I was thinking with the volcano that geothermal would be perfect, perhaps they didn't have that as one of the options because it would too obviously be a hands down winner. Although I do agree that the chosen solution wasn't important, the process of arriving there and the reasoning, individually and in the group, was the part you were being assessed on.
Unless you chose fossil fuels - then you just crazy brains and shouldn't fly the shiny jet.
It's a shame that such a large amount of money is required, although I do feel more secure in the fact Aer Lingus will do all that they can to place you because they have invested money in you.
In the case of the British Airways scheme, the airline has less of an incentive to employ you, because you've paid the entire cost of the training and they haven't outlaid anything. I'm not saying that they would just cast you aside on a whim, just that there is no financial penalty for them in doing so (unless they've acted as a guarantor - which they are
willing but not
keen to do).
Interestingly though, to fully sponsor the training of 20 cadets (if the figures being bandied about are accurate) it would cost Aer Lingus an extra €1M (20x50,000) which seems to me, not that huge an amount to an airline. Or rather, €1M to an airline is a less significant figure than €50,000 to Joe (or Joanne
) Public.
Although, given the current economic climate, I'm sure running a cadet scheme at all was a hard sell to the powers that be.