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.

This article is a joke. Not only does it massively exaggerate the amount of money that would be spent by pretending every person mentioned would spend sums like $1000 a night on lodging and $500 on food, it grossly exaggerates matters by claiming there will be “40,000 politicians and flunkies” despite quoting a source which says:
Activists, lobbyists and journalists are not covered under “politicians and flunkies.” They are people attending this conference as part of their jobs, paying their own costs. It is completely inappropriate to count the money they’d spend as a cost of hosting the conference.
If you can’t account for the fact many of these people aren’t going to be attending the conference on the public’s dime, and many of them won’t be attending for the full length of the conference, any estimate of costs you come up with will be worthless. This isn’t any sort of real analysis. It’s nothing more than petty point scoring.
Brandon,
Your comment is rather naïve since everything is either directly or indirectly at the public dime.
So for example, one reason why BBC licence fee is so high, or SKY satellite (or other cable channels) set their subscription charges at the rate they charge, or a newspaper charges as much for its copy as it does is because of the money paid to journos and their expense account.
Ditto for all the Big Green businesses which will be attending such as energy companies, solar, wind turbine manufacturers, those seeking to persuade government to support a windfarms or perhaps Carbon Capture schemes and the like, who will be wining and dining delegates and taking them out to nightclubs etc. The expense account of these big business is eventually passed onto the customer as part of their energy bills or being offset against profit thereby decreasing the amount of tax which would otherwise be paid by these businesses and which larger tax payment would have benefited the general public.
Charities such as Greenpeace, or WWF may have a very large budget for this event, but again that money which comes from either public donation or through government hand out, is being wasted when it could be better used on real environmental issues or saving the habitat of some truly endangered species.
The real issue is how much money will be spend by everyone who is attending and who may have representation there, even if that representation is on the side lines, since eventually in one form or another, the general public will have to pick up the tab for every single expense made at or incidental to this jamboree.
Greenpeace does not receive government funding, they rely on donations. If they believe they AGW is real, then obviously they don’t think attending COP21 is a waste of their money. And since a large percentage of their donor base believes that AGW is real, they would support Greenpeace attending this event.
No, true donors of an alarmist bent should expect Greenpeace to insist on using Skype. But hey, Skype isn’t as much fun as visiting Paris.
Greenpeace and all the other troughers at this bean-feast are complete hypocrites.
Sorry, but this is idiotic. All businesses in the world ultimately pay for things on “the public dime” if we use this logic. That means you can literally call everything a cost to the public. A journalist flies to St. Louis to cover protests out there? That flight is on “the public dime” because the newspaper he works for will pass the cost onto the consumer by way of selling advertisement space.
Your company throws a holiday party at the office? That’s on “the public dime” because the costs of the food and your work hours are passed onto the consumer by way of increasing the price of some widget you sell.
It’s idiotic. You’re literally saying we should count every cost of every person who attends the event as a cost of the event. That’s not how anyone measures the costs of anything. Try doing it for a sporting event. Or a concert. Or anything else. You’ll always get numbers that seem exorbitant. Heck, try doing it for the cost of this website. The amount of man-hours spent on this website by viewers would probably equal millions of dollars in value. Does that mean Watts Up With That has cost millions of dollars?
>>Brandon,
>>Your comment is rather naïve
Indeed, Brandon’s comment is a bit like saying wind energy is free. Or that shop-lifting is ‘free’ (a victimless crime). Everything has a cost, and those costs are all lumped into the charges you eventually pay – whether it is the cost of government taxes, the cost of a newspaper, or the cost of a gallon of petrol.
But the costs here are overstated, which completely detracts from the point of the story.
The hotel may well be $1000, because I have seen those kind of rates during a Paris conference season, even for very ordinary 4-stars. But if you stay away from the bollinger during the evening, you can easily have a good meal for $100 and entertainment for $100. The taxi to and from the venue, when shared between two or three will only be about $60 – unless you look very naive and then the driver presses the ‘night’ button and it goes up to $150.
I would imagine most companies giving $300 – 400 a night expenses. Unless you are in the airlines, were many still give a standard $50 a night to their crews.
R
“We will count the externalities for thee, but not for me.”
Brandon Shollenberger
Hello, First, unless the person attending the conference is paying out of their own pocket, then yes in one form or another the costs fall on “John Q Public”
For example, many of the Rico 20 are booked for this conference, how will they be paying? Grant money anyone?
And Brandon anyone who can weasel a way to justify going will. Truth be be told I’d jump up and down screaming I’M A GREEN! just to spend a week and a half in Paris on someone elses dime.( okay I really wouldn’t since I haven’t tried that angle) I’ve been there a few times. Love the museums, I tend to spend hours in them.
michael
Brandon, yes this is a bit high and a very rough estimate.
