Originally Posted by
TukwillaFlyboy
No, just a pragmatic , and amusing,response from experienced people.
The idea that reducing emissions will be cheap and easy is delusional.
Lithium batteries have about a sixtieth of the energy density of JetA1.
Its called physics.
It trumps wishful thinking every time.
“Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible.” Lord Kelvin 1895. Good thing nobody listened to him either.
Originally Posted by
TukwillaFlyboy
You might want to look up the concept of economic utility.
All successful revolutions increase economic utility , not decrease it.
The obsession with reducing emissions at all costs is going to lead to really dumb and expensive mistakes.
The problem with economic utility is that too often externalities are ignored. What is the cost of climate change, air pollution etc if we continue as is?
The frontline will be carbon fuelled through 2050 through we may see synthetic fuels replace fossil sources. And that's okay because military necessity justifies the cost.
But UAS and AEF flying won't have the same licence to operate. They'll have new generations of students and cadets looking for zero emissions and if the RAF is not ready to rise to that challenge then we will all be poorer for it (remembering that the primary purpose of UAS and air cadets is encourage air-mindedness , not recruitment).