If you could read their minds you would hear something like, "Well, the world is screwed anyway so we'll do the party elite style until the end and tell all the rest of the suckers how bad we feel about global warming."
I read in another article that there is also an environmental conference going on as well, same thing, flying in on private jets. May I suggest if you are supposedly advocating for the environment, maybe it's best that you lead by example. This is why I will always be opposed to a carbon tax. In Canada, we do not need a carbon tax, the government can take any one of the many taxes and rename and dedicate the money collected to their cause.
If you could read their minds you would hear something like, "Well, the world is screwed anyway so we'll do the party elite style until the end and tell all the rest of the suckers how bad we feel about global warming."
I read in another article that there is also an environmental conference going on as well, same thing, flying in on private jets. May I suggest if you are supposedly advocating for the environment, maybe it's best that you lead by example. This is why I will always be opposed to a carbon tax. In Canada, we do not need a carbon tax, the government can take any one of the many taxes and rename and dedicate the money collected to their cause.
I dunno about this, I agree and I don't. My personal philosophy is to walk the walk first, and then worry about the talk, so I agree on the jet...then again, people like Al Gore and climate scientists and activists have done more for the environment through their work than can be outweighed by their means of conveyance.
If you could read their minds you would hear something like, "Well, the world is screwed anyway so we'll do the party elite style until the end and tell all the rest of the suckers how bad we feel about global warming."
I read in another article that there is also an environmental conference going on as well, same thing, flying in on private jets. May I suggest if you are supposedly advocating for the environment, maybe it's best that you lead by example. This is why I will always be opposed to a carbon tax. In Canada, we do not need a carbon tax, the government can take any one of the many taxes and rename and dedicate the money collected to their cause.
I dunno about this, I agree and I don't. My personal philosophy is to walk the walk first, and then worry about the talk, so I agree on the jet...then again, people like Al Gore and climate scientists and activists have done more for the environment through their work than can be outweighed by their means of conveyance.
I agree with the no private jets thing. Even if you're as well known as Al Gore- take a couple body guards with you and fly first class. You'll still save plenty of money to use to help fund a group like NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Counsel) who uses legal means to protect the environment.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Yeah, private jets are always an excess, I was thinking more of just air travel and traveling so much in general.
Ah, I see. Yeah, that's a bit tough. Like a few months ago when I saw Henry Rollins do his slide show. He was able to do that because he's flown everywhere. And because he did, I got to go along for the ride vicariously and it was great!
And also, I know "liberal environmentalists" who travel a lot- in fact I know one who last year admitted to me that she now questions how wise a choice it was to travel so much. So who do we say, "OK, you are worthy of traveling a lot" but "You are not"?
I haven't flown since the late 80's and very likely never will again, so I guess I get a pass.
But wait! I'm using a massively destructive, energy sucking instrument this very moment... computer! I think I just lost that pass.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Yeah, private jets are always an excess, I was thinking more of just air travel and traveling so much in general.
Ah, I see. Yeah, that's a bit tough. Like a few months ago when I saw Henry Rollins do his slide show. He was able to do that because he's flown everywhere. And because he did, I got to go along for the ride vicariously and it was great!
And also, I know "liberal environmentalists" who travel a lot- in fact I know one who last year admitted to me that she now questions how wise a choice it was to travel so much. So who do we say, "OK, you are worthy of traveling a lot" but "You are not"?
I haven't flown since the late 80's and very likely never will again, so I guess I get a pass.
But wait! I'm using a massively destructive, energy sucking instrument this very moment... computer! I think I just lost that pass.
Yeah, private jets are always an excess, I was thinking more of just air travel and traveling so much in general.
Ah, I see. Yeah, that's a bit tough. Like a few months ago when I saw Henry Rollins do his slide show. He was able to do that because he's flown everywhere. And because he did, I got to go along for the ride vicariously and it was great!
And also, I know "liberal environmentalists" who travel a lot- in fact I know one who last year admitted to me that she now questions how wise a choice it was to travel so much. So who do we say, "OK, you are worthy of traveling a lot" but "You are not"?
I haven't flown since the late 80's and very likely never will again, so I guess I get a pass.
But wait! I'm using a massively destructive, energy sucking instrument this very moment... computer! I think I just lost that pass.
Brian, you probably would hate flying these days.
True, but I wouldn't fly anyway after being through a couple of close calls.
