tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8441439.post6357635792643007024..comments2023-11-19T17:31:49.939+00:00Comments on Bristling Badger: flying in the face of sustainabilityUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8441439.post-33265241293496197582007-11-22T21:54:00.000+00:002007-11-22T21:54:00.000+00:00Thanks Merick for a clear no nonsense article - ex...Thanks Merick for a clear no nonsense article - excellent.<BR/><BR/>With reference to the rainforest I would like to add a couple of points to what you said about the carbon sink - <BR/>1) the carbon in a living peice of rainforest is locked for as long as that piece lives (hopefully millenia) so re-afforestation is not temporary, although once it is mature it will emit as much carbon as it takes in.<BR/>2) the rainforest itself has a vital climate regulating capacity in that it is an enormous solar powered heat and water pump transferring heat and water (as water vapour) away from the equatorial regions to the higher latitudes.<BR/>This aspect is ignored in most climate change models and accounts for a significant error in those that do not take it into account leading to predictions which actually are too optimistic in that the rate of deforestation is severely compromising this climate regulatory function.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8441439.post-9592529556720944632007-11-21T17:11:00.000+00:002007-11-21T17:11:00.000+00:00Anonyperson,the answer is neither.firstly, donatin...Anonyperson,<BR/><BR/>the answer is neither.<BR/><BR/>firstly, donating money to rainforest protection or treeplanting doesn't help all that much.<BR/><BR/>Trees are part of the carbon cycle; the absorb CO2 from the atmosphere. Then when they die and rot or burn, they release it back again.<BR/><BR/>Fossil fuels add carbon to the cycle. Planting more trees would take out some of that carbon, and then put it back again. It's just a delaying mechanism. Making a twisty turny outflow pipe from a tank of toxic waste doesn't alter the quantity or toxicity.<BR/><BR/>Protecting existing rainforests is important, as they are still acting as carbon sinks. But flying directly assaults their ability to survive. Saying you can fly because you've donated to rainforest protection is like saying you're allowed to stab your baby because you gave money to a children's home.<BR/><BR/>The fact is we need to be preserving forest *and* stopping flying. Doing one or the other is to encourage climate change.merrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10959849087751101034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8441439.post-25200333310443266662007-11-21T11:20:00.000+00:002007-11-21T11:20:00.000+00:00Which is better (if you have to make a choice), go...Which is better (if you have to make a choice), going by freighter ship from South Africa to the UK or flying and donating the difference (about £900) to the World Land Trust or Cool Earth or similar organisation??!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8441439.post-88410783526370440842007-08-10T01:01:00.000+01:002007-08-10T01:01:00.000+01:00This is the best article that I have read in a lon...This is the best article that I have read in a long time. People continuously make inane comparisons about what is "good for the environment" or not. Emissions from power generation is about 30% and emissions from planes you say are 13%. But before you say that the power generation problem is more important, think about it. Flights are unnecessary, so we could cut that percentage practically to zero, whereas it will take a lot of investment in research, development, infrastructure and building work to cut emissions from power generation.<BR/>Thanks for putting perspective on the arguments and what we actually have to doGrinnyguyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08660699369923586004noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8441439.post-7873195723379383152007-07-23T18:13:00.000+01:002007-07-23T18:13:00.000+01:00Anonyperson, you're right - there are also other f...Anonyperson, you're right - there are also other factors that make exact amounts difficult to gauge too. <BR/><BR/>The type of aircraft (propellor planes are less carbon intensive than jets; newer planes are generally more efficient; Concordes flew higher so the radiative forcing factor was greater)<BR/><BR/>Seat occupancy - if a third of the seats are empty (as is often the case on scheduled flights) then the per-passenger figure is greater than for a fully occupied charter flight.<BR/><BR/>Even the UK government acknowledges the difference between long haul and short haul fights, giving 0.11kg/km for long haul and 0.15kg/km for short haul, precisely because of the extra emissions during take-off and landing.