Aviation is Unsustainable, what do you think?

Oilrig

This post makes me reminisce for the simplistic days of student politics...

Good to see the tradition continued.

dloob

George Monbiot wrote:

But it has become plain to me that long-distance travel, high speed and curtailment of climate change are not compatible. If you fly, you destroy other people’s lives.

Well it sucks to be them. I'll try to fly down to those endangered pacific Islands before they disappear.

H&#250 wrote: »

Where is the god of the climate change 'religion'? If not the true living God?

I though it was Al Gore.

Anyway besides my disregard for my fellow man, I like cp251 am not convinced that climate changed is human produced.
Melting Ice Caps etc. don't prove human caused climate change.

When was it decided that the climate as it is now is best and massive effort should be expended to keep it that way for ever.
It's been warmer in the past and colder as well.

Maybe global cooling will come back in fashion in a few years.

derry

Húrin
re: what the section from George Monbiot wrote in this and it can be found in his book Heat.
a small quote

In 2005, Friends of the Earth asked the Tyndall Centre to determine what impact this growth would have on greenhouse gas emissions. The results were staggering. If we attempt to stabilise carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere at 550 parts per million (which roughly corresponds to the government’s target), and aviation continues to grow as the government envisages, by 2050 it would account for 50 per cent of our carbon emissions. If we tried to stabilise them at 450 parts (which is closer to my target) flying would produce 101 per cent of the carbon the entire economy was able to release. If the carbon emissions were multiplied by 2.7, to take into account the full impact of aviation on the climate, the figures would be 134 per cent and 272 per cent respectively. The researchers assumed that the fuel efficiency of aircraft will improve by 1.2 per cent a year throughout this period. This could be optimistic.

extracted ...(which is closer to my target) man where the hell does this guy get of setting his target.
how can he decide 550PPM is better than 600ppm

That is for opener's

First fact of life divide a humungiusly enormous number by a infinitely tiny tiny number and the result is close to zero as doesn't matter

Ok
what they are trying to tell me is if I sealed up a 747 jumbo jet airtight and let a flea inside keep eating and farting that within a few years the flea would change the climate of the interior of this sealed up 747 jumbo jet

Later the flatulence would raise temperatures to the point that the fleas goose would be cooked from the ever rising and spiraling upwards temperatures

That the scaled down to common sense crap the IPCC and global warmers want me to believe

The human race a entertaining bunch of talking monkeys with a few fossil burning implements n scale terms against a huge planet are even less than the flea inside a airtight jumbo jet who imagine they can influence the temperature of the planet
They even got fingers and toes to count it to show that its getting hot in this there planet

Its a lot of cods wollop

This CO2 green house affect is virtually non existent in the overall scheme of things

example is here taken from this thread on this post I did
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=55836054&postcount=12

from this thread
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055285731

a small extraction from the thread

Most global warming which we absolutely need to keep us warm on the planet is created in the first 30 feet of the planet from water vapor H20 and then C02 aids that affect slightly

However after 100 PPM there is no massive extra warming from 120 PPM or 280PPM or 380PPM or 900PPM or 1500PPM as its a bit like the plastic sheet issue coving the plants to make a local green house event

If you cover the crops with a thin sheet of plastic you get green house warming which you want
Even if you double or triple or quadruple the plastic sheets you might get incremently a minuscule gain in green house temperature over one sheet but extra sheets wont amplify or even add anything extra worthwhile to use extra plastic sheets as its the first sheet suppling the majority of the green house affect that does the useful work
( In fact there is even a risk to get cooling affects from thicker plastic sheet)


So we can basically say GORE is a example of a convenient lie to sell his books and GW is just another money making scam to keep scientists in research funds sprouting hot air


The real question was aviation and jet planes

Ok the new airbus that Aer Lingus flies to USA gets about 90 passenger miles per seat
take the 330 passengers and the tonnes of fuel used to go Boston Dublin as per the Irish magazine flight issue where they supplied numbers and it comes out ~90 passenger miles per seat

That means three people in a car that goes 30mpg would equal the planes carbon footprint for the same distance

A single person traveling to Dublin to Boston distance with a car would use three times more fuel than a plane flight

