6 ms·

True, but why is it that so many people concerned about climate fixate on aviation? It’s 3% of world carbon emissions. It’s tiny, it’s pivotal to the economy,

by api 1y ago

True, but why is it that so many people concerned about climate fixate on aviation? It’s 3% of world carbon emissions. It’s tiny, it’s pivotal to the economy, and it’s hard to change. It’s the worst thing to fixate on, the one you’ll make the least progress toward. What we should be fixating on is “end coal” because coal burning, largely for power generation, is both the largest single source and one of the easiest to replace. Yet that climate group is called “end oil” not “end coal.” Why? If we actually think climate change is a problem we need to think like scientists and engineers and prioritize rationally. We also have to be willing to put politics aside and make a broad and wide appeal, arguing that fixing this is in everyone’s long term interest (because it is).

appreciatorBus 1y ago
I think part of the answer is that not everyone is convinced it's pivotal. Only a small amount of aviation is pivotal by any definition, and that portion isn't very price sensitive, so paying for externalities wouldn't make much difference to it. Even in the richest country in the world, only half of the population took even one plane trip in 2024, and the distribution among those who did, probably skews heavily toward a very small # of frequent fliers. Aviation is super useful, no doubt. But like many difficult political problems, the benefits are concentrated on those who fly the most, or who consume most of the products that typically fly, and the costs are spread among those who fly the least, or not at all. Anyway, I have never seen someone advocate to ignore coal in favour of focussing on aviation. But I have seen a lot of people advocate to ignore aviation in favour of focussing on anything but aviation. As others have said, we can do more than one thing. Some of us can focus on coal, others on aviation. I am just a message board pundit, not involved in coal or aviation, nor advocacy around climate change on either. I am just skeptical of approaches that privilege one pollution source over another. Maybe politics means it's the best we can do, but that's not a very satisfying answer to some of us.

by api 1y ago

appreciatorBus 1y ago

I think part of the answer is that not everyone is convinced it's pivotal. Only a small amount of aviation is pivotal by any definition, and that portion isn't very price sensitive, so paying for externalities wouldn't make much difference to it. Even in the richest country in the world, only half of the population took even one plane trip in 2024, and the distribution among those who did, probably skews heavily toward a very small # of frequent fliers. Aviation is super useful, no doubt. But like many difficult political problems, the benefits are concentrated on those who fly the most, or who consume most of the products that typically fly, and the costs are spread among those who fly the least, or not at all. Anyway, I have never seen someone advocate to ignore coal in favour of focussing on aviation. But I have seen a lot of people advocate to ignore aviation in favour of focussing on anything but aviation. As others have said, we can do more than one thing. Some of us can focus on coal, others on aviation. I am just a message board pundit, not involved in coal or aviation, nor advocacy around climate change on either. I am just skeptical of approaches that privilege one pollution source over another. Maybe politics means it's the best we can do, but that's not a very satisfying answer to some of us.