Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Huffington Post has noticed that many university academics are utter climate hypocrites, that many of them rate their personal importance by how many professional air miles they can accumulate every year.
The Climate Change Hypocrisy Of Jet-Setting Academics
By Nives Dolšak and Aseem Prakash
03/31/2018 09:00 am ET
Recently, we witnessed a fascinating conversation among a few of our professorial colleagues about their frequent flyer status on a prominent airline. Two of them had achieved “Diamond” status ― the very top of the priority boarding pecking order. They spoke the most and were the loudest. The others, with either Platinum or Gold frequent flyer medallions, also noted how “busy” they were with “all this travel.”
The group casually mentioned the various benefits ― such as seating upgrades and access to airport lounges ― that come with their statuses, but the bragging was not really about those perks. It was about importance and recognition. After all, only the most successful academics fly around the world, attending conferences, participating in workshops and giving lectures. Congratulations all around!
…
But while these universities are working to help their communities take on climate change, academics are accumulating big carbon footprints with their jet-setting professional styles. As The New York Times noted, “Your Biggest Carbon Sin May Be Air Travel.”
This is a notable disconnect between what universities preach and what their culture incentivizes and their star professors do. Academics are probably among the people most aware of the threats posed by climate change. But might their own carbon-profligate lifestyles undermine their moral authority to demand that coal miners, Teamsters working on oil pipelines and mining-dependent Native American tribes sacrifice their own economic well-being to fight climate change?
…
Read more: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/opinion-dolsak-prakash-carbon-tax_us_5abe746ae4b055e50acd5c80
The author notes that in 2014, University of Washington academics submitted claims for 136 million miles of professional travel – enough for a return trip to Mars.
This issue goes beyond feeling outraged at the blatant climate hypocrisy.
Why should any of us take academic warnings about anthropogenic CO2 seriously, when behind closed doors those same academics demonstrate their true level of concern by competing with each other to create the largest possible professional carbon footprint?
Back when I worked at a Federal Department HQ in Wash DC, I knew more than a few “executives” who flew unnecessary trips, just to maintain air mileage and airline membership status.
There are times when face to face meetings are urgently necessary. Other than that, phone calls and video calls easily satisfy long distance business. Much better, in fact, since one may make many phone calls or video conferences at the moment they’re needed. Great means of communicating without wasted time in airports or in the air.
Delta Airlines’ Diamond status is awarded when a person achieves 125,000 Medallion Qualification Miles (MQMs), plus $15,000 Medallion Qualification Dollars (MQDs) in one calendar year.
Flying around the world five times:
• Boeing 777 @ur momisugly 512 knots (590 mph) = a minimum 42 hours in the air per round the world trip, 210 hours total; i.e. 8.75 days flying. Without counting airport and travel to/from airport time.
• Boeing 747-400ER @ur momisugly 495 knots (570 mph) = a minimum 44 hours in the air per round the world trip, 220 hours total; i.e. 9.2 days flying. Without counting airport and travel to/from airport time.
Other airlines or planes will vary, YMMV.
Those “executives”, “researchers” or “whatever” taking pride in their airline mileage status entirely miss the rationale behind why they travel.
Instead those researchers beef up their travel for selfish and egotistical reasons. Causing one to wonder how much their research is influenced or affected by their rather sick desire for travel status and premium travel attention.
Bets on manniacal’s travel status?
I suggest that public sector employees not be allowed to earn frequent flyer miles on public sector “business.”
Nah… let them earn miles, just make it a taxable benefit.
The company/university/foundation pays for the travel, let them travel steerage… err, coach, like the rest of us. The perks are a taxable benefit.
That topic was discussed at the highest Civil Service levels and eventually decided in favor of employees keeping benefits given to them by the airlines.
Of course, it’s the highest levels of executives who travel most frequently and thereby gain the most from frequent flyer memberships.
While many Federal employees love to travel and seek to amplify travel opportunities and various perks associated with travel.
Many Federal employees consider travel an onerous chore.
In order to work at the highest Federal administrative levels, many if not most job descriptions include somewhere in the fine print; “frequent and/or long periods of travel may be necessary or required”.
One accepts travel duties and responsibilities or forfeits their job.
Airline perks are poor recompense for the time and inconvenience.
Unless, i.e., one’s ego is wedded to airlines treating a person as some sort of royalty. Which speaks volumes regarding researchers pursuing or maintaining “diamond” status. Pompous a$$, comes to mind.
