All they had to do was get out a map and put pins identifying where participants would come from. They could find something a tad more centrally located.

Such as?

All they had to do was get out a map and put pins identifying where participants would come from. They could find something a tad more centrally located.

There are so many less consumptive, less polluting, less expensive options. Write your government and let them know how idiotic this is. Writing blogs is fun and easy, but, like this entry, it won't solve anything. Hit 'em in the voting booth and let them know why. That's all they care about.

Gee why don't they just get on their yachts turn off the engines and sail to one of the Islands they own to have it, sh-t half of these gimps could have their slaves(i.e. mindless kook followers) row them there.

After all, they work at companies that have lights, A/C, heating, computers, etc.

Oh, come on. That's the most disingenuous load of crap I've seen you write in quite some time. How many times do you get serious businessmen to agree to videoconference at such a large scale? Never, that's how often. It doesn't scale, and people at that level of 'management' don't really know how to communicate in any way other than face-to-face anyways.

Of course, one of the more obvious ways to decrease emissions without emulating Chad’s standard of living is the substitution of technologies such as videoconferencing for real-space meetings. It’s not entirely clear why these people couldn’t do that.

Videoconferencing is ok for 2 or 3 simultanous feeds, but anything more than that and your internet connection will not be able to handle it. It is not currently possible for dozens or hundreds of simultaneous video streams to be sent to any one location. You would have to have a network capacity and last-time connectivity of a cable company to aggregate that many realtime feeds to that many realtime consumers.

Might as well ask why all conventions end up in Vegas or Orlando.

Because these cities have convention centers large enough to hold the numerous people attending while still being able to effectively divide them into the numerous simultaneous meetings that will be held, and airports that can accomodate non-stop and international flights without having an unreasonable commute. If it was just so the delegates could visit Disney, they would be held in Kissimmee not Orlando.

I think this is an excellent suggestion and would like to commend the author for their understanding of the problems we face today due to global climate change. I look forward to reading many more helpful tips on how I can help the environment; clearly something important to the author of this article.

Instead, we ended up with a massively corrupt political system filled with death squads and unspeakable torture that will (best case) result in a theocracy that's aligned with our most hated of enemies the nuclear Iran.

Guess the irony of the Global Warming conf causing Global Warming is more funny than a war to prevent terrorist and theocracy causing more terrorism and theocracy.

It's also how graft survives.

Why Bali? Might as well ask why all conventions end up in Vegas or Orlando. Nothing like a destination conference to make people feel important. Had this been held in a developed country the likelihood is that there would have been representatives on the ground and no excuse for a tropical vacation.