<BR/><BR/>Oh, see also <A HREF="http://adaisythroughconcrete.blogspot.com/2007/07/flight-of-fancy.html" REL="nofollow">this</A> excellent blogpost responding to the Observer piece.merrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10959849087751101034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8441439.post-18711899183809931882007-07-20T13:52:00.000+01:002007-07-20T13:52:00.000+01:00Per mile emission comparisons between aircraft and...Per mile emission comparisons between aircraft and other forms of transportation are misleading. The greatest percentage of emissions produced by an aircraft occurs during take-off and landing, thereby increasing the environmental damage to the immediate community. This is not just a factor of how many miles are flown from point A to point B.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8441439.post-57851188149981732082007-07-09T23:01:00.000+01:002007-07-09T23:01:00.000+01:00When people look at me as if I'm silly when I say ...When people look at me as if I'm silly when I say I don't want to fly to Australia or California, I tell them... ". but I haven't even seen all of Scotland yet, plus I've not started on most of Wales.."<BR/><BR/>Our next holiday will be in Shropshire, about 70 miles from home. Ideal. :-)RAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17716790076177977941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8441439.post-82757992215109946122007-07-09T20:23:00.000+01:002007-07-09T20:23:00.000+01:00Anonyperson, I don't doubt your word that the Ol M...Anonyperson, I don't doubt your word that the Ol Malo projects are superb. Nor do I doubt that they have been made possible by tourist money.<BR/><BR/>You imply that you don't think westerners would fund such things out of altruism. I think the millions donated every year to a huge range of charities with which we have no direct contact, and the spectacular Western response to things like the Ethiopian famines and the Asian tsunami, say otherwise.<BR/><BR/>Can you give me an answer to what I said after the bit about Ol Malo? Climate change is already starving and flooding people off their land. <BR/><BR/>The benefits of taking someone to somewhere like Ol Malo are at the very least severely dented by their contribution to climate change, which is hitting the world's poorest now, and it will continue to be the poorest of the poor who bear the brunt (not my words, but those of <A HREF="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6532323.stm" REL="nofollow">Rajendra Pachauri</A>, chairman of the IPCC).<BR/><BR/>180 million dead in sub-Saharan Africa alone, this century alone, if climate change is not reined in. It is those who over-emit who will be to blame if it happens. That includes everyone who flies, to Ol Malo or wherever.<BR/><BR/>Even if they do some good when they get there, they utterly undermine it not only by their emissions but by the normalising of intercontinental jet travel.<BR/><BR/>As the man said, donating to the RSPCA doesn't mean you can keep kicking your dog.merrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10959849087751101034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8441439.post-12942605437989895492007-07-09T08:41:00.000+01:002007-07-09T08:41:00.000+01:00I have seen the Ol Malo health / drought & conserv...I have seen the Ol Malo health / drought & conservation projects first hand. They are amazing. But do you think Westerners are just going to sit at home and send money to them out of the goodness of their hearts, without seeing first hand what the projects are all about? If tourists stop going to Ol Malo, those people will continue to lose their sight, the cattle will die, the men, women and children will starve. Thanks for nothing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8441439.post-80978193442601744292007-07-09T00:50:00.000+01:002007-07-09T00:50:00.000+01:00I last flew in 2004. From Liverpool to Amsterdam f...I last flew in 2004. From Liverpool to Amsterdam for my Honeymoon, and back again.<BR/><BR/>My missus would love to go to India before she dies, but it looks like we will have to walk, coz I've made a decision that I won't fly again.<BR/><BR/>And that's mainly down to you, Merrick. Keep it up, my man. You do make a difference.Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07477727620596783913noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8441439.post-38080431874722847302007-07-08T13:10:00.000+01:002007-07-08T13:10:00.000+01:00absolutely brilliant post.nice work xabsolutely brilliant post.<BR/><BR/>nice work xzoehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01308200573937625129noreply@blogger.com