First time, coming into JFK from SFO, just a few minutes before final approach the plane, a Boeing 747, take a sudden, hard dive to the port, sending anything not tied down flying about the cabin including flight attendants (at that time referred to as "stewardesses"). Lot's of people screaming, shitting their pants, freaking out. Great stuff for one of those Hollywood crash scenes. Captain comes on in a shaky shaky voice and say's "We'll b-b-be landing sh-sh-shortly", (but no word about what the hell that was all about!)
And then on a routine flight from Boston to SFO, captain comes on and says matter-of-fact like, "Our instrument panel indicates that the landing gear will not lock so we are going to make an emergency landing at DFW (Dallas International)." As we approach the runway, I look out the window and see a foamed landing strip lined with red vehicles. Oh goodie. Lucky day- the landing gear held.
Flying? Ahhhh, fuck that.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
I got the gist of this article before it asked for money continue to read (that's OK, I'll send the money to one of our organizations working to preserve the environment). No surprise move here. Trump and the like only care about their own short-term gain. They have no qualms about making the planet uninhabitable for large portions of future generations. Greed and money, that's their bottom line.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
For those that lack water, here is a way to conserve...
LOL. Gotta say though, it makes sense.
Or pee off the back porch (id you live somewhere where that is acceptable). Or pee on the compost pile. A woman in a gardening class I once took said "Around our place, all the menfolk pee on the compost pile- it's good for it."
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
For those that lack water, here is a way to conserve...
I think this is a perfectly acceptable suggestion personally. Urine isn't technically filthy - your sink would be clean after a rinse with the hand soap. And it's not like anyone puts their mouths and hands all over the basin of a bathroom sink anyhow. The only problem would be splash back ... One would have to be conscientious about doing this without leaving pee drops on the counter. And obviously it doesn't work so well with women, lol. I personally only flush every 4 pees or so (unless I have guests). I can't believe there are people who flush pee every single time they go. What a waste.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
For those that lack water, here is a way to conserve...
I think this is a perfectly acceptable suggestion personally. Urine isn't technically filthy - your sink would be clean after a rinse with the hand soap. And it's not like anyone puts their mouths and hands all over the basin of a bathroom sink anyhow. The only problem would be splash back ... One would have to be conscientious about doing this without leaving pee drops on the counter. And obviously it doesn't work so well with women, lol. I personally only flush every 4 pees or so (unless I have guests). I can't believe there are people who flush pee every single time they go. What a waste.
You wear contacts? Ever accidentally dropped on in the sink? Just piss in the shower like a human.
For those that lack water, here is a way to conserve...
I think this is a perfectly acceptable suggestion personally. Urine isn't technically filthy - your sink would be clean after a rinse with the hand soap. And it's not like anyone puts their mouths and hands all over the basin of a bathroom sink anyhow. The only problem would be splash back ... One would have to be conscientious about doing this without leaving pee drops on the counter. And obviously it doesn't work so well with women, lol. I personally only flush every 4 pees or so (unless I have guests). I can't believe there are people who flush pee every single time they go. What a waste.
You wear contacts? Ever accidentally dropped on in the sink? Just piss in the shower like a human.
No, I don't wear contacts. But anyway, like I said, this doesn't work for women. I'm not pissing in any sinks. I'm just saying that this does seems like a reasonable suggestion for those men who really want to conserve water. It's especially relevant in places that have no water, like LA or Vegas or Scottsdale and places like that. But yeah, pissing in the bathtub would work too! People need to pee a lot more often than they bathe of course, so I'm not just talking about when you're actually showering.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
For those that lack water, here is a way to conserve...
I think this is a perfectly acceptable suggestion personally. Urine isn't technically filthy - your sink would be clean after a rinse with the hand soap. And it's not like anyone puts their mouths and hands all over the basin of a bathroom sink anyhow. The only problem would be splash back ... One would have to be conscientious about doing this without leaving pee drops on the counter. And obviously it doesn't work so well with women, lol. I personally only flush every 4 pees or so (unless I have guests). I can't believe there are people who flush pee every single time they go. What a waste.
Especially in a drought year.
But if you're like me, there's one exception which is a few hours after eating asparagus... what the heck is it with asparagus?! (Maybe it's just me...)
For those that lack water, here is a way to conserve...
I think this is a perfectly acceptable suggestion personally. Urine isn't technically filthy - your sink would be clean after a rinse with the hand soap. And it's not like anyone puts their mouths and hands all over the basin of a bathroom sink anyhow. The only problem would be splash back ... One would have to be conscientious about doing this without leaving pee drops on the counter. And obviously it doesn't work so well with women, lol. I personally only flush every 4 pees or so (unless I have guests). I can't believe there are people who flush pee every single time they go. What a waste.
