No disrespect but there in lies one of the main issues. Those millions of little indulgences that millions of people have have the snowball effect. I 'deserve' a holiday abroad etc. If there was a way of demonstrating that Mr & Mrs family of four holiday to Spain would have XXXX impact precisely on this species or that village in the desert I still think people would go in the same way that they are aware of the impact on buying cheap from Primark but choose to look the other way as it were.Unfortunately I do like my holidays in Lapland. To get there without flying, Train to Edinburgh - London - Dover - Calais - Brussel - Hamburg - Kiel - Copenhagen - Malmo - Stockholm - Kiruna about 4 days. Back in the bad old days you could get the ferry to Bergan and train from there - only around 30 hours. Taking the train is also a lot more expensive. I know it's an indulgence but it is so nice up there.
Not a cunning comparison - people choose to fly, whereas if people can't drive/don't own a car/insert excuse here and need to travel between cities they had no choice but to take a train.
And as it happens, the train is one of the less damaging means of transport, regardless of the political ethos behind the ownership of the railway or otherwise.
Is this an argument for doing nothing then? When desertification increases, when droughts increase, when crops fail, when sea levels rise, all due to climate change, will the poor be having any less of a miserable time? As always, they will be on the sharp end of it. More of an argument for overcoming the issues and disagreements and taking action now.In the form many of the greener options are currently proposed, the biggest losers of that are liable to be the poor in areas of the world that are already deprived.
Which options? Proposed by who?In the form many of the greener options are currently proposed, the biggest losers of that are liable to be the poor in areas of the world that are already deprived.
Is this an argument for doing nothing then? When desertification increases, when droughts increase, when crops fail, when sea levels rise, all due to climate change, will the poor be having any less of a miserable time? As always, they will be on the sharp end of it. More of an argument for overcoming the issues and disagreements and taking action now.
This was Farnborough when I was a kid.
View: https://youtu.be/O5o5ZdEJxD8
View: https://youtu.be/xNLWb0DEsoo
Now it's all rich footballers and celebrities flying in and out.
Yes I do realize that.No disrespect but there in lies one of the main issues.
They're a fairly recent development in the scheme of things.I was stationed there for two years in the early eighties, no private flights back then.
BP leading the way (out, to net zero):The really 'bad guys' are the oil corps heavy industry, and those who don't want to see action on the climate crises .
If "private flyers" includes leisure travel it sounds plausible. So called "executive jets" are simply a notable manifestation of the same problem and an easy target."Private flyers cause half of aviation’s global emissions" says the tw*t in the OP. Can someone help with a 'fact check'?