When I stopped traveling, I happily let all travel memberships and mileages lapse.
Yeah, I converted a few miles into magazines; but magazine offers rarely included magazines I had any desire to read.
I converted some miles into a plane ticket to visit family. But, travel is travel, and best avoided.
The rest of the miles eventually evaporated, after months/years of airline nagging that expiration was nigh.
I agree with that thought!
Upgrades and free tickets are directly translatable to cash income; since airlines allow people to “purchase” upgrades and tickets.
Federal executives at officer level, i.e. the highest level executives, are always flown at “First Class”.
All of the rest of use minions fly at coach, government rate. i.e., without operative upgrades, expect seats behind the engines and near the toilets.
When a Federal employee is sent on trave enough, the airline starts “upgrading” seating and classification, without the flyer requesting such consideration.
I’ve always assumed the reservations program is triggered by a traveler’s total air mileage.
I once won a raffle for a stay in the Bahamas. I always wondered why I had to claim that trip as income, but airline perks avoided IRS radars. Could there be IRS conflicts of interest in operation?
And yet this idiocy, fueled by millennial ignorance, continues to expand. Everybody go their files, haul out your latest electricity bill and check your cost per kilowatt hour. Then hum to your self, “These are the good old days…”
“Why should any of us take academic warnings about anthropogenic CO2 seriously, when behind closed doors those same academics demonstrate their true level of concern by competing with each other to create the largest possible professional carbon footprint?”
Well said!
One of their solutions is for universities to charge a carbon fee to the fliers or their sponsors, and to purchase carbon offsets with the proceeds. How this regains their moral ground when they’ll require miners to give up their jobs for the planet, escapes me.
They would build the carbon fee charges into their travel allowances in their grant submissions. So who would end up paying the bill? (Hint: not the academics or government scientists, all of whom are pulling downd 6-figure salaries.
Coming to you this very month: http://on-climate.com/2018-conference
Tenth International Conference on Climate Change: Impacts & Responses
2018 Special Focus: Engaging with Policy on Climate Change
20–21 April 2018 University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, USA
Check it out….. Or Check in!
http://on-climate.com/2018-conference/hotel-travel
oneworld® is pleased to be the official airline alliance of the International Conference on Climate Change: Impacts & Responses.
attendee benefits
Discounts on flights for attendees and one travel companion.
Travel up to seven days before and seven days after the event.
Flights available from all oneworld member airlines and affiliates.
Enjoy a user-friendly booking tool showing the most convenient flight options.
24-hour support via email or phone.
Earn rewards and tier status points on eligible oneworld flights.
Frequent flyer privileges including access to some 650 premium airport lounges worldwide, fast track at security lanes in selected airports and extra baggage allowance.*
Seamless connections and quality service on oneworld member airlines.
*Privileges depend on your oneworld tier status level. For more information visit http://www.oneworld.com/benefits.
There is more irony and hidden meaning in the OneWorld message for the climate change faithful congregants than you realize.
All the invites to conferences, symposia, workshop, special lectures, etc all feed the egos of these CAGW scientists. It makes them believe, even those with doubts, that they are right, the movement is right. Also if they are seen to be good devout monks and high priests then they believe they will ensure “their” funding that is they will get paid. It doesn’t just happen in Climate “Science” but in other sciences as well though not quite to the same extent. Two of the biggest expenses in government budgets is salary and benefits and travel. To of the greatest controls that elected officials have over government bureaucrats and tenured professors, where generally they can’t be fired, is cut salary and travel. Such cuts can easily be defended to the general public by just listing the destinations and the cost.
Yes, but other than Bali, Fiji, Cancun, Rio, NY, Paris, London, Prague, Vienna, Durban, Venice, Doha, Copenhagen, Aspen, Vancouver, etc., these conferences tend to be where no one wants to visit.
LMFAO. Since the Climate Fascists, whether overtly or covertly, support human “depopulation” to “save the planet,” they should hold all “climate conferences” at Auschwitz, including a free, live demonstration of the gas chambers for all participants. You know, in the “practice what you preach” manner of the necessary “sacrifices.”
Recently received my alumni magazine. My alma mater, once a highly rated science and engineering school, not so much anymore, actually hardly at all anymore, is soooo politically correct now it almost made me puke. Really heavily into everything politically correct and useless to the nth power. Literally sickening for a school that was once so good. Can remember when the late 60’s war protesting hippies tried to block the doors to the administration building. Didn’t work out well for them.