You wear contacts? Ever accidentally dropped on in the sink? Just piss in the shower like a human.
Never take your contacts out while peeing in the sink!
Peeing in the shower, for sure. No harm there.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
But seriously- a 4% of us GPD would be felt far and wide. We've already had way more rain than normal this year. I measure after each rainfall. The average here is 39" (99cm) and were already up a little over 60" (152cm). Luckily were up hill a good bit.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
But seriously- a 4% of us GPD would be felt far and wide. We've already had way more rain than normal this year. I measure after each rainfall. The average here is 39" (99cm) and were already up a little over 60" (152cm). Luckily were up hill a good bit.
Nothing will change drastically unless the overpopulation issues are addressed. I have no idea how you address this issue. China tried with 1 child policy, which I believe they have abandoned. And absolutely no doubt in my mind California is close to becoming full or is already overcapacity.
EasyJet apparently wins for lowest emissions per passenger kilometre, though the graph (which didn't display when I cut and pasted the article) suggests that progress in cutting airline emissions will be slow:
Climate change: Which airline is best for carbon emissions?
By Roger Harrabin, BBC environment analyst
EasyJet has come top of the league for airlines trying to cut carbon emissions to tackle climate change.
A report suggests that by 2020 its emissions per passenger kilometre will be less than half that of some rivals.
The firm's performance is partly down to its modern, efficient fleet and its push to fill every seat.
Companies named as having the weakest plans to cut emissions are Air China; China Southern; Korean Air; Singapore Airlines and Turkish Airlines.
EasyJet's aircraft are expected to be emitting 75g of CO2 per passenger km by 2020, compared with 172g for Korean Air.
International Airlines Group (IAG), which includes British Airways, is expected to emit 112g.
The industry has volunteered to freeze its overall emissions by 2020, and halve emissions by 2050.
This is a more generous target than those given to other industrial sectors, but the report says only EasyJet is meeting those aviation targets so far.
Who produced the report?
The report from the London School of Economics is backed by a group of institutional investors, the Environment Agency Pension Fund.
It is anxious for their funds to support firms committed to reducing emissions.
Faith Ward from the fund said: "Investors have a clear message to the aviation sector: when it comes to carbon performance, they must be in it for the long haul.
"That means setting stretching emissions reduction targets to 2030 and beyond. It's clear this is not currently the case."
The investors also complain that the airlines are trying to achieve their targets using the controversial process of offsetting – where firms plants trees to compensate for their own CO2 emissions.
"Offsetting is no substitute for a clear strategy to reduce emissions," Ms Ward said.
What's the reaction of the airlines?
Aviation creates 12% of transport-related emissions.
The industry body ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) told BBC News it couldn't comment on individual airlines, but said the industry's carbon-cutting plans were "on track".
Aviation has been given easier targets than other industrial sectors because although aircraft are becoming more efficient, this trend has been overwhelmed the by the relentless increase in people wanting to fly.
Some caveats must be applied to the LSE research. First, it doesn’t take into account that some airlines allow much more baggage than others, which alter the notional weight per passenger and thus their CO2 tally.
There is also some cause for caution over EasyJet's carbon virtue. Remember that the figures are based on CO2 per passenger kilometre.
This means EasyJet can improve its per capita performance by stuffing planes with cut-price ticket-holders, thereby potentially encouraging a new generation of frequent flyers.
EasyJet apparently wins for lowest emissions per passenger kilometre, though the graph (which didn't display when I cut and pasted the article) suggests that progress in cutting airline emissions will be slow:
Climate change: Which airline is best for carbon emissions?
By Roger Harrabin, BBC environment analyst
EasyJet has come top of the league for airlines trying to cut carbon emissions to tackle climate change.
A report suggests that by 2020 its emissions per passenger kilometre will be less than half that of some rivals.
The firm's performance is partly down to its modern, efficient fleet and its push to fill every seat.
Companies named as having the weakest plans to cut emissions are Air China; China Southern; Korean Air; Singapore Airlines and Turkish Airlines.
EasyJet's aircraft are expected to be emitting 75g of CO2 per passenger km by 2020, compared with 172g for Korean Air.
International Airlines Group (IAG), which includes British Airways, is expected to emit 112g.
