@hypolite @benfulton
-
IDK per person they are pretty bad.
-
IDK per person they are pretty bad.
@futurebird @benfulton Yes but it won't have a significant impact on global emissions because it concerns so few people. As a way to reduce inequality, such a ban would be worth it, but the overall carbon footprint of private jets is negligible (2% of all aviation in 2023). -
@futurebird @benfulton Yes but it won't have a significant impact on global emissions because it concerns so few people. As a way to reduce inequality, such a ban would be worth it, but the overall carbon footprint of private jets is negligible (2% of all aviation in 2023).
I agree. But I also think it will be hard, unreasonable even to expect everyone to adapt to pull the breaks on the climate crisis as long as a bunch of the richest jerks you can think of keep flying around in jets.
We need to replace shorter plane flights with trains for example. Some people will think that's a downgrade (it's not but whatever)
It's symbolically important.
-
I agree. But I also think it will be hard, unreasonable even to expect everyone to adapt to pull the breaks on the climate crisis as long as a bunch of the richest jerks you can think of keep flying around in jets.
We need to replace shorter plane flights with trains for example. Some people will think that's a downgrade (it's not but whatever)
It's symbolically important.
@futurebird @benfulton Agree about the symbolism. In itself it's almost useless but it makes perfect sense as part of a host of other measures aiming at the same goal. -
@futurebird @benfulton Agree about the symbolism. In itself it's almost useless but it makes perfect sense as part of a host of other measures aiming at the same goal.
To the extent that addressing the climate crisis looks anything like austerity the richest must go first and take the biggest hit.
That's just ... fair.
