UN Climate Summit To Emit More CO2 Than 8,200 American Homes Do In A Year

From The Daily Caller

10:24 AM 12/03/2018 | Energy

Michael Bastasch | Energy Editor

 

The U.N.’s climate summit will emit as much carbon dioxide as more than 8,200 American homes.

  • It’s also equivalent to more than 11,700 cars driving for one year or 728 tankers trucks worth of gasoline.
  • When air travel is factored in, the summit’s emissions are likely higher, according to one expert.

This year’s United Nations climate summit will have a carbon footprint equivalent to the yearly electricity usage of more than 8,200 American households, according to the international body’s own figures.

The U.N. estimates the summit, called COP24, will emit 55,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide — the very greenhouse gas U.N. officials are trying to keep from accumulating in the atmosphere.

Based on U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) figures, that’s the equivalent of more than 11,700 cars driving for one year or 728 tanker trucks worth of gasoline. That amount of CO2 emissions is also the same as 8,243 American homes for an entire year, according to EPA.

However, that’s a low-ball estimate because it only includes the emissions from the conference itself, and not emissions associated with the thousands of people who flew to the meeting in Katowice, Poland. More than a few summit-goers, including celebrities, likely flew private jets.

When those emissions are factored in, COP24’s carbon footprint is likely much higher, according to environmental economist Richard Tol. (RELATED: UN Kicks Off Climate Summit With Alarmist Message — Act Now Or Face The Collapse Of Civilization)

“[It is] probably unusually high as Katowice would require multiple stops for anyone who’s not from Europe,” Tol told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

March against climate change In Brussels

People take part in a march called “Claim the Climate” demanding Belgian authorities to take action during the COP24, in Brussels, Belgium, Dec. 2, 2018. REUTERS/Francois Walschaerts.

The high carbon footprint only contributes to the U.N.’s hypocritical image. Indeed, a former U.N. environment director was forced to resign in November over his extensive, costly travel while warning the world of the need to cut emissions to stem global warming.

U.N. officials spent the past few months hyping COP24 as one of the last chances humanity has to avoid catastrophic global warming. A U.N. report issued in October suggested a $27,000 per ton carbon tax might be needed by the end of the century to stem warming.

Tol also estimated COP24’s cost to top $130 million, but Tol considers that to be an underestimate because whole new facilities, basically a town, had to be built to accommodate tens of thousands of people.

“There’s 30,000 people in Katowice — 1,300 person-years. I’d put that at $130 million,” Tol said via email. “That’s an underestimate, as they build a new town.”

More than 30,000 people are expected to attend COP24, which kicked off Monday, in Poland. For 60 days, U.N. officials, diplomats, environmentalists and journalists will eat up electricity and fuel traversing thousands of square meters of temporary structures set up to house the summit.

March against climate change in Brussels

People take part in a march called “Claim the Climate” demanding Belgian authorithies to take action during the COP24, in Brussels, Belgium, Dec. 2, 2018. REUTERS/Francois Walschaerts.

 

The summit’s goal is to further the implementation of the Paris climate accord, which went into effect in 2016. British natural historian and broadcaster Sir David Attenborough kicked off the summit with dire predictions of catastrophe is nothing is done to stop global warming.

However, Attenborough, like thousands of others, no doubt emitted lots of carbon dioxide getting to Katowice, which is in the heart of Poland’s coal country.

The U.N. has long been criticized for the high carbon footprints and costs of its meetings. The U.N.’s 2015 climate summit likely resulted in 300,000 tons of CO2 emissions, mostly from associated air travel.

To deal with this hypocritical image, the U.N. has taken to offsetting the emissions from its summits by sponsoring forestry projects. For COP24, the U.N. will pay the Polish State Forests agency to plant 6 million trees.

Carbon “offsets,” however, are somewhat controversial because they allow people to pay for theoretical emissions reductions by funding green energy projects or reforestation.

The U.N. is also offering free lanyards to COP24 participants who buy offsets for non-conference-related emissions, which may include air travel based on how the U.N. calculates summit emissions.

