Previously
Past ESG conferences
Who were the speakers at our previous conferences? What were we discussing? What carbon footprint did the conference produce? You can find out below.
Previously
Who were the speakers at our previous conferences? What were we discussing? What carbon footprint did the conference produce? You can find out below.
Co-Chair of the UNEP Environment International Resource Panel, ex-Commisioner of the European Commision
Member of the Board, Production & Logistics at Škoda Auto
Senior Vice President Sustainability & Innovation at wienerberger
CEO & Chairwoman Vodafone Czech Republic
Co-founder at CURRENT
Chairmen of the Board of Stavební spořitelna České spořitelny and President of the Association of Czech Building Savings Banks
President at Defence and Security Industry Association of the Czech Republic
LIMESS Sustainability Lab, Founder
ESG Manager at Wienerberger
CEO of the Prague Congress Centre
Director of Public and Client Relations, Ipsos
Board Member ASCOPA
Head of ESG & WHS, GasNet CZ; Presidium of the Czech BCSD
Assistant professor
Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles Univeristy in Prague. Deputy Head of the Department of Political Science.
Chief AI Officer, Adastra
Client Director, Head of ESG Strategy
Head of the Responsible Companies Section at Frank Bold
Team Leader and Consultant in the ESG team
CEO of Czech Green Building Council (CZGBC)
CI3, s.r.o., a BLF partner, has once again calculated the carbon footprint of this year’s conference based on internationally recognized methodologies. The calculation included transportation of participants and guests to and from the event, their accommodations, transportation of materials and people during the event, energy consumption at the venue, materials used, catering, and waste generated. Some of the data had to be collected prior to the event itself, but the final data was not available until after it ended, particularly regarding participant transportation, energy consumption, and catering.
The conference’s total carbon footprint reached 3,350.2 kg CO2e, or approximately 3.35 metric tons of CO2 equivalent. This represents a significant increase compared to the previous year. This increase is due to several concurrent factors, not a single change in the event’s organization. Participant transportation accounts for the largest share of the total footprint, amounting to 1,773.3 kg CO2e, or 52.9% of total emissions. Compared to previous years, a larger proportion of participants chose to travel by private car, which had a significant impact on the result. Guest transportation accounts for an additional 471.7 kg CO2e (14.1%).
The second most significant category is catering, which amounted to 754.5 kg CO2e (22.5%). The increase in this category is primarily due to a higher number of servings, not a significant change in the composition of the meals. The catering remained strictly vegan. Energy consumption during the event amounted to 156.9 kg CO2e (4.7%). Although the venue uses green electricity, the calculation also includes emissions associated with energy production and electricity transmission. A positive development compared to previous years is a more detailed understanding of actual energy consumption in the halls, particularly for lighting, cooling, and ventilation.
Other monitored categories—transportation of materials and people during the event (90.0 kg CO2e), lodging (83.2 kg CO2e), materials (19.1 kg CO2e), and waste (1.5 kg CO2e)—account for a relatively small share of the total carbon footprint. The calculation for material transport reflects a conservative estimate of the logistics flows associated with the event’s preparation and execution.
The results of this year’s calculation clearly show where the greatest potential lies for reducing the carbon footprint in the future. Participant transportation remains a key area, where individual decisions have a significant impact on the overall result. Precise catering planning and further improvements in energy efficiency at the venue also play a significant role.
The conference’s carbon footprint thus serves not only as a tool for transparency but, above all, as a practical basis for targeted measures in future editions.
