71–80 of 151 posts
It would be helpful if something like might incentivize such celebs to create a fund for alternative fuel/energy research or commercial ventures.
See Hawaii as the latest example.
Since 99.9% of the flights and the people are already registered, there should be a worldwide limitation per each of the person for CO2 emissions.
That is some high-level authoritarian nonsense right there. Should there also be limits on how many KM's a person can drive a year? How many often the BBQ in their backyard? What is the penalty for exceeding said limit in your fantasy? edit Just out of curiosity I took what seems to be the "average" of the reported number of billionaires in America as 800, and the average yearly CO2 from flying via the linked article…
I'm not the guy who has the golden law that will change the world. I'm just proposing that CO2 emission is a big problem and some of the people are exploiting it.
Pointing towards this to help reconcile some of the hypocrisy from celebrity messaging seems productive towards better discourse on climate change imo
What's missing here is a sense of scale. Routine private jet flights are nothing compared to last mile freight such as Amazon. Short frequent trips by delivery drivers from your local warehouse to your doorstep should not be so wasteful. The largest source of pollution is freight in general. Hating on individuals solves nothing at all.
Since 99.9% of the flights and the people are already registered, there should be a worldwide limitation per each of the person for CO2 emissions.
That is some high-level authoritarian nonsense right there. Should there also be limits on how many KM's a person can drive a year? How many often the BBQ in their backyard? What is the penalty for exceeding said limit in your fantasy? edit Just out of curiosity I took what seems to be the "average" of the reported number of billionaires in America as 800, and the average yearly CO2 from flying via the linked article…
Your comment comes across as yet another average joe randomly defending billionaires wrecking the world while we take the consequences of it. Meanwhile yet another daily disaster in nature, 100s of dolphins are dead today from record temperatures https://www.insider.com/dolphins-dead-brazil-amazon-lake-rec...
Since 99.9% of the flights and the people are already registered, there should be a worldwide limitation per each of the person for CO2 emissions.
If your goal is to cause a revolution, then limiting freedom by “carbon emission limits” is an effective way to do it.
A recent flight by Zuckerberg consuming 1.4 tons of CO2 just to get from New Jersey to Jamaica Bay NYC while travelling multiple times the distance between the two if he'd taken a car in a more or less cross-line. His money, his choice on how to use it, but it's rather incredible coming from a guy who yammers on so much to the media about social responsibilities... Some things never change, and one of them is the way…
Generally, flights like that one exist because the airplane is somewhere other than the most convenient place for the owner to take off from, so the crew repositions the plane in a better location for a more convenient pick up.
I don't think that this really invalidates your overall conclusion or anything, just wanted to point that out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If your goal is to cause a revolution, then limiting freedom by “carbon emission limits” is an effective way to do it.
I think a revolution starting because Kyle Jenner isn’t allowed to use her private jet quite as much is… unlikely
That kind of ideas is parroted by people would be the first to suffer, while the "elite" will of course be exempted to comply. This is yet another power grab for the happy few.
Pointing towards this to help reconcile some of the hypocrisy from celebrity messaging seems productive towards better discourse on climate change imo
What's missing here is a sense of scale. Routine private jet flights are nothing compared to last mile freight such as Amazon. Short frequent trips by delivery drivers from your local warehouse to your doorstep should not be so wasteful. The largest source of pollution is freight in general. Hating on individuals solves nothing at all.
It does. It's a huge problem with so many complexities and requires so many sacrifices by all inhabitants of the planet.
The celebrities are already calling dibs on the problem claiming that they are the ones who solved it. If sacrifices are needed then some climate change dividend is also required at the end of such effort. And if there is no dividend for us then there shouldn't be for the celebrities.
It's only positive that an out of scale public shame would fall on them for flying private as it counteracts their massive PR effort orchestrated to fool the world into thinking that they alone have solved climate change or that they are 'the person who is doing the most in the world to solve climate change'.
Since 99.9% of the flights and the people are already registered, there should be a worldwide limitation per each of the person for CO2 emissions.
Instead of this petty, divisive and hostile nonsense, how about we just acknowledge that our civilization is fundamentally based on energy use, and work towards making all our energy use carbon-neutral?
Our planet receives enough harnessable solar energy to allow every single human being an energy allocation far in excess of a typical American.
There's absolutely no need to be hostile towards other people's energy use. Advocate for fundamental change, not petty ineffectual bullshit.
Taylor Swift would be mobbed everywhere in the airport.
Donald was a former president. The Secret Service doesn't let you drive a car after that, let alone fly commercial. Even if they wanted to; they can't. Many former presidents were car fanatics; Bush Jr. lamented to Jay Leno about not being able to drive his truck off private property anymore. 45 was known for sneaking past security detail in his pre-POTUS days to drive his Rolls around NYC. Not to mention Biden and his Corvettes, in his pre-dementia days anyway.
This article is implying wrongdoing for situations can logically cannot exist.