'Flight shaming' and the ethics of recreational flying?

[Jabiru7252]

Well there's a movie I'll go and see! But to be serious, if downsizing could be done it would still be a temporary measure because we'd run out of room at (say) 1 trillion people, and being so small, cats and dogs, rats and mice and bugs would be a real scary danger.

[spacesailor]

Are we all missing the missing link!.

The boffins are all in agreement that our Human race has peaked already.

Mans sperm count is falling,

The babies are getting too large for normal birth.

Our cancer is rising, especially in children.

Our disease is getting spread rapidly around the world.

Will our population ever get much higher than it is now ?.

spacesailor

[facthunter]

None of US are getting out of this alive Space. Everyday you wake up alive is a miracle so do your best is all we can ask. Nev

[Jabiru7252]

Well, it's all because we let dogs and cats sleep together...

[Sam the Swiss]

If we reduced our use of resources to just 1% of what we use now it wouldn't matter. Population growth is not being addressed and the fact is one day we'll run out of room. Imagine 50 billion or 100 billion trying to eat, sleep, take a dump and stay alive on a planet that struggles with 7.5 billion.

Predictions are not going in this direction. They expect 10-12 billion at stabilization point, followed by decline. So we can make it, IF we work together and don't wag war against each other.

[Sam the Swiss]

Hi folks!

 

A tough one here.

 

Recent events have placed climate change concerns front and centre of the political agenda. As somebody who lives on the land, my observation of recent weather and climatic conditions in the far north has been cause for concern...

 

Im no greenie, but I recognize the need to be more environmentally aware in our lives, if not for our sakes, then for future generations. And my wife and I have tried hard to translate intent into action. Im not going to list the things we do to try and reduce our environmental impacts, as am sure that most responsibly minded people do likewise...

 

I guess the most gratuitous emissions we produce are from aviation. This is an unresolved question in our minds. Ive got no idea how emissions from a light aero engine compare with other emissions sources (can somebody here tell me?), but I suspect that as time passes private flying is not only going to be perceived as an expensive luxury but also an environmentally selfish one. For now the focus of Flygskam angst is commercial jet travel which obviously account for the bulk of aviation emissions. But sooner or later somebody is going to pick up on all the little Cessna's, Pipers and Jabirus buzzing around, and the dirty two-strokes screaming behind ultralights. How does flying in a light aircraft compare with emissions per capita/mile in a commercial aircraft? Im assuming even higher.

 

Personally I'd love to have an electric aircraft. Since all my power is solar, it would be good and cheap to run although Im not sure how useful current models would be for bush flying... The range is a big concern.

 

But other than putting the plane on bricks, growing a beard, wearing sandals and eating mung beans, is there anything we can actually do to make our passion more environmentally responsible? Gliding?

 

Has anybody yet given this much thought? I guess its a personal accommodation we each need to make....

 

Alan

I think renouncing is not the way to go. We better use our ingeniously. How about aiming for getting twice the things we want with half of the CO2-producion? This has proven very effective in our climate (Switzerland) with heating our homes (which accounted for roughly 30% of our total energy consumption!): increased insulation increased the comfort and reduced the amount of energy used.

 

In aviation it might be harder to achieve. But quite a few here on this forum use lighter aircrafts with smaller motors that use half the fuel for the same distance. And if you envision that the Rotax 912iS uses at least quarter less fuel for the same performance as the 912 ULS, then you realize that there is a lot of unused potential. Lets get that first and then go on searching!

 

I personally believe that synthetic fuel (made by solar power) will be the way. First results are there, we can do it.

Ah, and I think I am responsible for my extremely small but relevant contribution to the world climate.

[Marty_d]

 

Good concept but unfortunately a crap movie. (IMHO)

[M61A1]

I think renouncing is not the way to go. We better use our ingeniously. How about aiming for getting twice the things we want with half of the CO2-producion? This has proven very effective in our climate (Switzerland) with heating our homes (which accounted for roughly 30% of our total energy consumption!): increased insulation increased the comfort and reduced the amount of energy used

Maybe if the climate got warmer you could cut back on heating......

[danny_galaga]

Good concept but unfortunately a crap movie. (IMHO)

 

Yeah it didn't get great reviews but we loved it!