However, please note that the French government has already released a report saying that their government’s costs will be $185 million. That is in addition to the travel, lodging, and entertainment of the majority of attendees who are not in the employ of the government of France. Don’t forget that at Copenhagen, there were so many chartered jets that they had to shift them to other airports just to have enough space to park them, and over a thousand limos were imported from across Europe to handle the burden.
As much as I hate to say it, given the sheer volume of high powered people and international travel involved, we are at the very least looking at a grand total of half a billion.
Brad, while activists & lobbyists may not be covered by the umbrella of “politicians and flunkies”, they are suckers on the teat insofar as they avoid tax and, in some cases accept tax funding for their activities!
I would seriously doubt that, apart from the naive oddball, any lobby group pay their way without subsidy.
I think it is reasonable to assume the top 10,000 officials would run up £30,000 each during their 11 day jolly. Add £100,000,000 (£5,000 each) for 20,000 flunkies and £20,000,000 for 10,000 Paris-ites. Ok, we’re still £280,000,000 away from the target, but world leaders don’t travel light.
I don’t think you’re far out Eric.
Is it feasible to hold conferences of this sort (for negotiations) on big tour boats in the Mediterranean (or a fleet of them, communicating electronically)? Has it ever been done? If so, it would seem cheaper, and more convenient for attendees than buzzing around town.
Today…none of them need to leave home AT ALL! hey should practice what they preach!
+1
Agreed, but they won’t change habits of a lifetime!
If they want to save the planet, hold this meeting in Podunk.
emsnews November 2, 2015 at 6:42 am
Nah,
Damascus Syria, Baghdad Iraq, Kabul Afghanistan,
Also there are some interesting African capitals that are ah, nice this time of year.
michael
whatever figures are correct, it’s a monumental waste.
COP21 Paris: Sponsors and Partners
Headline Partner
BMW i
With its three brands BMW, MINI and Rolls-Royce, the BMW Group is the world’s leading premium manufacturer of automobiles and motorcycles and also provides premium financial and mobility services…
READ ALL
http://www.cop21paris.org/sponsors-and-partners/sponsors
To be fair much of this money will be pump into the local high class hotels , high end restaurants and if past experience is anything to go by then the local laddies of ‘commercial entertainment’ , so costly yes but much of the money will end up in the Paris anyway . And of course the Christmas shopping opportunities this event presents will mean that the local shops may do well out of it has well, and someone has the use the small forest of ex-carbon sinks to print out all the BS that the event will generate .
The big loser will of cause be thee suckers that pay for it all , that would be you an me !
I think that in the first line you have used the word “hotels” when you possibly intended to say “hookers”. 🙂
Apologies, I meant to say that “laddies” should read “ladies” – but the effect of the correction will be the same.
I knew what you meant.
All you guys arguing about the figures…I think you’re missing Eric’s essential point. It’s a godawful waste of money which goes to the hypocrisy of this whole endeavor. If they were serious, you’d see much more in the way of firm pledges by now. I think on some level even these moonbats can see what a scam the co-called developing countries are attempt to run…..
Not to worry. Maybe costs will exceed voluntary pledges, but increased taxes & academic grants will make that up 1000x over.
I personally know somebody who works for a major UN body based in Geneva.
This person told me that he/she receives $400+ per night spent away from home – as a basic expenses cover.
Whether any expenses occurred or not.
It occurred to this person, that since many of the participants had numerous friends and relations at various locations around the world – then this sum, in addition to their generous tax-free salaries may help to explain why so many of the employees like to devise ways to go and conduct “business” away from home.
It all adds up.
Meanwhile, of course, the self-declared intent of the exercise, is that the U.N. is rescuing the poor from the dire conditions brought about by the extreme imbalance of global wealth.
Yeah, sure y’all are doing just that. With yer fancy limousines and all your jewellery and marble bathroom suites.
The fly bitten, starving African children, whom YOU have effectively bred in great numbers must be really really delighted about all your self-sacrifice and hard work.
Let’s conduct a thought experiment.
Imagine that we had a vast cage full of rats provided sparsely with restricted supply of rat-food.
NOW – imagine that the rats become very great in number, run out of food and start fighting.
So we divide off 1/3 of the cage and guard that section and prevent those rats from fighting. Every day we pour a big heap of extra rat food into the new rat “enclave” aka “safe zone” aka “refugee camp”.
The rats in the safe zone section continue to breed and the rats in the remaining section continue to fight (and breed). Plus, occasionally fighting rats attack the enclave and occasionally young rats leave the enclave to join the fighting rats.
Over the course of several generations of rats, we will notice that:
the quantity of extra food required and the quantity of rats, both starving and fighting, has not diminished. In fact, oddly, we now have many more rats starving, fighting and breeding than when the experiment began.