A group of four persons traveling to Dublin to Boston distance with a car that goes 30 mpg would be 25% more fuel efficient than the than a plane flight
but it would take a few days to cover that distance and probably they will be stinky when they get there

The new airbus A380 500 seater with 500 passengers will be similar 90 miles per passenger mile

Changing the same plane to be 800 seater will make that more like 120 miles per passenger mile

The stretched version of the A380 with 1000 passengers will be more like 140 miles per passenger gallon

So we can see that very soon cars are going be even worse than aircraft for long haul

Then also the turbine engine can be made to run on most any fuel you wish to use as its what is classed as a semi flexii fuel engine

However a turbine made for kerosene will not easily change for Bio fuels with out some mods so 10% bio diesel will work no issues usually but if you want a 100% bio fuel engine its not a big problem but that turbine wont run the 100% kerosene as well i will be 10% kerosene tolerant probably

but the stupid thing is as jets get better and better cleaner and cleaner than other transport and get mayby 150 passenger miles per seat solutions they will as a result replace other transport solutions

So if jets were 50% the fuel users of the world and were super efficient compared to cars we would suddenly say eeeeeekkkkkkk

Jets are 50% the polluters the world so the fact that they are the cleanest will be distorted to say ban them and bring back gas guzzling stone age 30MPG cars

So wee can say the more planes increase in carbon emissions the more good it is for us as it replaces worse things that are out there like cars

But the global warmers will explain why jets are bad for us


The reality is jet planes want to use less fuel as less fuel means more passenger s more cargo and more profits so its win win for the aircraft to become even more fuel efficient

But one thing its hard to get the exact data on the aircrafts as if most people figured ryan air 60 miles per passenger seat was costing ~5 euro for each passenger to go from Dublin to London on a 737 they would be getting hot under the collor if its only 5 euros for me why did the ticket cost E100 so they keep quite when the global warmers talk their crap

A bit pro aircraft blurb outline of the aircraft improvement in fuel consumption some 5% in a short period of time from 20o4 to 2005 two years or so

http://www.atag.org/content/showissue.asp?level1=3&level2=472&folderid=472&pageid=1084

More exact airline info
http://members.airlines.org/about/d.aspx?nid=7955

fuel info
www.transportenvironment.org/Publications/prep_hand_out/lid:398
the same in html
http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:02wBPMp6zu8J:www.transportenvironment.org/Publications/prep_hand_out/lid:398+fuel+consumption+for+jet+aircaft&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=ie

and when aircraft succeeded to reduce fuel consumption what does everybody want to to them
BAN them
man this is a whacky stupid planet especialy full of dick head George Monbiot wanna be types

long live the fleas eating your legs of in the jumbo jet passing wind and out to cook your goose and laughing at these stupid talking monkeys

derry

Calina

George Monbiot is not my favourite writer for a number of reasons, including the tendency he has to assume he knows best for everyone and that anyone who disagrees with his world vision is inherently wrong, and also I get the impression that people who share his opinion are not good at dealing with people who disagree.

This thread has not changed that view one little bit. That's for starters.

I want to make one thing clear: climate change is happening. Anyone who says or implies that it is not is wrong. Anyone who imputes the view that climate change is not happening to another party is disingenuous and trying to avoid the key debate which is how much climate change is caused by human activity and how much is caused by general planetary changes on Earth. This is the cause of much disagreement.

What disturbs me is that there are two key approaches to dealing with life changing developments, such as climate change. We can either try to prevent it, or we can engineer our way out of it. My experience has been that the environmental movement tries to prevent it, and the rest of the world tries to engineer its way out of it. The latter will ultimately be more successful for one very simple reason: no matter what the environmentalists try to do, what they try to ban, how much they try to control people, climate change will still happen as part of the natural cycle of the world.

I am pretty certain that the aviation world will look a whole lot different in 50 years time. It already looks a lot different to how it looked 50 years ago. This is normal and natural in nature and in business. Human society does not stay static for very long.

I am unhappy with the way the environmental movement makes its case. It seems to me to be very much based on many assumptions, and many models which although increasingly accurate, are still not perfect. At the end of the day I think that there is one key thing that needs to be remembered: mother nature is unpredictable and it is extremely arrogant to think that we can control it.

