3 ms·

> If the problem with air travel is emissions then we ought to work on alternative fuels. They don't exist yet. > Globally, air travel accounts for only a sma

by xroche 5y ago

> If the problem with air travel is emissions then we ought to work on alternative fuels. They don't exist yet. > Globally, air travel accounts for only a small proportion of emissions Air travel is 2% of all global emissions. This is huge for such a small sector.

mytailorisrich 5y ago
They don't exist yet... Hence perhaps working on it and investing much more into R&D would be useful. 2% of global emissions is close to negligible. Certainly this does not warrant the constant media coverage against air travel on environmental grounds. This is the usual fluff while the real, hard problems are not discussed. Politics instead of pragmatism. It's really important to go a such important problems in a pragmatic and systematic way, rather than following into PR and political games.
- bellyfullofbac 5y ago
  Can I have 2% of your paycheck then, if it's negligible?
  - mytailorisrich 5y ago
    This is about prioritising issues. If your boat is sinking you do not discuss what to do about the slow drip at the back, you try to solve the massive hole at the front first. If air travel only accounts for 2% of emissions then whatever we do will have a very small impact overall. So do we really need to bother at the moment or at all? It's not targeted because it makes a difference but because it's politically easier for a number of reasons. People, especially on HN, should really see through this theatre. For example in France they tried (very badly) to add further taxes on car fuel and that ended in riots. So now they say that they will ban air travel when a train alternative exists. That will make no difference on anything but they can claim that they are doing something (that seems to target the rich more than the poor, so even better).
    - globular-toast 5y ago
      I think most people here understand profiling and starting with the big target first. But we can and should be doing multiple things at once and air travel is far enough up there to bother with.
    - CRConrad 5y ago
      >>>[mytailorisrich:] 2% of global emissions is close to negligible. >>[bellyfullofbac:] Can I have 2% of your paycheck then, if it's negligible? >[mytailorisrich:] This is about prioritising issues Maybe de-prioritise your wardrobe then?

by xroche 5y ago

mytailorisrich 5y ago

They don't exist yet... Hence perhaps working on it and investing much more into R&D would be useful. 2% of global emissions is close to negligible. Certainly this does not warrant the constant media coverage against air travel on environmental grounds. This is the usual fluff while the real, hard problems are not discussed. Politics instead of pragmatism. It's really important to go a such important problems in a pragmatic and systematic way, rather than following into PR and political games.

bellyfullofbac 5y ago
Can I have 2% of your paycheck then, if it's negligible?
- mytailorisrich 5y ago
  This is about prioritising issues. If your boat is sinking you do not discuss what to do about the slow drip at the back, you try to solve the massive hole at the front first. If air travel only accounts for 2% of emissions then whatever we do will have a very small impact overall. So do we really need to bother at the moment or at all? It's not targeted because it makes a difference but because it's politically easier for a number of reasons. People, especially on HN, should really see through this theatre. For example in France they tried (very badly) to add further taxes on car fuel and that ended in riots. So now they say that they will ban air travel when a train alternative exists. That will make no difference on anything but they can claim that they are doing something (that seems to target the rich more than the poor, so even better).
  - globular-toast 5y ago
    I think most people here understand profiling and starting with the big target first. But we can and should be doing multiple things at once and air travel is far enough up there to bother with.
  - CRConrad 5y ago
    >>>[mytailorisrich:] 2% of global emissions is close to negligible. >>[bellyfullofbac:] Can I have 2% of your paycheck then, if it's negligible? >[mytailorisrich:] This is about prioritising issues Maybe de-prioritise your wardrobe then?