11–20 of 35 posts
It would be nice if the author applied his design and writing skills to something more interesting than destroying as much of the ozone layer as possible in a month (or is there some valuable aspect of his project that I'm missing?).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see. Because everyday activities have some effect on the ozone layer, a month of constant, pointless, unneccessary flying - an activity that is widely known to have a large impact on the ozone layer - is okay. Got it.
You're right to point out that this activity has a reasonably high environmental cost, but the value of this idea is in its RELATIVE merits. Will they do something interesting/worthy/influential/etc enough to merit the cost. As a practical example of this trade-off, imagine the cost of creating a documentary film. The environment might be hurt by driving all over, or flying a film crew around. But was it worth it? De…
I don't see why a month of constant, needless flying is needed to for this premise. Documenting a bicycle trip using web 2.0 techniques, for example, would be a similar project without the subtext of needless consumption.
It would be nice if the author applied his design and writing skills to something more interesting than destroying as much of the ozone layer as possible in a month (or is there some valuable aspect of his project that I'm missing?).
It would be nice if the author applied his design and writing skills to something more interesting than destroying as much of the ozone layer as possible in a month (or is there some valuable aspect of his project that I'm missing?).
As I said the last time this came up, if a seat isn't filled on an outbound flight, it just makes more room for cargo.
It would be nice if the author applied his design and writing skills to something more interesting than destroying as much of the ozone layer as possible in a month (or is there some valuable aspect of his project that I'm missing?).
You had better be posting this from a computer powered by a stationary bike and an attached generator.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It'd also be just as nice for you to apply your commenting skills strictly to pen and paper instead of using your monitor, computer, and internet to waste energy by the second. But even then, you'll be destroying the forests if you used pen and paper. Seems like any option you take will ultimately result in some sort of pollution/destruction of the environment. It's best that you just stand still and breathe - ah nop…
I see. Because everyday activities have some effect on the ozone layer, a month of constant, pointless, unneccessary flying - an activity that is widely known to have a large impact on the ozone layer - is okay. Got it.
Also, the added effect to our planet by having a plane that's going to fly regardless carry 2 additional people (plus the weight of their luggage) is minuscule at worst.
I suggest a reading of "The World Without Us" by Alan Weisman for a look at just how durable our planet is. (http://www.amazon.com/World-Without-Us-Alan-Weisman/dp/03124...)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As I said the last time this came up, if a seat isn't filled on an outbound flight, it just makes more room for cargo.
Less total weight carried, across the system as a whole, would result in less fuel consumption.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see. Because everyday activities have some effect on the ozone layer, a month of constant, pointless, unneccessary flying - an activity that is widely known to have a large impact on the ozone layer - is okay. Got it.
I don't view their plan as pointless at all. Attempting to document an "average" airline passenger is an interesting social exercise I look forward to reading about. I've recently flown to Germany and Japan from the USA and met extraordinary people along the way. Also, the added effect to our planet by having a plane that's going to fly regardless carry 2 additional people (plus the weight of their luggage) is minusc…
As for "The World Without Us", I'm confident that the world will continue to exist even if it's uninhabitable for humans. The issue is preserving conditions favorable to human survival, i.e. having a functioning ozone layer.