Nothing will ever be done. People could literally be falling dead in the streets due to severe heat, and you’d still get those on the right saying that you couldn’t prove those deaths were heat-related.
1 Like
I think for comparison you need to make is towards the clean air acts of the 1950s and 60s. There was huge opposition to them despite the fact that thousands of avoidable deaths occurred during smog events. The same tropes were wheeled out and the cost to poorer people of legislation was used as an excuse by industry to do nothing - even though they didn’t care whether those same people literally lived or died.
When a problem is there every day it becomes the proverbial elephant in the living room. It’s just there and no one mentions it. I still remember when the Liver Building was cleaned up for the Queen’s Jubilee in 1977. I was completely surprised that it wasn’t supposed to be black because it always had been.
One thing that did happen with the clean air acts was that grants were given to people to convert from coal to gas or electricity. The same thing needs to be done now to help people move away from fossil fuel use. However, I can see it being derided as “green crap” by the same vested interests.
1 Like
I see the UK government currently aligning themselves as the climate deniers / ignore it party, probably so they can argue against tax payers having to fork out to cover the cost of anything that will inevitably be required.
Basically we seem to be entering a really dangerous period where there will be a very strong and concerted effort against climate policies.
Meanwhile…
Nothing to see here. Move along.
1 Like
It is definitely fraying. Eastern North America predominating wind patterns are a function of global rotation (W to E) and the Gulf Stream interacting. We historically almost never get wind from the east, and the northern ‘polar vortex’ is 1-2 a year. We have had 3 such patterns since June 1, each time bringing smoke from northern Quebec, and wind from the east has happened around the ‘shoulders’ of those events. There is no question in my mind that it is now in peril.
Record temperature variations here in sunny south of France.
We were getting up near 42°C and have now dropped below 18°C (almost the coldest recorded temp for this time of year (feels good though)).
Ok that’s highest afternoon temp to coldest morning even so some morning temperatures were up around 34/.35°C.
1 Like
It looks like the sea is on fire off the east coast of Canada. That can’t be doing the marine life any good.
https://twitter.com/US_Stormwatch/status/1683890913293246464?s=20
Some good ideas, mainly common sense, in this article:
Of course, as with most things, education is the key. If children are taught from a young age that flying (and driving, for that matter) is bad for the environment, then surely habits will change.
3 Likes
I suspect that there are two big factors at play that hold this back: cost and time.
I dislike flying. Actually, I dislike airports rather than flying but that is something of a prerequisite. Given the choice I would to travel by train or boat.
Now both have their problems in terms of frequency, availability and so on. But even if they are top-notch they both tend to cost more (certainly in the UK) and they are usually longer options. If I am travelling from my home in Germany to Liverpool or Scotland (my usual UK destinations) I have to allow two days for travelling in either direction rather than just one. For me that isn’t such a problem but it immediately eats away at my annual leave allowance.
Most people have a limited financial budget and limited time. If you can make it more attractive on both those counts then it is going to make travelling by less environmentally damaging means the default option.
I suppose the worst thing regarding the airline advertising is that they aren’t just appealing to people who are taking an annual holiday or travelling to visit friends and family or for essential business. They are encouraging people to take unnecessary flights, simply because their whole business is encouraging people to fly.
1 Like
The most frequented flying routes are all between cities in the same country. You don’t need any technological advancement to replace these journeys with a lower emission option.
2 Likes
Providing you’ve got a train system that actually works.
It’s so odd that the last 5 posts have come from people with differing political views that touch on the topic at hand, but I agree with all of them.
As I mentioned in the cars thread, a massive societal shift needs to happen, and much more investment needs to happen to make public transport the first, and default mode, such that few ever need to think of the alternatives, aside from particular idiosyncratic things.
Unlike @RedWhippet I have the luxury of being stubborn about not taking a flight, but this has also scuppered many travel plans simply because of the complexity involved. Going to Portugal for example, requires 3 days, which isn’t that huge a problem in isolation, but each additional change adds risk in transfer, since you may miss your connection for whatever reason, and adds cost in accommodation. Now, as I haven’t seen much of the world, that’s not a problem for me to see another city for another day.
But I am in a unique and privileged position, and it should not take this in order to make greener transport available. And I put this solely down to the lack of societal and political will.
2 Likes
I’ve read about an admittedly edge-case scenario, where someone who lives near Heathrow flies regularly to see family in Aberdeen. I was all ready to judge, but currently getting to Aberdeen from Kings Cross takes 8 hours, and 1 or 2 changes.
I still don’t think it’s necessary, but I don’t think I can blame that person as much, knowing this.
1 Like
Getting from my house, to Hampshire where my wife has family, takes about the same time whether it’s by plane or train.
Taking the train is a more relaxing experience, if for no other reason than not having to deal with fucking airport staff.
Train companies know this, hence the disgustingly inflated prices.
1 Like
At one time I had to travel to London from Stirling on a regular basis. I actually did a round trip by train in a single day on more than one occasion. I was considered somewhat eccentric for doing this but it didn’t take significantly longer. I could get the train within walking distance of each location and it saved me having to get to Edinburgh Airport, fly, switch at Heathrow and spend hours sitting around in the airport lounge.
Of course it would have been far easier to do all this electronically (and we had Skype (or its predecessor) at this point. I think the world is finally catching up to that.
1 Like
I’m not disputing that.
I constantly treat anyone who flies from London to Edinburgh with nothing but the utmost disdain. Some people seem to treat flying as their right, and wouldn’t think about any other mode of transport.
The funny thing is, it’s just “the free market operating as it should”.
Quite clearly, some things can’t be left up to a completely free market.
1 Like
It’s hard to see how domestic flights are justifiable in any European country. There needs to be heavy investment in the railways to provide a faster, more frequent and more reliable service at an affordable price.
This is not beyond the capabilities of any reasonably competent government.
2 Likes
I’d also add connecting flights. If you book flights from further afield to Germany it will often include a connecting flight within Germany with a long wait. The ICE can get you there faster but this isn’t offered when booking tickets.
1 Like