In April, I flew to Bangkok for the final session of the 6th Assessment Cycle (AR6) of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). My return flight to Stockholm emitted more carbon than any person in the world's 50 % population with the lowest emissions in an entire year. A recent report on the synthesis of AR6 (ref go.nature.com/4hfkzpc ) concluded that rapid, deep and immediate reductions in emissions are needed to maintain a livable world. But this strong message is weakened by the actions of the IPCC. The IPCC should aggressively limit its own emissions instead of requiring face-to-face meetings and long-haul escort flights. Although the meetings contribute only a tiny fraction of total global emissions, improved accountability would have a huge impact on the IPCC's effectiveness and would be a case study for robust, internationally coordinated mitigation. The COVID-19 pandemic has shown that many IPCC meetings can be conducted entirely remotely, and most climate researchers are in favor of virtual elements at conferences. It's in line with trends in the broader climate science community: The World Climate Research Programme's Coupled Model Intercomparison Project, which helps coordinate climate models, suggested that it should lead by example and move to net-zero emissions as quickly as possible. However, similar IPCC statements are notably absent. (Benjamin M. Sanderson)