A few months ago, the mayor of Bristol, one of the greenest cities in Britain, boarded a plane and flew to Canada to attend a conference on the climate crisis and, in particular, reducing carbon emissions. Environmental activists calculated that for his trip, which lasted about nine hours, the carbon emissions were too high and certainly not in line with the message the mayor wanted to convey with his speech.

Something similar can be said about the leaders – more than a hundred – who are participating these days at the UN Climate Conference (COP27) in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt. It would be very interesting if someone calculated the ecological footprint of all these movements of the leaders and their environment.

I’m guessing they didn’t get hung up, they took the plane to Egypt to discuss how to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 45% by 2030 to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, and get a few more under-commitments. How else could they go? Perhaps most of the discussions could be done online. The pandemic has pointed the way to greener negotiations and consultations. You can also coordinate the policy remotely.

This is not a symbolic move, but a necessary one. In one of the most critical periods in recent years, when the war in Ukraine, the energy crisis forced us to return to fossil fuels, the food crisis and runaway inflation, every movement counts and sends a strong signal. How will you convince the planet skeptics, those who do not believe in the climate crisis? In the US, 20% do not believe in climate change, and among Republicans this figure reaches 45%.

Undoubtedly, when leaders’ actions do not match their words, climate deniers will remain a force to be reckoned with. It’s like discussing food waste over a buffet full of food.