per-centers in the case of Islamics) and who intolerantly and forcibly insist on forcing their brand of (usually religious) thought or politics onto others then I don’t see any universal peace happening (re Indonesia today). It’s also amazing that there are always supporters of those 10-20 per-centers, kind of like abusive police who are always upheld by their unions and usually their bosses or repeatedly incompetent doctors who are usually protected by the AMA. You realize that these people are also through out government, J, Edgar Hoover for example and also what have become relatively rouge sub-governments such as the CIA. FBI, SS, DEA and most all intelligence agencies who will go to almost any length to protect their manpower & turf.
However it is just a matter of when, that a smaller nasty nation or group will obtain one or more block busters and really upset the cart. And what just do you predict will happen to a country that happens to do so, do you actually think that the French, for instance, will just sit back and negotiate with those after half of Paris is wiped out…..
Thank you for an excellent, it simplified analysis. I’m not concerned about the numerous miscellaneous things you skipped for simplicity. They don’t significantly change the result.
However, you did miss a couple of major items:
– security
– social cost
That is, how much would the tens of thousands of police, counter-terrorist officers, etc, etc, cost?
And then, you can’t just dump tens of thousands of politicians, hangers-on and security forces into a city and expect to get away without major social upheaval. It’s like running an olympics. There is a significant cost to the social lives of the city’s residents; not least in terms of traffic disruption.
Let’s face it £10 a day is to much to spend on this utter Con fidence trickery of fools and liars.
With NOAAgate, NASA showing no global warming in Antarctic, with the gagging of NOAA, French weatherman Philippe Verdier, it looks like the “Dead Parrot Talks” are quickly turning into a fiasco before they start.
https://youtu.be/4vuW6tQ0218
This is a green conference, meaning bring ‘greenbacks.’
Paris is great. Thing is it’s full of people like this…
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=monty+python+taunt+you+a+second+time&FORM=VIRE3#view=detail&mid=16DF2189716EEB293BAE16DF2189716EEB293BAE
Ah, but this is Socialist waste. It is only the money dipped out of the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. The leprechauns will keep refilling it.