This is astonishing. Over 100,000 people are attending (and almost all flying) to the latest annual climate change conference. The numbers attending used to be 5,000 or so which was reasonable for a conference with 150+ countries represented, but now you have 100,000 people going.
Click to vew
You could justify the greenhouse gas emissions from those attending when it was a modest number, but with 100,000 attending the conference itself will cause more CO2 to be emitted than almost any other single event this year.
They estimate every hour of passenger flying emits 250 kgs of CO2 equivalent. Let's assume the average flight is 12 hours each way.
250 x 24 x 100,000 = 600 million kgs of CO2 or 600,000 tonnes. That is around half the annual emissions of NZ Steel.
David Farrar runs Curia Market Research, a specialist opinion polling and research agency, and the popular Kiwiblog where this article was sourced. He previously worked in the Parliament for eight years, serving two National Party Prime Ministers and three Opposition Leaders.
They estimate every hour of passenger flying emits 250 kgs of CO2 equivalent. Let's assume the average flight is 12 hours each way.
250 x 24 x 100,000 = 600 million kgs of CO2 or 600,000 tonnes. That is around half the annual emissions of NZ Steel.
David Farrar runs Curia Market Research, a specialist opinion polling and research agency, and the popular Kiwiblog where this article was sourced. He previously worked in the Parliament for eight years, serving two National Party Prime Ministers and three Opposition Leaders.
7 comments:
Quite wrong this time David . Aeronautical CO2 emission is NOT a recognised emission in all IPCC and others emission calculation. Similarly emissions from ships at sea . International airspace and oceans are therefore not attributed to any individual country.
Basil Walker
Maybe all the hangers on don't want to miss out.
Hopefully the writing's on the wall for these pointless talk-fests, attended by people who know little or nothing about climate change.
Accelerating private jet demand is happening at a time when climate alarmist elites have a weird obsession with lecturing everyone else about doomsday climate prophecies if cow farts and fossil fuel cars aren't banned.
Hypocrite Bill Gates provided the latest warning about climate change at the annual United Nations meeting in Dubai on Sunday. He said, "Climate progress is moving ahead even though we won't meet our highest aspirations."
Well, Bill, if you and the other elites who attended COP28 cared about the environment and didn't use virtue signals - then flying coach would be a better option than a private jet.
But, of course, elites will never give up their private jets and mega-yachts because there is a two-tier society where the rules that apply to the working poor don't apply to them.
They are gunning for Feudalism, where we are their serfs/slaves in slavelandia.
An unbelievable pack of hypocrites and even worse when most Governments around the world are financially strapped for one reason or another.
And, Basil Walker, just because it may not be 'attributed' doesn't mean it miraculously doesn't count. What a joke, a bit like the so called "crisis."
We have issues sure, but "crisis?" and "global boiling?" No wonder some many young have mental health issues.
Maybe NZ should put our hand up to host one in the near future. 100,000 - imagine the boost for our tourist and hospitality industries. Maybe that is the underlying reason for these pointless exercises.
World rejects dire consequences of energy strangulation: Climate cult delusions crumble.
The climate scheme is built on three obvious lies, including the lie that CO2 is bad for plants (hint: It's actually the single most important molecule that allows trees, grasses and food crops to thrive).
The real agenda behind the climate cult is to enslave and then exterminate humankind. Cutting off the energy grid for human populations is a key element of control through "climate lockdowns." And just yesterday, John Kerry called for banning all coal-fired power plants around the world, which would plunge the planet into mass famine and collapse.
This is the plan, and it's related to the jab plan as well, since it all comes back to depopulation and the anti-human agenda.
If humans protected the Amazon Forest and other CO2 sinks, ( ie Mother Nature’s built in systems of protection) would that not make more sense than expensive talkfests?
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.