I see the news story I linked to has been adorned with some spurious graphs. The data that shows 20% of transport related emissions is for the UK only. Why not the Shetlands, then we can see 90% related to aviation!! It is totally invalid to localize useage as GW effects (if any at all), are global, except for the acclerated decay of the GW gas Methane by Aviation, which is localised (according to the IPPC Special Report on Aviation).
Here's some data from the same source document.
Aviation Petrolum Consumption:
2000 = 49.09 million tonnes.
2004 = 50.99 million tonnes.
Number of PAX transported:
2000 = 180 million.
2004 = 216 million.
So a
20% increase in PAX for a
2% increase in total fuel consumption. Pretty good going I would say. Mainly due, I wager, to the basic need to be more efficient than the competition.
If fuel consumption has risen by 2% since 2000, then is there a graph showing a %140 rise in carbon emissions over 30 years when the last four years indicate the increase would be more like 80%. In other words, how can carbon emission increase more than consumption?
We are being diddled, but why isn't the Aviation Industry fighting this? Why is it only MOL who kicks back at this nonesense?
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/group...ats_609987.pdf
EastMids,
Irrespective of how efficient its fleet is, it therefore follows that the amount of emissions produced by Ryanair is increasing as a proportion of the total produced by airlines
No it doesn't follow at all I'm afraid. If RyanAir wasn't running those slots, somebody else would be. If RyanAir are effieicent, regardless of how big they are or by how much they are expanding, then there is less wate - the total produced by airlines reduces.