Climate change is happening. It has always happened. Anyone who knows anything at all about how the planet developed over thousands and thousands of years understands this. It seems to me that only the environmental lobby don't understand the wider ramifications of this. We will have to engineer our way out of trouble, as we always have. However, the ones who will be doing it are not the ones writing The End is Nigh type pieces. I have no faith in George Monbiot and his ilk to sort out our environmental issues. I do, however, have a lot more faith in those whose profession historically have moved our technologies forwards.

cp251

Then I read this. It seems climate change is on hold at least until 2015.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/04/30/eaclimate130.xml

I think the end is nigh all right. The end of this global warming nonsense.

Tabnabs

Aviation has nothing on carbon dioxide emissions compared to shipping. Shipping has twice the emissions and is growing just as quickly. Cruise ship holidays will get it in the neck first (if anything).

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/04/25/business/wbshipping.php

cp251

I wouldn't worry about it. The whole global warming farce has begun to unravel as we speak. A couple of more years with no real change and the whole fantasy will collapse.

Calina

cp251 wrote: »

I wouldn't worry about it. The whole global warming farce has begun to unravel as we speak. A couple of more years with no real change and the whole fantasy will collapse.

Therein lies the problem. With the best will in the world, climate moves at a far slower pace than the average lifetime. I don't think it's a fantasy - because it happens naturally.

The issue - from what I can see - is that there's a major argument over the causes. A lot of the climate change lobby is predicated on the fact that humans have caused a disproportionate amount of it and we must be punished to some extent by cutting back on our lifestyles to "save the planet". But the planet will survive whatever we throw at it.

But climate is a lot more complex than that.

In any case, I think you'll find that once carbon trading really takes off, it'll be the next big trading boom. So some people have an economic interest in pursuing this line.

cp251

Indeed I agree that climate change is real. But I'm referring to the our supposed influence which I also believe is real however small that may be. However like an increasing number of people I have come to the conclusion that our impact has been hyped and exaggerated out of all proportion not neccessarily by scientists but by green campigners and failed politicians like Al Bore.

The next few years will see who is right. I just wonder will we get a refund on the taxes we pay in order to 'save the planet' when the whole AGW things dies a natural death from lack of evidence? I doubt it.

derry

cp251 wrote: »

Indeed I agree that climate change is real. But I'm referring to the our supposed influence which I also believe is real however small that may be. However like an increasing number of people I have come to the conclusion that our impact has been hyped and exaggerated out of all proportion not necessarily by scientists but by green campaigners and failed politicians like Al Bore.

The next few years will see who is right. I just wonder will we get a refund on the taxes we pay in order to 'save the planet' when the whole AGW things dies a natural death from lack of evidence? I doubt it.

The next few years will tell us Squat

it takes at least a 1000 years to change the temperature of a planet this size and we would have to set fire to every coal field and every oil field and every forest and every flammable thing possible for a 1000 years and then we might cahnge the temperature by 1/10th of a degree

We got proven real problems like you cant drink the water in Galway
We got proven real problems with asmha suffers from smog pollution in cities
We got proven nitrogen polution and alga growth in rivers
We got proven chemical spill pollution issues from illegal and legal dumps seeping nasty chemicals and heavy metals
We got proven PCB plastics components accumulations in the food chains from burning plastics
We got proven untreated sewer outlets all over Ireland that require billions to change into sewerage treatment plants so that we don't kill of all the ducks

So as some one who would class myself knee deep in serious interest for the enviorement I am inclined when I see a pie in the sky gravy train unprovable mathamatacaly impossible even for dim wits Global warming senario that at the earliest will take thousands of years to cook our goose then I would prefer to say forget it
The Sun will go bang in x billion years same diiference


If and I use the big IF the temperature of the planet is increasing as half the data from scientists is suspect slanted and lots of cases like the fake data from the gulf stream conveyor belt fiasco where they outright told lies and fabricated the data makes me suspicious of anything they say what we do know is 1922 the weather in the north pole was hot
1930 also the north pole allowed the ships to get past pack ice
so melting ice does happen every few decades
And the cute little polar bears survived those ice sheet lacking periods same as they will survive this one as others sections of the north pole are gaining ice where others lose it so its even Stevens same as the other melting periods

