Reply To: Extinction Rebellion
“Also, of course, we’d be hypocrites to sympathise with such a stunt. To be honest, I myself flew from and to Gatwick a couple of months ago, without feeling the slightest guilt. Many members will too (all the members of my branch do or have). And why not? Of course there’ll be airports and flights in socialism, though a trip in a balloon might be fun.”
I find it mildly hypocritical that those who are not climate-change deniers should, “without feeling the slightest guilt”, choose to bury their heads in the sand for the sake of preserving questionable personal “lifestyle” choices.
The environmental impact of aviation cannot be dismissed lightly. Aircraft engines emit heat, noise, particulates and gases which contribute to climate change and global dimming. Aircraft engines emit particles and gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2), water vapour, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulphur oxides, lead, and black carbon which interact among themselves and with the atmosphere.
Despite emission reductions from less polluting turbofan and turboprop engines, the rapid growth of air travel in the past years contributes to an increase in total pollution attributable to aviation. From 1992 to 2005, passenger kilometers increased 5.2 percent per year. And in the European Union, greenhouse gas emissions from aviation increased by 87 percent between 1990 and 2006.
Comprehensive research shows that despite anticipated efficiency innovations to airframes, engines, aerodynamics and flight operations, there is no end in sight to rapid growth in CO2 emissions from air travel and air freight, due to projected continual growth in air travel.
I would be very surprised indeed if this particular mode of transport, in its present form, would continue unabated in socialism.
As for me, I haven’t flown since 1985 and have no intention of ever doing so again. I have a car which I only use when there is no viable alternative.