The industry has volunteered to freeze its overall emissions by 2020, and halve emissions by 2050.
This is a more generous target than those given to other industrial sectors, but the report says only EasyJet is meeting those aviation targets so far.
Who produced the report?
The report from the London School of Economics is backed by a group of institutional investors, the Environment Agency Pension Fund.
It is anxious for their funds to support firms committed to reducing emissions.
Faith Ward from the fund said: "Investors have a clear message to the aviation sector: when it comes to carbon performance, they must be in it for the long haul.
"That means setting stretching emissions reduction targets to 2030 and beyond. It's clear this is not currently the case."
The investors also complain that the airlines are trying to achieve their targets using the controversial process of offsetting – where firms plants trees to compensate for their own CO2 emissions.
"Offsetting is no substitute for a clear strategy to reduce emissions," Ms Ward said.
What's the reaction of the airlines?
Aviation creates 12% of transport-related emissions.
The industry body ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) told BBC News it couldn't comment on individual airlines, but said the industry's carbon-cutting plans were "on track".
Aviation has been given easier targets than other industrial sectors because although aircraft are becoming more efficient, this trend has been overwhelmed the by the relentless increase in people wanting to fly.
Some caveats must be applied to the LSE research. First, it doesn’t take into account that some airlines allow much more baggage than others, which alter the notional weight per passenger and thus their CO2 tally.
There is also some cause for caution over EasyJet's carbon virtue. Remember that the figures are based on CO2 per passenger kilometre.
This means EasyJet can improve its per capita performance by stuffing planes with cut-price ticket-holders, thereby potentially encouraging a new generation of frequent flyers.
Comments
My personal philosophy is to walk the walk first, and then worry about the talk, so I agree on the jet...then again, people like Al Gore and climate scientists and activists have done more for the environment through their work than can be outweighed by their means of conveyance.
Andrew Wheeler, former energy lobbyist, confirmed as nation’s top environmental official
As acting chief at the EPA, Wheeler has advanced the Trump administration’s deregulation agenda.
For those that lack water, here is a way to conserve...
A Nearly $1 Trillion California Flood Likely to Occur Within 40 Years
Most are in Asia where they are extremely overpopulated.
Climate change: Which airline is best for carbon emissions?
EasyJet has come top of the league for airlines trying to cut carbon emissions to tackle climate change.
A report suggests that by 2020 its emissions per passenger kilometre will be less than half that of some rivals.
The firm's performance is partly down to its modern, efficient fleet and its push to fill every seat.
Companies named as having the weakest plans to cut emissions are Air China; China Southern; Korean Air; Singapore Airlines and Turkish Airlines.
EasyJet's aircraft are expected to be emitting 75g of CO2 per passenger km by 2020, compared with 172g for Korean Air.
International Airlines Group (IAG), which includes British Airways, is expected to emit 112g.
The industry has volunteered to freeze its overall emissions by 2020, and halve emissions by 2050.
This is a more generous target than those given to other industrial sectors, but the report says only EasyJet is meeting those aviation targets so far.
Who produced the report?
The report from the London School of Economics is backed by a group of institutional investors, the Environment Agency Pension Fund.
It is anxious for their funds to support firms committed to reducing emissions.
Faith Ward from the fund said: "Investors have a clear message to the aviation sector: when it comes to carbon performance, they must be in it for the long haul.
"That means setting stretching emissions reduction targets to 2030 and beyond. It's clear this is not currently the case."
The investors also complain that the airlines are trying to achieve their targets using the controversial process of offsetting – where firms plants trees to compensate for their own CO2 emissions.
"Offsetting is no substitute for a clear strategy to reduce emissions," Ms Ward said.
What's the reaction of the airlines?
Aviation creates 12% of transport-related emissions.
The industry body ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) told BBC News it couldn't comment on individual airlines, but said the industry's carbon-cutting plans were "on track".
Aviation has been given easier targets than other industrial sectors because although aircraft are becoming more efficient, this trend has been overwhelmed the by the relentless increase in people wanting to fly.
Some caveats must be applied to the LSE research. First, it doesn’t take into account that some airlines allow much more baggage than others, which alter the notional weight per passenger and thus their CO2 tally.
There is also some cause for caution over EasyJet's carbon virtue. Remember that the figures are based on CO2 per passenger kilometre.
This means EasyJet can improve its per capita performance by stuffing planes with cut-price ticket-holders, thereby potentially encouraging a new generation of frequent flyers.
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47460958