Luckily, nobody has ever been daft enough to attempt this experiment using human beings. (sarc)
Good analogy. Socialism is not about lifting the poor out of poverty, it is about impoverishing everyone, especially the well-off
I think that the Paris summit should focus its intent on just one simple key issue, in order to achieve its goals. I would choose sea level rise and threatened island nations.
Here’s my attempt to construct a clear demand for action that they can present. (sarc)
“During the entire history of the existence of planet earth the oceans have risen and fallen repeatedly. They have risen over 100metres in just the last few thousand years.
And mysterious, we idiots, have just noticed that – COINCIDENTALLY – they happen to be at just the exact same height as several small island nations built atop of coral atolls.
Well – what an AMAZING coincidence.
BUT, if they rise just one tiny bit further then those islands will disappear forever – AND – that means that we must immediately STOP the ocean from continuing to rise and fall as it has done for billions of years.
It’s time to STOP climate change – NOW.
And that is why we need to take all of your money away and spend it on ourselves as we stop the climate from changing.”
How’s that. That’s about the level of it.
How hard is it to build floating houses?
“How hard is it to build floating houses?”
Floating houses; they are also called ‘boats’ or ‘rafts.’ Stilts would work, too. Nahhhhh…. all that stuff is too practical.
I know! Let’s take all that $100-billion climate change slush fund, stack up the bank notes, build houses on top of the bank notes, and Bob’s your uncle.
Tuvalu is only about 10 sq miles.
Sea level rise is currently 3.4mm/year max, non-accelerating.
What’s 26 sq kilometers x 3.4mm?
If for some reason they have disrupted the process of atoll generation, then let’s just send them that much rubble fill and top soil every year.
Surely that’s got to be a better idea than trying to stop the post-glacial sea level rise.
Well – anything is a better idea than that!!!!
Floating homes are, of course, how they ended up on the islands in the first place.
I think Eric Worrall’s figures are pure invention – just speculation, so let’s halve the total costs he predicts. That still suggests something north of $500m in total (taxpayer) spend, and that’s before we even begin adding up the numbers for the aggregate ‘carbon footprint’ of so many eco-zealots criss-crossing the world’s air lanes to make it to the Paris jamboree – and the ‘filthy’ fossil fuels and electricity they’ll consume (totally without irony) whilst there.
It’s the hypocrisy of these True Believers that almost certainly irritates the most. Half a $billion could feed a good number of the world’s poor, save quite a few boatloads of so-called ‘climate refugees’, etc, etc.
My only real criticism of Eric’s original costing is the Car costs as a lot of the “flunkies” will car share and not have individual limos.
Another statistic that is not included is the cost in “CO2” that all these people are supposed to be so paranoid about.
All those flights, train and car journeys will use 1000s of gallons of fuel.
Don’t worry. They’ll all give a few dollars to a man in the Dominican Republic to plant a tree and then call themselves carbon neutral. ( the man will buy a packet of Luckies and sit staring at the bush and not give a rats ass of course)
It would be easy for countries like Canada and Australia to commit significant amounts of money “to fight climate change” but to let everyone know the money will be spent by the respective countries within their own borders.
Need a new highway? We are constructing a new highway to fight global warming.
A new conference centre? We are building this new conference centre using green technology to host (among other things) many conferences on global warming.
etc
I can not think of anything on the planet which produces more CO2 than executive jets (and I have included F1 cars in the thinking bag).
So, it sure is a good place to hold the festival, love-in, gang bang, fiesta, carnival, side show, or whatever it is.
40,000 people going to this conference? that is a lot of meeting rooms. Well, after the conference there will be lots of interesting reading on WUWT and other sites, I can’t wait!
Just checked – 5 star Paris hotel from 6th – 10th December from approx £700 – £1400 ($1000 – 2000) for 4 nights. Approx 25% – 50% of your model.
Not all delegates will have so generous a sponsor and may be reduced to 3 and 4 star. Just goes to show the inadequacy of a process which starts with the outcome and generates assumptions to fit.
Just checked – 5 star Paris hotel from 6th – 10th December from approx £700 – £1400 ($1000 – 2000) for 4 nights. Approx 25% – 50% of your model.
______________________________________________
Not sure where you got those figures from. Just been on ‘Bookings com’ and for the four nights 6th to 10th a 5-star is between £1,500 and £5,000. Multiply by 1.5 for dollars. So if a minister wants a good room, $1,000 a night is easily surpassable, rising to $2,000 a night if they want to push the boat out.
For the serfs down in the 4-star accomodation, it is from £500 to £2,000 for the four nights. So even the secretary can rack up $700 a night.