The Viking grew wheat in Greenland and supported a population of 100,000 plus before it went cold again and nothing grew and it got full for ice again and the Viking got killed off

So warm times have existed before and then it go colder again no big deal

WHICH END OF THE TALKING MONKEYS DONT AFFECT THE TEMPERATURE OF A HUGE PLANET DO PEOPLE NOT UNDERSTAND

But its wasting money and diverting money from real issues like ensuring water is safe in Galway and other places

yes we should have wind power as the country is chock a block with free wind but not to save the planet just to ensure we are not hostages to Arab oil
Yes we should try to harnesss tidal powerfor the same reasons as above
Yes we should look at geo thermal heat sources same as above

But we don't need to worry one tiny bit about humans being able with oil to make planet hot

And we don't need to worry about using planes as they are quite fuel efficient and often make less CO2 than ships not that CO2 matters as it is only a harmless trace gas

And those like me will simply say it is totally disingenuous of the global warming brigade to try scaring the populations with this global warming clap trap so as to divert funds to them at the expense of real proven environmental issues
I fly and I don't feel guilty doing it and at every opportunity I will tell others the same thing but I will ask them to request funds to be diverted to save the ducks nesting at Shannon airport from the open sewer outlets


I recall when i was younger the forests of germany were all dying and would be gone in a few years from acidic rain
The Berlin wall fell down and that story got dropped and the German forests are doing very well thank you very much
Since then this new boogy man Global warming popped up and it took me a few years to run the numbers to see what a load of crap in there with the imminent ice age that was going to get me or the German forests dying wha5ever is the latest nonsense

Derry

cp251

The next few years will tell us Squat

Couldn't have put it better myself. But, essentially I was referring to the current global warming scare. Once the lack of global warming becomes obvious to the even the most enthusiastic adherants. The whole global warming scare will fade like the all the rest of them. Then we can all go back to worrying about the real problems you mention.

As a victim of the Galway water poisoning scandal. I too agree that we are ignoring real problems of pollution etc while chasing the new unpolluting bogeyman of Carbon dioxide. Ridiculous!

NatDonegal

Húrin wrote: »

It is true that the government expects air travel passengers to double by 2030, by which time air travel will be the biggest contributor to global warming.

Rising prices of aviation fuel could hinder this expected growth of the air transport industry... Given that oil reserves are expected to be low by 2030 (western countries are consuming more than ever, developing countries now following... and the rate of consumption will increase over the coming years).

derry

Its been a while since I looked at this thread and some new info has come about

First is some egg heads worked out over the millions of years the total amount of forests that fell into swamps and made coal gas and oil deposits and then some fancy calculations for those that were lost for whatever reason and came up the liklely amount of oil coal and gas there is still left to be exploited

Much as expected the results for coal were some thousands of year supply were still be found at present usage ( USA has 1000 years supply at least )

With the natural gas it confirmed most estimates that suggest some one thousand years plus supply at present usage which is higher than the normal 100 yeas figures we are told about but fits other Gas watch gurus who watch GAS projections and then extrapolate

And what do you know the estimates for oil reserves from this system estimates also 1000 years plus supply at present useage


SO THE WE GONNA RUN OUT OF OIL SOON IS ALL A LOAD OF BULL CRAP

And guess what the so called all tapped out state of Texas where they claim to know every inch of it and have tapped every worthwhile well suddenly last week they hit the mother load in natural gas some sort of huge field

When we we look at the overall size of the planet and we figure out how much has been explored we can see we havent touched 1% of the planet

We can also see every time they start drilling they find new oil wells like north Gulf sea of Mexico Alaska Venusvela and those are what we know about

Oil companies after hitting these big oil supplies found a new problem with such a glut of oil the price dropped so they stopped drilling or at least if they found any more oil they didn't tell us

So they gradually stop drilling or letting us know how much reserves there is and strart to employ peak oil specialists to tell us we all running out of oil and then reduce the refining capisity all so that they could hike the price and rip our faces

But all the main specialists who watch oil say there is MEGA huge oil fields from drilling found in Labadour Newfoundland , Malavinas (Faulklands for Brits ), west Africa some results already announced and Brazil some results already announced and Ireland off shore which they don't tell us plebs

