Air travel will destroy the world
Story submitted by Eric Worrall
Southampton University in England has published a hilarious study, which calls for the implementation of a global strongman authority with “teeth” to stop us from travelling by air. According to the study;
“The analysis shows that forecasts for strong growth in air-traffic will result in civil aviation becoming an increasingly significant contributor to anthropogenic CO2 emissions. Some mitigation-measures can be left to market-forces as the key-driver for implementation because they directly reduce airlines’ fuel consumption, and their impact on reducing fuel-costs will be welcomed by the industry. Other mitigation-measures cannot be left to market-forces. … A global regulator with ‘teeth’ needs to be established, but investing such a body with the appropriate level of authority requires securing an international agreement which history would suggest is going to be very difficult. … the ticket price-increases necessary to induce the required reduction in traffic growth-rates place a monetary-value on CO2 emissions of approximately 7–100 times greater than other common valuations. It is clear that, whilst aviation must remain one piece of the transport-jigsaw, environmentally a global regulator with ‘teeth’ is urgently required.”
Source: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231014004889
One thing for sure, this has got to be one of the most bizarre calls for totalitarianism I have ever read. If our civilisation acts upon this advice, one thing we can be certain of is that puzzled historians in future ages will devote entire chapters to strange circumstances surrounding the “Southampton Solution”.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Uh, oh looks like AlGore’s private jet may be at risk.
Think about how elitist this suggested “solution” is – only the richest would be able to travel by air. But then again, all of the so called solutions to CAGW involve raising energy prices, which hurt the poorest hardest. Ironic because the left used to position themselves as champions of the poor & underprivileged, which all their environmental positions are diametrically opposed to. I don’t think they have thought this through very well.
How about a science malfeasance regulator with teeth, that can dismiss scientists misusing science for political ends.
They don’t give a tinker’s cuss about the poor & disadvantaged, it’s all a clever ploy to seize power & taxpayers money that we don’t have, to enrich the few, make the rich even richer, & exert authoritarian control on everyone else. They want to put the world back 50 years +!
I’m not ready to give up air travel.
Perhaps these guys could be the source of hot air for increased Hot Air Balloon travel?
Win/Win for all.
/grin
Radical Muslims or Radical Environmentalist, which is the greater threat? We are allowing one group to teach our kids their beliefs in our schools. If we wait 20 years before taking some action to stop it, it will be too late.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/energy/epa-chief-teach-global-warming-in-schools-20140808
I suggest they have a conference in some far away locale and all fly in to discuss the matter.
Not so funny. The fact its comfortable for them to publish this stuff says loads. Substitute any other thing “needing” regulation and you have the plan. Things start with someone having such an off-the-wall idea. Europe is beyond hope as even Europeans know – they were oddly restrained from their desired seduction by total*#itartianisim by the iron curtain. With it gone, they are now moving left of China while China is moving right. My concern is the softening of America on individual freedoms, the inexorable shifting into the new_ #world_order. It reminds me of the feminist revolution – probably none were so surprised as women themselves how relatively easy it was to achieve acquiescence of their “foe”. Ironically, we have to look to China, India and the former Soviets to save us from the Southhampton man#ifesto. Don’t we always say re agreements to stifle ourselves, “we won’t do it unless China and India agree to do it! The Republicans, unfortunately are me-tooiing themselves into the plan.
I guess we serfs won’t be flying much anymore.
Col Mosby said at 6:03 am
Uh, oh looks like AlGore’s private jet may be at risk.
No, Al Gore is a VIP and his air travel is important just like he is. You on the other hand …
Col Mosby says:
August 12, 2014 at 6:03 am
—–
The private jets of Gore and the other “leaders” will never be in jeopardy. It is the air travel of the masses that our “betters” seek to eliminate.
Give up air travel and give up being crowded into a box with seats designed for 5’4″ 100-lb folks; the rush to find 4″ of carry-on storage or pay extra to be in the head of that rush line; lousy food; surly flight attendants; having to darn near undress at Checkpoint Charlie and then getting rechecked in the boarding area and all the other amenities of modern air travel? I decided that air travel was a form of torture 25 years ago, a worse torture after 9/11 and get on commercial air only when forced.
So who most often travels by air? Not the poor. Not the disease ridden “refugees” arriving by the southern entrance of the US. Not even most of the middle class, who can no longer afford food, much less luxuries.
The answer is the rich! So why do we need anything with teeth? Just make the rich poor – socialists are good at doing that.
I’m ashamed. Southampton was my university.
Was this study sponsored by a consortium of cruise ship companies?
More, including press contact. The proposed price rises (1.4% per year) seem smaller than previous correspondents may have assumed:
“This would translate to a yearly 1.4 per cent increase on ticket prices, breaking the trend of increasing lower airfares,” says co-author and researcher Matt Grote. “The price of domestic tickets has dropped by 1.3 per cent a year between 1979 and 2012, and international fares have fallen by 0.5 per cent per annum between 1990 and 2012.”
However, the research suggests any move to suppress demand would be resisted by the airline industry and national governments. The researchers say a global regulator ‘with teeth’ is urgently needed to enforce CO2 emission reduction measures.
“Some mitigation measures can be left to the aviation sector to resolve,” says Head of the Centre for Environmental Science at the University of Southampton Professor Ian Williams. “For example, the industry will continue to seek improvements to fuel efficiency as this will reduce costs. However, other essential measures, such as securing international agreements, setting action plans, regulations and carbon standards will require political leadership at a global level.”
http://www.southampton.ac.uk/engineering/news/2014/08/08_air_traffic_growth.page
Guess it’s time to go back to coal-burning trans-oceanic steamers. Oh wait, I mean clippers, since they’re “renewable”.
So has Anthony booked his sea passage for the UK visit yet? Queen Mary 2 is very nice, I’m told.
The ticket price increases would come in the form of taxes. The Progressive who propose these sorts of foolish schemes then say, “look at all the good things we can do with this new found fountain of money.”
One big problem though, as a consumption tax, airline travel would diminish dramatically as designed, cutting tax revenue further. the as airlines failed, and aerospace industry crumbled, everyone would ask, “What were we thinking, letting these Progressives be in charge?”
“One thing for sure, this has got to be one of the most bizarre calls for totalitarianism I have ever read. If our civilisation acts upon this advice, one thing we can be certain of is that puzzled historians in future ages will devote entire chapters to strange circumstances surrounding the “Southampton Solution”.”
Maybe it’s just me, but it seems as though it is increasingly normal for academia to be bizarre these days and spit out bizarre pieces like this one.
If you want to start a revolution and foment social upheaval, academia is a good place to start. Academia tends to attract radical thinkers with bizarre ideas and agendas, and CAGW as a movement certainly fits the bill as a tool for reorganizing or reformulating society in the model of the radical thinker.
As long as the bizarre and radical thinkers are confined solely to academia, I don’t think that we need be too concerned about them. However, when they start successfully asserting their influence in government at all levels, then it is time to worry–a lot.
@Jim Stevens
Nope, cruise companies and other ship operators are keeping their heads down because the hounds are loose on the trail of their polluting of the seas. pollutionarticles.blogspot.com
Pick out a cave soon, we’re headed back to the stone ages.
I used to think like this(Southampton) then I grew up!
Hen’s teeth.
@ur momisugly joelobryan –
…everyone would ask, ‘What were we thinking, letting these Progressives be in charge?’”
See, that’s where you’re mistaken. Such thoughts would be forbidden by the time we reach that point.
……of course, we could always go back to the dirigible, couldn’t we?