“Many will put that on their expense account, so this is cheap virtue,” Tol said.

Follow Michael on Facebook and Twitter

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

 

Advertisements

47 thoughts on “UN Climate Summit To Emit More CO2 Than 8,200 American Homes Do In A Year

  1. The sign says, “Make biodiversity great again & no climate change will remain”

    That’s hilarious! At least that guy has a sense of humor, trolling the confused protesters. 🙂

    Or, at least I think he’s making a joke… It gets harder and harder to tell with the green blob.

    • What I want to know is do offsets work on other ‘problems’?

      If you are facing Manslaughter… sorry, Personslaughter charges in front of a jury of your peers, could you just point out that the last couple of times you got ‘sexy’ you didn’t use a condom?

  2. If they believed the hype, they would video conference. They claim they are saving the planet, and working toward destroying it at the same time.
    I don’t believe the hype, so I don’t care if they utilize the incredible transportation system we have created using natural resources and human ingenuity. But don’t lecture the masses on how virtuous you are, when you are a hypocrite, and it is obvious to anyone that looks at what you are doing, that you are a hypocrite.

  3. And they want US to pay for what THEY do? Oh, heck no!

    Next time, to prove they are truly sincere, they can only attend if they walk, swim, or row a boat to get there. Then I will believe they mean what they try to push on us.

  4. Excerpted from above published commentary:

    The U.N. estimates the summit, called COP24, will emit 55,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide — the very greenhouse gas U.N. officials are trying to keep from accumulating in the atmosphere.

    A U.N. report issued in October suggested a $27,000 per ton carbon tax might be needed by the end of the century to stem warming.

    Does that mean that the UN would be directly liable for a $1,485,000,000 carbon tax for the COP24 summit?

    • If the 30,000 participants truly believed what they were selling, they would split the $1,485,000,000 equally out of their own personal pockets (not to be reimbursed).
      So, only $49,500 each for attending the conference.
      There are probably a good number of attendees where that amount of money would be completely insignificant and they would gladly do it.
      There might be some number of attendees who would put on yellow jackets and cause quite a ruckus about having to pay that unexpected and unnecessary fee.
      The ones who see no problem with it would not understand what in the world the others were upset about and tell them “this is really good for you, we just didn’t explain this well.”

  5. The ironies here are multiple.
    1. The sheer hubris and hypocrasy evidenced in excessive cost and carbon footprint
    2. The same last chance to save the world meme as Copenhagen COP15. Nothing has happened and nothing has cjanged concerning COPs.
    3. Nothing will result, again. There is no means for Tier Two countries (Tuvalu et. al.)to extort $100 billion per year from tier one countries, period. And US no longer plays the game despite its UNFCCC delegation. Trump would have been wiser to withdraw from UNFCCC than just the Paris Accord thereunder. Faster, also, as previously explained here several times.

  6. “…U.N. officials spent the past few months hyping COP24 as one of the last chances humanity has to avoid catastrophic global warming…..”.

    ….and so will COP25 and COP26 and COP27 and COP28 and COP29 and COP30 and…..

    The nice thing about a deadline is that the party that imposed it can always push it further down the road as necessary. Deadlines never need to be set in concrete.

  7. Was the flatulence of 30,000 people included in the calculations?

    Oh! And the burping after all those extravagant meals on the taxpayer!

  8. Its just crazy innit – an orgy of doom gloom and depression.

    Why not just sit through an evening of UK National TV – or the 24 hour news channel

    Do these muppets have ANY idea what sort of an effect their words and pronouncements might have on sensitive & vulnerable people?
    Esp= the poor, infirm, elderly, the lonely, the stressed, depressed or (Holy H. Cow) ‘The Anxious Ones’ that Mrs May was wondering about in her National Statistics Survey recently.

    Because it is the very actions that these clowns are proposing are what is causing and exacerbating that list….