R
I’d love to know who is in my country’s Official delegation and send them some Email. I assume that information is essentially unavailable. Due to security concerns and whatnot.
It would be nice to find one of the “flunkies” who would be willing to share their expense report. I wonder if some would be available via FOIA request.
A sympathetic journalist might do also.
A State politician in Western Australia was recently shamed for spending AU$25,000 for a 3 day trip to France to do nothing more than have a look at a light rail system. For all you who think that $25,000+ per person is an inflated figure due to many being on lower budgets, you forget this is just the average. For every 4 spending $5,000-$10,000 there will be someone spending $100,000. Private jet or first class ticket. Penthouse suite and bottles of Cognac or Champagne.
I worked for the Hilton group in Geneva for a while, it would disgust you just how much money can be spent by government officials!
Ah – a good “teaching moment”. It’s important to remember the mean is not the mode or median! While the flunkies may be paying something close to the mode, which will be below the median, the top shelf delegates will be significantly elevating the median to keep things unbalanced.
Dominique Strauss-Kahn should clearly have a great set of business opportunities present themselves to him at COP21……..
The most important thing about this conference is that it looks to be their last chance to destroy the western economies. In another year or two the lack of warming will be obvious, as will the ongoing cooling.
For those who can pray for the poor, offer up a prayer that this conference fails to do anything. After that, mother nature will handle the rest I wager.
~ Mark
It’s not just mother nature that is against them.
New and improved measurement techniques and more exacting data analysis methodologies ARE slowly emerging.
As seen in the ICEstat result yesterday.
Things which formerly looked way out of whack are settling neatly into the bigger jigsaw of trends observed over geological time.
Slowly but surely it is beginning to appear as though the “climate change” in this era is not exceptional after all.
Mother nature is against them. And now science is working against them too.
They really do need to act now – whilst they still have plenty of junk science to shove down our throats.
Apologies – “ICEsat result”
Sounds like a great party, how do I get in on it ? I used to believe in the tooth fairy, I am sure I can find a way to believe in imaginary green houses.
“how do I get in on it” – O.K. here are the instructions.
Go back to before you were born. Now get born, but this time, try not to think about anything from first principles. Just go to school and learn all the lists of facts provided.
Continue to learn to repeat the consensus opinion on all topics – especially relating to socialist political theory.
Now you will doubtlessly be selected as the ideal “useful idiot” to represent the agenda of invisible power brokers. You will find that you are given an astonishingly generous salary for doing relatively little work.
Things will mysteriously work out very well for you.
Just make sure that you never ask any questions about what might REALLY be happening.
Also checked figures. According to Booking.com, which I’m told is the best of the booking web sites, it is possible to get a 3 star hotel room for the duration of the conference for CAD$2,400 (@ur momisugly GBP1200) plus tax. A 5 Star room can be had for as little as CAD@ur momisugly4,220 (GBP2,110 plus tax. Nightly rate @ur momisugly CAD$383 + 3.30 per night residency tax @ur momisugly GBP196 per night) for the conference period (Hotel Pont Royal), with deeper discounts available.
There’s also AirBnB or VRBO, where some quite pleasant city centre apartments can be booked for CAD$700.
Last time I looked, room occupancy in listed Parisian hotels 30th Nov to 11th Dec was running at 78%.
However, the above are bargain basement prices and it is easily possible to pay well over a thousand Canadian a night (@ur momisugly GBP500+) and more at places like the five star Hotel Barrière Le Fouquet’s and over CAD$2,000 per night (GBP1000) at the five star Four Seasons.
I wonder what the going rate will be for a green prostitute?
http://www.yourfaceisa.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Yvonne-Craig-Star-Trek.jpg
Isn’t it becoming obvious why these events are held where they are:
“Paris red light districts aren’t just for tourists. Sure, the world famous Pigalle district entertains thousands of newcomers each night. And yes, Paris red light districts (there ARE more than one!) offer some of the finest prostitutes and brothels in Europe, if not the world. You’ll soon find out that the good Paris brothels house some of finest specimens from all over Europe and Asia. You can find many delightful teenage eastern European beauties and even Thai and Cambodian girls, anxious to fulfill your wildest fantasies for very reasonable prices.”
http://parisredlightdistrict.com/brothels-guide/
http://parisredlightdistrict.com/images/paris-brothels.jpg
Airport for private jets? Gee. I naively thought that given the nature of this conference, they would all be arriving in sail boats and/or taking horses and buggies over land.
Nope, they’re all getting there using a version of Solar Impulse.
Current predictions are that all representatives will be in Paris by July 2138:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-33538442
It’s like the 21st Universal Peace Congress scheduled to September 1914 in Vienna, in Bertha von Suttner‘s honor.