Airlines, Airports, Routes - and climate change

[ATNotts]

Originally Posted by OzzyOzBorn

Err ... natural processes, anyone? Remember those???

You can bury your head in the sand as deep as you want, or stick a pair of underpants on your head and a pencil up each nostril but that doesn't change the science.

A great deal of the rapid (in geological terms) climate change IS DUE TO HUMAN ACTIVITY. Aviation is a part of the problem, as is shipping, road transport and indeed human population.

Commercial aviation is playing its part in trying to reduce emissions, along with a fair bit of greenwash. There is more that could be done, not least curbing the mushrooming use of business aircraft. Also ensuring, as low cost airlines do, maximising loads on aircraft.

[Ascupart]

Originally Posted by OzzyOzBorn

Err ... natural processes, anyone? Remember those???

I'm curious what your point it, since we know that

As stated in this article

Humans emissions and activities have caused around 100% of the warming observed since 1950, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

[Ascupart]

UK airline emissions on track to reach record high in 2024

Sector may breach the government’s Jet Zero strategy which pledged not to surpass 2019 CO2 figures

[andymartin]

Originally Posted by Ascupart

UK airline emissions on track to reach record high in 2024

Sector may breach the government’s Jet Zero strategy which pledged not to surpass 2019 CO2 figures

Well I'm still burning tyres in my back yard, and I ain't giving up flying anytime soon.

[TURIN]

Originally Posted by SWBKCB

Obviously not the sole source, but a contributor.

A very, very minor contribution.
It's crazy to shut down flying to tackle climate change.
It's crazy to even consider using alternate fuels. The overall effect is minimal.
Let's focus on tackling the big CO2 emitters, that will make a difference.

[Ascupart]

Originally Posted by TURIN

A very, very minor contribution.
It's crazy to shut down flying to tackle climate change.
It's crazy to even consider using alternate fuels. The overall effect is minimal.
Let's focus on tackling the big CO2 emitters, that will make a difference.

No one is suggesting that we 'shut down flying', but if we all flew less that would certainly make a difference.
We need to tackle all sources of CO2 emissions, including aviation, if we have a chance to avoid the worst effects of climate change.

[PAXboy]

I first became seriously aware of climate change around 1995. One branch of my family were then farmers (outside the UK) and they said that the reduced rainfall and other changes was unlike anything that they had seen in 40 years. As I read more I cam to the conclusion that: The chances of the countries of the world getting their collective act together - in time - to prevent major climate change = Zero.

In the subsequent 27+ years, I have seen nothing to make me change my mind. Yes, inroads are being made but they will not be enough.

[andymartin]

Originally Posted by Ascupart

No one is suggesting that we 'shut down flying', but if we all flew less that would certainly make a difference.
We need to tackle all sources of CO2 emissions, including aviation, if we have a chance to avoid the worst effects of climate change.

'If we all flew less'??
So the family who take their one foreign holiday per year by plane shouldn't go anywhere? Absolute nonsense.

[Ascupart]

Originally Posted by andymartin

'If we all flew less'??
So the family who take their one foreign holiday per year by plane shouldn't go anywhere? Absolute nonsense.

Let me phrase this in a way that's easier for you. If, globally, fewer flights were taken, then that would make a real difference to aviation emissions. So maybe your family holidays abroad every other year. Hardly a big sacrifice.

And keep in mind you can travel by rail to France and beyond. Or holiday at home.

Remember that around 80% of the global population has never flown - yet they will suffer just as much from climate change (more so, probably, since they tend to live in poorer parts of the planet).

[ATNotts]

Originally Posted by andymartin

'If we all flew less'??
So the family who take their one foreign holiday per year by plane shouldn't go anywhere? Absolute nonsense.

If less flying took place might be a better way of looking at it. When you look a cargo operations so many of the ad hoc flights involve long environmentally damaging positioning flights. Look for example at some of Atlas Air and National's positioning legs. A lot of the air cargo uplift can be layed at the feet of "Chinese Tat" that western consumers apparently "need" delivered next day. Great for the industry, apalling for the environment.

Then the mushrooming of bizjet flying needs curbing, probably through a global agreement on penal taxes, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

[Mr Mac]

I think the Elephant in the room re Climate change is not flying or indeed power generation or in steel production or cars etc it is people. The world’s population has grown exponentially and these people have higher expectations than their forefathers and there by creating more demand. Address the population explosion but nobody wants to mention that as a factor as it’s far easier to point at shiny planes or cars or whatever.

Cheers
Mr Mac

[kcockayne]

Totally true, Mr.Mac. ALL of the world's problems revolve entirely around the fact that there are far too many people on the planet. What is more; there is nothing that will be done that will solve any of these problems.

[TURIN]

Originally Posted by Ascupart

No one is suggesting that we 'shut down flying', but if we all flew less that would certainly make a difference.
We need to tackle all sources of CO2 emissions, including aviation, if we have a chance to avoid the worst effects of climate change.

How much less flying would you like everyone to do?
If we cut all flights by 50% it would reduce global CO2 emissions by..... Wait for it... less than 1.5%!!!
That is not going to make a difference, at all.
Cut surface transport, power generation and industrial emissions by. 50%? Now were talking.

[APU.INOP]

Originally Posted by TURIN

How much less flying would you like everyone to do?
If we cut all flights by 50% it would reduce global CO2 emissions by..... Wait for it... less than 1.5%!!!
That is not going to make a difference, at all.
Cut surface transport, power generation and industrial emissions by. 50%? Now were talking.

Well said! Unfortunately with aviation being a very "visible" contributor to Co2 emissions (even though that contribution is comparatively quite low,) it will likely always find itself in the crosshairs

[Ascupart]

Originally Posted by TURIN

How much less flying would you like everyone to do?
If we cut all flights by 50% it would reduce global CO2 emissions by..... Wait for it... less than 1.5%!!!
That is not going to make a difference, at all.

How do you know that?

No one is suggesting that we ONLY cut aviation emissions. We need to cut emissions wherever we can.

Agriculture sector: We can eat less meat , reduce tilling.
Road transportation: Electrification of vehicles - already in progress.
Energy generation: Move to renewables and nuclear
Shipping: Tough to solve, LNG is possible but of dubious value.
Aviation: ? SAF is possible but is currently way more expensive then traditional fuel, and can we ever produce enough of it?

It's tough for people to give up food or using electricity at home. But cutting out a flight makes a huge difference to a person's carbon footprint.
The obvious first step would be to target the 1% of flyers who make up half of global emissions. But we must all do our part.

[Ascupart]

Originally Posted by Mr Mac

I think the Elephant in the room re Climate change is not flying or indeed power generation or in steel production or cars etc it is people. The world’s population has grown exponentially and these people have higher expectations than their forefathers and there by creating more demand. Address the population explosion but nobody wants to mention that as a factor as it’s far easier to point at shiny planes or cars or whatever.

Cheers
Mr Mac

This is wrong. It's not the number of people that is the issue, it's what we do. There are tremendous inequalities in emissions.

You Tube

[Asturias56]

Its not just numbers - its aspirations. 40 years if you had a bicycle in Jakarta you weren't poor and if you owned a motor bike you were middle class.

Now the middle class all have cars - and they travel further, start to take holidays abroad, want bigger houses, A/C etc etc

[Ascupart]

Aviation fuel plan supports growth of British aviation sector

Interesting to read that

While we recognise SAF may be more expensive than traditional jet fuel in the immediate term, we’re ensuring decarbonisation doesn’t come at the expense of consumers. This plan is part of our approach to ensure that the rationing of flights through ‘demand management’ is ruled out.

Hmm, I wonder what the next government's view will be on that.

[chaps1954]

Exactly the same as every body else so no change.
One of the big problems are the wars with all the weapons and fuel being burned so lets ban wars and Volcanos and wild fires whilst we are at it

[ATNotts]

Originally Posted by chaps1954

Exactly the same as every body else so no change.
One of the big problems are the wars with all the weapons and fuel being burned so lets ban wars and Volcanos and wild fires whilst we are at it

They only one of those that the human race has control of is war and I'd stand four square behind that ambition.

Sadly the human race is incapable of such a quantum leap.