PDA

View Full Version : Carbon Footprint for Military


racedo
9th Sep 2009, 17:17
Given the Goverments stated aim to reduce the carbon footprint, in other words to tax anything that moves in the attempt to balance the books, what would be the impact within the RAF.

I can just see the whole team in an early morning briefing, more time is spent reminding Aircrew / Ground Crew of their carbon emmissions, than in the Intel for an upcoming mission.

Mission success is decided on the level of carbon emmissions rather than destroying the target, crew who have in todays world completed a successful mission now held as Pariahs for their Carbon emmissions. Crews who didn't get off the ground being chaired high for their succesful mission.

Oh god say it isn't true.

BEagle
9th Sep 2009, 17:26
Any mission which turns stone-age fanatics into carbon is fine by me.

The penalty for fuel theft seems quite justified as well......

Sun Who
9th Sep 2009, 18:42
Reducing the military's carbon foot print isn't a question of demonstrating PC green credentials, it's a question of maintaining sovereign power and being able to project effect independent of a dependence on fossil fuels.

Reducing Operational Dependency on Fossil Fuels (http://www.science.mod.uk/engagement/cp/capabilityvisions_default.aspx?ThemeId=348378fc-3b93-45f8-892e-58d96ef2d630&ThemeType=cv&)

Sun

Cyprus countrybred
9th Sep 2009, 21:35
While the RAF is still flying VC10s I see absolutely no reason to suffer low energy light bulbs in my house.

L J R
9th Sep 2009, 21:59
Time to join B A B E. For those who were in the club in the'80s - welcome back.

Runaway Gun
10th Sep 2009, 07:31
Build Another British Empire ?

trex450
10th Sep 2009, 10:42
stop fighting pointless wars!

aviate1138
10th Sep 2009, 11:00
There are huge deposits of oil, so much that every Pruner will be dead and there will still be oil around. All this **** about carbon is simply politico-scientific claptrap. Save money and avoid any carbon trading and prepare for the next ice age. Scrap the wind turbines and make aircraft engines more efficient and remember that shipping belches out more CO2 than all the
aircraft in the world and fly safe.
Without CO2 there would be no trees/vegetables/humans. It isn't a poison or pollutant.

Greens are not good for anyone.

cornish-stormrider
10th Sep 2009, 11:27
Greens are not good?
Back to school for you young man. You are obviously completely unaware of the importance of mint in a mojito! or salad for the wife to keep her quiet when I are cooking big slabs of steak.

NYF
10th Sep 2009, 11:39
The are, undoubtedly, huge amounts of oil, but less and less that's relatively cheap and easy to extract. We're also getting through it quickly.

The International Energy Agency (not an environmental pressure group, but an intergovernmental organisation About the International Energy Agency (IEA) (http://www.iea.org/about/index.asp)) believes that known and yet to be discovered reserves will last for another forty years.

And the first report of the UK Industry Task Force on Peak Oil and Energy Security (with a foreword by Lord Oxburgh, former Chairman of Shell) comes to much the same conclusion. It argues that Peak Oil will be reached as early as 2013 beyond that point production declines until it runs out.

Again, the UK Task Force is not made up of tree-huggers, but comprised of companies like Arup, Virgin, Stagecoach, Scottish and Southern Energy.

Food for thought at least

advocatusDIABOLI
10th Sep 2009, 17:44
If you ever get the chance, to sample the truely excellent 'Fish and Chips' at the chippy on the harbour at Anstruther, Fife. You might detect a faint odour of AvTur............ Probably due to the Bizzillion Tons dumped over the years by jets.

It takes nearly 30 mins to dump an entire 'Fat' F3 of fuel, and I personally have needed to do that on several occasions straight after take off. As one other poster pointed out, while we still fly VC10s, we might as well leave the porch light on, with a 200W bulb in it.....

I personally think, the planet will be just fine, we (humans) might not, but it will.

Regards,

Advo

stiknruda
10th Sep 2009, 20:20
As my P51 owner buddy said to me recently, "The larger your carbon footprint, the more fun that you are having!"

aviate1138
11th Sep 2009, 07:15
"Oil is a fossil fuel and finite."

How about this below? If true, why are we throwing money down the drain about CO2?

Not from the Daily Mail but an august Swedish Scientific organisation.

KTH | Easier to find oil (http://www.kth.se/aktuellt/1.43372?l=en_uk)

And this......one of many new finds.

BG's Brazilian oil find will 'dwarf' BP's strike in the US Gulf Coast | Business | guardian.co.uk (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/sep/09/bg-guara-brazil-oil-discovery)

Sadly for the UK our Government isn't interested........Doh!

Carbon trading ?may spell early end to oil fields? - Herald Scotland | Business | Markets & Economy (http://www.heraldscotland.com/business/markets-economy/carbon-trading-may-spell-early-end-to-oil-fields-1.918668)

hunterboy
11th Sep 2009, 07:40
Wont the global warming problem end when we run out of oil anyway?
Just give it 50 years and we will all be back to the Victorian age anyway.

aviate1138
11th Sep 2009, 07:52
Hunterboy - read the previous? :rolleyes:

NutLoose
14th Sep 2009, 21:02
Plant a tree to offset it, shoot your local Taliban then stick a tree on his remains :p

It is okay making engines more efficent etc but end of day that just allows makes it last longer, in the end you are still going to eventually burn it all regardless of wind power etc it is a finite resource...........

Myself I think recycling plastics is a waste of time, I am all for burying it, I firmly believe that we are laying down a resource for the future, the technology is not there 100% to recycle plastics efficently, as oil reserves run down I can envisage these waste dumps being revisited in future years and the plastics being recovered and processed, most of the other waste having broken down.