So whats the new game in town
Its simple blind everybody especialy ireland with crap of all sorts so they dont see the real piture

irealnd for example is with its sea area of expoltaion 6 times bigger than the isaland we see a bit like a iceberg 1/6 land 5/6th under water land

So they fill the Irish full of **** oh oil is running out give us good drilling terms deals at knock down rates and what will happen

Simple they will find oil with so much region of land under the sea they cant miss The chances that there is no oil fields out there is so close to nil that we can be sure statisticlaly there is several large fields out there

But will the thicko Irish plebs us joe soaps get any of it not a chance

They will get a rubber stamped deal from the FF that allows them a special low rate of tax ......and they can export the oil to highest bidder ........and we will be a pipe line watching all the stuff go to richer Europe ....just like the last west of irealnd gas deal ......rip off alley except on a bigger scale

Then when all teh oil is all sucked up and gone they will leave us the big oil mess to clean up but then we wont have the money to pay for the clean up

So for me I prefer we don,t find any oil we stop all drilling and give nobody any drilling rights
Instead we grow forests and burn wood stoves and make wind mills and all other reusable solutions

Irealnd can become nearly 90% not dependant on oil or gas if we decide to eject these oil company rip off SOB and make tax oil out of existance and we can still have a good economy and live from renewables

Then that way Ireland will become independent of oil shock problems and hopefully only need oil for the aircrafts some 2% to 10% of oil use today maybe then that will 100% oil use for aircraft 100% quick grow forests driving electric power stations and Bio fuel for all the cars and trucks and then we can tell the oil companies who wrecked the west with gas pipe lines to go take a hike

With so much fertile land and a low population density Ireland can actually produce all its own Bio fuels to replace oil

But with FF running the show and selling Ireland out for buttons with the golden circle welcome to oil rich oil polluted future of Ireland

So go take a tri colour and get a big blob of black paint and make that your new flag and watch the rich eat the cream put the money in the Carabeen secret accounts and leave the Irish kids of the furture sqaut for money to clean up the oil spills as they jet off to sunny climes

I am too old to see the full story pan out but the oil companies have bought off the big players in Ireland and will make the EIRCON scam look like a minor bit player con job compared the oil con JOB that will wreck Ireland and make the bit player Eircon scam dealers even more money

I don't like Ryan air but at least he pays his tax in Irealnd and does buy land here and he hates spending money on oil to fuel his fleets of planes so I don't think he will want the big oil con job to take place
The farmers in the west I salute you as savoirs of the WEST possibly all of Ireland

Possibly showing the rest of us the evils of the regime that cons us and waking us up to how the system will use the full force of hundreds of the gaurda to protect these bandit oil giants

Derry

tracker-man

good man.

derry

Nice to get a bit of support

I am also a anti nuclear kinda guy but that forum melted down into a china syndrome event with nuclear lover experts from the midlands

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055364915

any way here is the new flag Ireland can change over to

Mostly blue to show how much water we owned and controlled before Oil buys it for buttons
The dead fish to show how the government is determined to let the EU strip mine fish all the fish ASAP so as to stop fishing boats getting upset from oil spills
No fish to fish no oil spills to worry about

The pipe line shows the oil passing through Ireland on the way to highest bidder which isn't Ireland who pre sold it
The plane shows all the brown envelope money winging it away from Ireland to secret carabeen accounts
The boot is the force of the laws used to suppress opposition for happless victims in the way of the process to turn Ireland into a worthless hulk of oil spills with no fish left and no farming to make food so we become enslaved to the big food importers who often tend to live in Kinseely


Welcome to the fiefdom of ireland riddled with the hoodwinkers


Pass the flag around seeing as that is the emminent future as the Eircon group and others moves to pull of the biggest con this century has ever seen

Might as well change the national anthem while your at it to" I to sold my soul to the company shop " as all the big depts will come from the clean up of the oil mess long after the oil runs out

Húrin

cp251 wrote: »

Then I read this. It seems climate change is on hold at least until 2015.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/04/30/eaclimate130.xml

I think the end is nigh all right. The end of this global warming nonsense.

Your own source contradicts you ya clown!

However, the effect of rising fossil fuel emissions will mean that warming will accelerate again after 2015 when natural trends in the oceans veer back towards warming, according to the computer model.