    What happened to self awareness and empathy?
    (Went down the toilet with all that ‘nutritious fibre’ and acetaldehyde we’re all supposed to be eating in case you hadn’t worked it out)

    and isn’t this fantastic stuff:
    11-nor-delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol-9-carboxylic acid

    Just wait till that (acid) gets into the oceans – and it’s coming to one near you soon.
    The climate clowns will need a few serious spliffs to get over that

    • “Its just crazy innit – an orgy of doom gloom and depression.”

      I bet it really is depressing for many of the delegates. They probably know that most of their pleas will fall on deaf ears, which should make them depressed, and if they are True Believers and think the end of the world is just 12 years away, then they will *really* be depressed.

      They need some football-type cheerleaders and a marching band to cheer them up and lighten the mood.

  9. If they were really concerned about the burning of fossil fuels then they would hold their conferences on the Internet. The technology to do so is in place.

  10. For anyone attending the conference, there are things you can do to reduce your impact on the environment.

    1) Take a hybrid limo from the airport to the conference, and turn the lights off in your private jet.
    2) Do not put ice in your Scotch. Really, you shouldn’t be doing that anyway.
    3) Congratulate a homeless person on their low-emissions lifestyle. We all aspire to that.

  11. In what seems very likely, a hard exit from Europe by the UK, one good thing will be that the expected economic downturn will at last put paid to their obsession with Climate Change nonsense.

    When the choice is between suffering economically or worrying about a fairy tale finally confronts them, they will soon cease to worry about what might happen in 100 years time.

    MJE

  12. For 60 days you say ? Great , that means the pathetic May , half her cabinet and most of the Civil service will be out of the country that they are working so hard (and unfortunately so successfully) to destroy until the end of January. By then if the chairman of the BOE is correct the UK will be in such a poor economic state that their return tickets will be declared worthless and invalid , and they will all have to hitch hike to Calais and hope to smuggle their way back in a lorry.

    • 60 days? I don’t think so. Apparently the some of the exhibits will be open after everyone has gone home. But the time line I saw say the “closing plenaries” are Dec. 14.

      See: cop24.gov.pl/conference/agenda/

  13. Well, they used less that 0.01 % of all carbon used that week. And the results of their efforts have resulted in certainly single digit percentage increases in the amount of renewable energy used. So, paid for.

    Pretty funny that you complain about trifling amounts of energy used for such conferences and then make fun of the slowly going renewables.

    • trifling amount of energy?
      i wonder how much of polands coal electricity supply is powering the heaters in all the transportables?
      they want poland to close their coalmines
      hmm
      maybe turn the power OFF! while they see just how nice and cosy it is without heat and lights and warm food
      like many people have to, unable to afford power costs on pensions etc?

    • trafamadore
      You are a joke. Translation of what you just said is: each individual uses a “trifling amount”. So there is no need for any action on carbon. Translate a bit more: the Gores and Suzukis and the attendees of these COP parties use a higher trifle than I do so therefore these conferences Should be banned before I take any action.
      Now for a better comment from Ivan.

  14. David Attenborough the liar for hire.
    Despite all the rhetoric and lies . . .
    During the next 20-years, CO2 concentration will continue to increase at or near the average of the last 20-years. In 20 years, our World will be no different to today.
    UK Gov start planning the mechanism by which Sir David should be posthumously stripped of his knighthood.

  15. Emissions of CO2 from their activities is OK as they are saving the planet. It’s criminals like us who’s emissions of CO2 are the problem.

  16. Carbon dioxide emissions from the first 20 COP equals that from all motoring in New Zealand in a year,on the assumption that the average distance traveled by each attendee is a quarter of the way round the globe.

  17. I am not sure if the calculation also includes the hot air emitted from various orifices by the delegates. If not then the emissions for getting there are seriously underestimated. I wonder if they approve of their heating in the venue being provided by coal power or would they prefer to live up (down) to their objectives and turn off the heating.

  18. Language is vital in this battle, sceptics should try to avoid playing away games on dictated terms, such as carbon “pollution”.

    The keyword here is WASTE, firstly of precious (another keyword) coal used by this useless meeting, and of taxpayers money used to plant the supposedly offsetting trees.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *