"life in a post-flying Australia and why it might actually be ok"

[cooperplace]

here: Life in a post-flying Australia, and why it might actually be ok (http://theconversation.com/life-in-a-post-flying-australia-and-why-it-might-actually-be-ok-70388) some academics discuss life without jet travel. Any thoughts?

[Atlas Shrugged]

Again, yet nothing short of a totally pointless exercise, which has no intent other than giving an appearance of doing something.

[Capn Bloggs]

Oxygen thieves... or should I say CO2 generators...

[IsDon]

As if we needed any more evidence that the only true wilderness is between a greeny's ears.

All these tree hugging lefties have just realised they have wasted the last three years of their lives at uni doing Environmental Science. To make themselves look busy they come up with these nonsense hypotheses.

And it took four of them to write it.

[KittyKatKaper]

We now use, on average, 2.2 barrels (or 347 litres) of jet fuel per person per year but from the place where they got that data ( https://industry.gov.au/Office-of-the-Chief-Economist/Publications/Documents/aps/2016/Australian_Petroleum_Statistics_242_September2016.pdf ) a quick calculation shows that automotive fuel consumption is over 700 l/person/pa !

Aircraft with sensible load-factors have person-fuel-usages similar to that of road transport.

Sure, rail is more fuel-efficient than road/air but the capital cost is very high with long construction times.

And as for sea-transport, I have no intention of spending 3+ weeks to get to Europe and another 3+ weeks to return.

[John Eacott]

Totally lacking in Chem-Trails substantiation....

[UTW]

Aviation is contributing to around 4.9% of current global warming and this is forecast to at least triple by 2050.

More hysteria.... Their own reference data suggests that aviation contributes 4.9% of human-caused global warming not total global warming. Nobody seems to mention what percentage is actually caused by anthropogenic factors as opposed to natural causes.

[Captain Dart]

I clicked on the thread thinking it was about CASA.

[stilton]

I thought it was about retirement..

[abgd]

Well, humans have caused the vast majority of the spike in CO2 and it coincides with a global increase in temperature. I don't think there's much doubt we're to blame for the bulk of global warming.

You won't wean people off of air transport, and my own view is that aviation emissions are going to be far harder to curtail than emissions in other spheres of industry. In terms of reducing global CO2 emissions, it would make sense to concentrate our efforts on other sectors first.

That said, I took the train from Canberra to Sydney recently and it made British trains look modern which is saying something, though it was a lot roomier than British trains and the food was better. There probably is a lot of scope for improving rail links such as this one though I grant you a flight from Sydney to Darwin is always going to beat the train.

[neville_nobody]

What a misleading piece of writing.

1. They are counting international fuel in their calculations but not counting the number of foreign nationals carried.

2. As mentioned above the elephant in the room is the motor car which is most inefficient form of transport. It burned 460% more fuel than all domestic aircraft. Now think about that figure for a while.

3. There is no consideration of the efficiency of flying. ie you can easily fly SYD-MEL-SYD in one day and have time to conduct business. Every other form of transport requires an overnight.

4. There is no consideration of freight carried including bags and time critical items.

5. They have brought short range public transport into a debate about long range transport. Planes don't compete with people commuting from Bowral or Central Coast to Sydney or from Gold Coast to Brisbane. How efficient is a train on SYD-BNE vs an Aircraft? Or BNE-PER? Don't forget a plane does that on 2 x 2km of runway vs 1000's kms of railway.

6. They expect railways to be subsidised by the government but aviation can pay the entire economic cost of operating.

Here's an idea how about we run railways like aviation and let the end user pay for the entire cost of operating and see how cost effective it is then?

[cooperplace]

I think 3 of the authors are from business/tourism backgrounds and one is an environmentalist. You wonder if any of them have ever actually run a business.

[Willie Nelson]

Well, a bunch of pilots chucking rock at what is essentially a though experiment regarding a world that has finally taken a strong stance against climate change, who would have thought.

I'm a pilot and I've derived my income from this caper for the last 18 years, I love it but I am deeply concerned about the consequences of climate change too.

There is little point in debating it on prune though because the collective total of us pilots that accept that not only is climate change real, I could count on my left hand. Let alone those that recognise its effects here and now.

The cognitive dissonance is insurmountable for most pilots to accept.

The implications of climate change, if we collectively chose to accept them are so significant that indeed, these sort of changes would be required. But these changes will of course not happen and therefore, crack on as you were and we can all go back to sticking our heads up our collective arses and let's just see what happens hey.

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

Well take a stand and give up flying if you think that doing so is destroying the earth. Then you can take the moral high ground. Obviously you're not that worried. There's a lot that talk the talk, but not many that walk the walk.

That tripe was written by three professors and a doctoral candidate?? It reads like a year 10 homework assignment.

[Allan L]

An alternative view of Carbon Dioxide levels

https://www.youtube.com/embed/BC1l4geSTP8

[cattletruck]

One of the most useless persons I have ever worked with was an academic who never ever held a real job. He really was as thick as sh!t.

His life of stress free work seems to have provided him with an expensive house inside an exclusive suburb, and privileged positions for his just-as-thick kids.

From this picture draw your own conclusions on how money gets exchanged for favourable opinions disguised as research.

[Willie Nelson]

Hi Allan,

Thanks for giving me the view of Senator Malcolm Roberts, wouldn't it be wonderful if indeed it were that simple, I so wish it were so.