[Marty_d]

Yeah it didn't get great reviews but we loved it!

I just thought it had scope for so much more. A movie with a fantastic concept and Matt Damon shouldn't leave the viewer bored, and this one did.

[M61A1]

[Marty_d]

 

F*ck yeah!!

 

Team America was great. Think we have it on DVD.

[Jerry_Atrick]

Blimey - I must be a virtual hermit - never even heard of the movie.. But then, maybe, "Honey, I shrunk the kids" was the last movie I saw...

 

Anyway, back to our bad habits.. I have to admit - with the tech on the LAA/RAA side of things compared to Contipolis and Lycosauras tech, I am tempted to go to the dark side...

[M61A1]

F*ck yeah!!

 

Team America was great. Think we have it on DVD.

Yeah, I have my own copy. Every time someone mentions Matt Damon, that's all I hear.

[Marty_d]

I thought Elysium was one of his better efforts.

[Jabiru7252]

Team America - the chunder scene in the alley - so funny. Brings back memories from the 70s....

[danny_galaga]

I've been doing my bit to keep emissions down :D

[Mike Borgelt]

This thread really should be ended by contemplating the fact that at last count, all of aviation accounts for 2% of CO2 emissions. This is predicted to rise to maybe 3% in a decade or two. Either way it isn't exactly low hanging fruit if emissions reduction is your thing.

Electricity production is something like 30% or more. This one is easy - just go nuclear like France did, including reprocessing of the fuel. You only get around 1% burn up on first pass through the usual current style reactors. Then you can contemplate going electric for cars too. No point when you generate the electricity by burning coal or gas.

Advanced nukes get you the capability to make hydrocarbon fuels from water and atmospheric CO2 giving you a totally carbon neutral way of keeping our civilisation going.

In any case the whole thing is nonsense. The planet is atmospheric CO2 deficient. The plants and other geological processes have been sucking it out of the atmosphere and sequestering it. The small increase from 300ppm or so to 400 or so has done wonders for the greening of the planet. This BTW is the only unequivocal observed effect of the slightly increased CO2. NOTHING else unusual is going on.

We are in an interglacial. 8000 years ago temperatures were generally warmer a few thousand years after the last ice age ended and on average, have been declining ever since.. Now *there* was global warming and people had nothing to do with it.

[Student Pilot]

No to nuclear, taking into account decommissioning nuclear is vastly more costly than alternative sources. Storage of waste another major issue, seems those in favour of nuclear say just bury it and let future generations worry about the problems. Talk about temperatures 8000 years ago, they are talking 500,000 year half life for nuclear waste. Short term gain for a few, long term pain and annihilation of our planet in the long term.

We also have to stop digging uranium from our ground, only real use is small amounts for medical use.

The amount of humans on our planet is the biggest issue facing our future.

[facthunter]

The population graphs shows it all. In the lifetime of some of us, the human population has tripled and arable land and water become more scarce as does places to dump our rubbish. WE account for about 25 tones /annum each of rubbish that must be disposed of.. Nev

[turboplanner]

[quote="facthunter, post: 552304, WE account for about 25 tones /annum each of rubbish that must be disposed of

My wife is saying about 250 kg/year.

[turboplanner]

The amount of humans on our planet is the biggest issue facing our future.

Pick a crowded country, say England.

Go on google map and take a look around. There’s an amazing amount of wide open space. Greater Tokyo comfortably contains 40 million.

[Student Pilot]

25T sounds a lot, 250 sounds a bit more realistic. If we ever get around to recycling in this country (Instead of sending overseas) we will get better.

[facthunter]

It includes all your old mattresses cars mowers fridges car tyres bottles batteries, demolished buildings ,sewage, Burned fuel for power and production of what you consume. roads sewer pipes power lines. You have to count the lot. It's what is Used as a result of how WE/You live In other Countries with a lower standard of living it's a fraction of what we USE. It's YOUR footprint on the earth..Nev

[turboplanner]

Co-incidentally overcrowding of the earth has started to appear in the arguments of "Greenhouse effect/Global Warming/Climate change" proponents, probably because it sounds so convincing.