3 ms·

Not sure why we tend to start the discussion with air travel. 100,000 commercial flights, all over the world, every day of the year add up to about 2% of tota

Not sure why we tend to start the discussion with air travel. 100,000 commercial flights, all over the world, every day of the year add up to about 2% of total emissions. The 40% of the global electricity generated for the past several decades from those dirty coal power plants that no one wants to live near seem like a better place to start. In addition to all that pollution, there’s quite a bit of CO2

Judgmentality 4y ago
You make an excellent point, but there is something about flights that's often overlooked. Night flights are actually significantly worse than day flights, because the emissions don't reflect heat from the sun but trap heat from the Earth. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2006/jun/15/theairlineindustry.ethicalliving https://www.theguardian.com/science/2006/jun/15/theairlinein... That said, this isn't a large enough effect to discredit your point.
WastingMyTime89 4y ago
That’s a very misleading way of looking at the problem. There are no good place to start before tackling the other places. We have to start everywhere and cut everywhere. You can’t shield your life style behind the excuse that some things are worst. 2% is also a big number. Cleaner planes are on the way but trying to shift how you travel towards cleaner mean of transport is everyone responsibility. So is helping the poor countries currently electrifying which constitute the majority of new coal plants being built have access to cleaner sources of power.
- melling 4y ago
  That’s not correct. There are large emission issues that would should tackle first. How we generate electricity is one of them. Carl Sagan warned us almost 40 years ago that coal would be a future problem. https://youtu.be/Wp-WiNXH6hI https://youtu.be/Wp-WiNXH6hI That was clearly a large problem that could have been addressed, and still needs to be ASAP. Coal-fired power stations emit over 10 Gt of carbon dioxide each year,[4] about one fifth of world greenhouse gas emissions, so are the single largest cause of climate change. 8500 coal power plants in the world. “Coal-fired power stations emit over 10 Gt of carbon dioxide each year,[4] about one fifth of world greenhouse gas emissions, so are the single largest cause of climate change.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal-fired_power_station https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal-fired_power_station So, we start the discussion with air travel, trying to reduce 2% to under 2%. While we’ve ignored 20% of global emissions. We actually cost ourselves decades. So many miracles needed by 2050, when we could be talking 2070. Now, let’s just tell everyone we need to do everything at once.
  - WastingMyTime89 4y ago
    > That’s not correct. There are large emission issues that would should tackle first. No we should and can and are working on tackling everything at once because we don’t have the time to sit on our ass and wait for others to solve issues which don’t affect us before moving if we want our way of life to survive. There is no valid reason to work sequentially here.

Judgmentality 4y ago

You make an excellent point, but there is something about flights that's often overlooked. Night flights are actually significantly worse than day flights, because the emissions don't reflect heat from the sun but trap heat from the Earth. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2006/jun/15/theairlineindustry.ethicalliving https://www.theguardian.com/science/2006/jun/15/theairlinein... That said, this isn't a large enough effect to discredit your point.

WastingMyTime89 4y ago

That’s a very misleading way of looking at the problem. There are no good place to start before tackling the other places. We have to start everywhere and cut everywhere. You can’t shield your life style behind the excuse that some things are worst. 2% is also a big number. Cleaner planes are on the way but trying to shift how you travel towards cleaner mean of transport is everyone responsibility. So is helping the poor countries currently electrifying which constitute the majority of new coal plants being built have access to cleaner sources of power.

melling 4y ago
That’s not correct. There are large emission issues that would should tackle first. How we generate electricity is one of them. Carl Sagan warned us almost 40 years ago that coal would be a future problem. https://youtu.be/Wp-WiNXH6hI https://youtu.be/Wp-WiNXH6hI That was clearly a large problem that could have been addressed, and still needs to be ASAP. Coal-fired power stations emit over 10 Gt of carbon dioxide each year,[4] about one fifth of world greenhouse gas emissions, so are the single largest cause of climate change. 8500 coal power plants in the world. “Coal-fired power stations emit over 10 Gt of carbon dioxide each year,[4] about one fifth of world greenhouse gas emissions, so are the single largest cause of climate change.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal-fired_power_station https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal-fired_power_station So, we start the discussion with air travel, trying to reduce 2% to under 2%. While we’ve ignored 20% of global emissions. We actually cost ourselves decades. So many miracles needed by 2050, when we could be talking 2070. Now, let’s just tell everyone we need to do everything at once.
- WastingMyTime89 4y ago
  > That’s not correct. There are large emission issues that would should tackle first. No we should and can and are working on tackling everything at once because we don’t have the time to sit on our ass and wait for others to solve issues which don’t affect us before moving if we want our way of life to survive. There is no valid reason to work sequentially here.