Anyhoo, here's what NASA has to say on the matter:

Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Evidence (http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/)

The National Oceanic and Atmoshpheric Administration (US):

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/featured-images/2015-state-climate-global-temperature

While, we're at it here's what the Royal Society has to say:

https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/projects/climate-change-evidence-causes/

And here's what out own Bureau of Metorology has to say on the matter despite the coalition governments best efforts:

Climate change and variability (http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/#tabs=Tracker&tracker=timeseries)

Oh but wait everyone, they're just a bunch of wealthy scientists trying to feather their own nests with endless research grants about fake science so I wouldn't pay too much attention to them. Silly me.

[t_cas]

If we can call the food we are eating natural, then perhaps everything we do here on earth is natural and evolutionary.

Nothing we can make or not make will even come close to what nature will serve us.

Control freaks, that describes those who think we can beat nature.

Earth is a mere lifeboat for the human race. Where we go
From here will define our future.

[SpyderPig]

By far the most ridiculous thing I have ever read. I sincerely hope this was not written as part of a thesis or even high school assignment. God help us all, if there even is a god and if she allows us to continue to populate............

[cooperplace]

One of the most useless persons I have ever worked with was an academic who never ever held a real job. He really was as thick as sh!t.

His life of stress free work seems to have provided him with an expensive house inside an exclusive suburb, and privileged positions for his just-as-thick kids.

From this picture draw your own conclusions on how money gets exchanged for favourable opinions disguised as research.

academics do have real jobs; your characterization of them is harsh. Did you go to school? Your teachers were taught by academics. To the doctor? Dentist? lawyer? Guess who teaches all these people.

[IsDon]

academics do have real jobs; your characterization of them is harsh. Did you go to school? Your teachers were taught by academics. To the doctor? Dentist? lawyer? Guess who teaches all these people.

Those who can, do.

Those who can't, teach.

[Pinky the pilot]

Those who can, do.

Those who can't, teach.

Those who can do neither become consultants.

[cattletruck]

coops, it's only academic but I said "One of the most useless persons I have ever worked with..."

Recently one of our management team was carping on about some "hot shot" employee working at some big university was now wanting to work with us, and that he wanted to create a position for him. I told this manager that if said "hot shot" employee didn't have any industry experience outside academia then to dump the prospect. I quickly quizzed this manager on what his "hot shot" could bring to our organisation and as it turns out not much.

[cooperplace]

coops, it's only academic but I said "One of the most useless persons I have ever worked with..."

.

please accept my apology, I over-reacted.

[Atlas Shrugged]

academics do have real jobs; your characterization of them is harsh. Did you go to school? Your teachers were taught by academics. To the doctor? Dentist? lawyer? Guess who teaches all these people.

I understand what you are saying, and you are quite right, although somewhat out of context. The article goes deeper and deeper into areas which are plainly and simply utter nonsense until it ultimately transforms into a large bag of poo.

[unobtanium]

Anyone who has traveled Japan's excellent rail and bullet train network will agree that is the most efficient way to cross medium distances, ie up and down the east coast of Australia. However being Australia it will be afew billion dollars over budget and take 3 times as long to build.

On the subject of academics, I have a cousin who is doing a doctorate in Education. He also believes in angel sightings, christian miracles and supports trump mainly because Hilary approves abortion. And that the earth is 5000years old.

[neville_nobody]

Anyone who has traveled Japan's excellent rail and bullet train network will agree that is the most efficient way to cross medium distances, ie up and down the east coast of Australia.

Yes and they have 75% of Australia living between Melbourne and Albury. Changes the economics of it slightly.:rolleyes:

The most effective thing for Australia to do will be to build a few more runways with ILS's and/or airports and they will basically cover us into the future.

The whole High Speed Train thing is a ridiculous suggestion given the sparseness of the Australia Population and the inherent inefficiency in train travel over the sort of distances being proposed. Flying between Sydney and Melbourne and Brisbane is far and away the most efficient way of traveling.

If the lefty Green/Socialst types want to pick a fight they should start with the petrol driven vehicles as they use the most amount of fuel AND are the most inefficient form of transport.

However they are to scared to do that because they will mean taking on Big Oil Companies and Big Motor Car Companies and they will ultimately be crushed, so they just go the soft target which is aviation.

[Willie Nelson]

Here's the latest that the so called 'academics' are saying:

https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-noaa-data-show-2016-warmest-year-on-record-globally

[cooperplace]

On the subject of academics, I have a cousin who is doing a doctorate in Education. He also believes in angel sightings, christian miracles and supports trump mainly because Hilary approves abortion. And that the earth is 5000years old.

we all have relatives like this; no-one should draw conclusions about whole occupational groups because of one nitwit in that group; also, the acid test for him is whether he gets a job after finishing his PhD. As someone from the hard sciences, I can't help thinking that the field of education, and especially early childhood development, seems to attract more than its share of people who, shall I say, do research that I fail to see the point of. No doubt all the early childhood dev. people on this forum will now be outraged.

[criticalmass]

Guess it needed four authors because it took four of them to actually remember the English alphabet.

[Atlas Shrugged]

Guess it needed four authors because it took four of them to actually remember the English alphabet.

Brilliant !!!

:ok:

[DHC8 Driver]

And as anyone who has worked in Japan can attest, the super efficient Japanese rail network co-exists along side a very healthy aviation industry. No sign of airlines disappearing anytime time soon in Japan.

[Old Fella]

How many of those blaming the rest of us for creating emissions would be prepared to travel in a sailing ship, ride a push bike and live in a mud-hut with no electricity? Not too many I suspect. These people with Utopian ideals give me a pain in the backside.