“Academics are probably among the people most aware of the threats posed by climate change. ”
They must know the truth of a scientific malfeasance enabling a financial fraud against humanity that makes Bernie Madoff look like a petty thief.
If they cancelled the CMIP6 and AR6 coordination conferences and simply did a bunch of GoToMeetings and Skpe virtual conferences, then we might could take anything they have to say about reducing CO2 emissions seriously.
But that ain’t gonna happen. Simply because climate change has nothing to do with climate and everything to do about accumulation of power and wealth in the hands of the elites and their academic enablers.
True enough, but even if they did exactly what you say about using teleconferences as a substitute for travel, I would still not believe their pseudo-science drivel. I MIGHT believe them to be less hypocritical, but that’s about all the “credit” they would get.
There are layers and layers of fuzzy thinking concerning everything about CAGW.
The issue is not how much airplane fuel is wasted by idiotic cult of CAGW scientists to attend purposeless CAGW conferences.
Air travel is a necessity for almost all tourism.
Taxing air travel only reduces CO2 emissions if it stops most air travel (say $2000 US return New York to Paris, standard airfare) which in turn will stop tourism.
The issue for CO2 emissions is tourism, not fuel to run airplanes.
There are CO2 emissions to construct airplanes, airports, cruise ships, hotels, condos, food for tourism, and so on.
The 20 destinations most reliant on tourism
1. Maldives – 39.6% of GDP
2. British Virgin Islands – 35.4%
3. Macau – 29.3%
4. Aruba – 28.1%
5. Seychelles – 26.4%
6. Curaçao – 23.4%
7. Anguilla – 21.1%
8. Bahamas – 19%
9. Vanuatu – 18.2%
10. Cape Verde – 17.8%
11. St Lucia – 15%
12. Belize – 15%
13. Fiji – 14.4%
14. Malta – 14.2%
15. Cambodia – 14.1%
16. US Virgin Islands – 13.3%
17. Antigua and Barbuda – 13%
18. Barbados – 13%
19. Dominica – 12.4%
20. Montenegro – 11%
Top 10 destination cities
1. Bangkok, Thailand — 19.41 million visitors in 2016 (20.19 million forecast for 2017)
2. London, England — 19.06 million visitors in 2016 (20.01 million forecast for 2017)
3. Paris, France — 15.45 million visitors in 2016 (16.13 million forecast for 2017)
4. Dubai, UAE — 14.87 million visitors in 2016 (16.01 million forecast for 2017)
5. Singapore — 13.11 million visitors in 2016 (13.45 million forecast for 2017)
6. New York, USA — 12.70 million visitors in 2016 (12.36 million forecast for 2017)
7. Seoul, South Korea — 12.39 million visitors in 2016 (12.44 million forecast for 2017)
8. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia — 11.28 million visitors in 2016 (12.08 million forecast for 2017)
9. Tokyo, Japan — 11.15 million visitors in 2016 (12.51 million forecast for 2017)
10. Istanbul, Turkey — 9.16 million visitors in 2016 (9.24 million forecast for 2017)
Las Vegas had over 39 million visitors last year.
Florida has been averaging right at 100 million tourist per year.
Different web numbers for visitors depending on source.
The following is number of visitors to US cities (millions).
1 New York, New York 59.7
2 Chicago, Illinois 54.1
3 Atlanta, Georgia 51
4 Anaheim/Orange County, California 48.2
5 Orlando, Florida 48.0
6 Los Angeles, California 47.3
7 Las Vegas, Nevada 42.9
8 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 42
9 San Diego, California 34.9
10 San Francisco, California 25
What is the cult of CAGW’s goal? Cut those numbers by 50% by 2040?
These idiots are idiots among idiots.
Surely, all flights to CA cities are on the chopping block!
Drill, baby, Drill!
Burn, baby, Burn!
Energy, baby, Energy!
CO2, baby, CO2!
Food, baby, Food!
Sounds like a logical description of the Carbon Cycle benefiting mankind in more ways than one!
Give them credit at last unlike ‘green’ celebrities they are not using private jets !
@1:36 Michael Crichton suggests the symbolic action of banning private jets.
https://youtu.be/f-28qNd6ass?t=5760
Huff post still has a long way to go. Their belief that the profs may deserve all this recognition (In their article) because of all their struggles and hard work after invoking the plight of coal miners and other laborers …
Is this the beginning of the breakdown of the enormous dissonance warmunist wackos are eventually going to have to endure? These freaks are going to need a daily 12 step program.
ccc
Like it!
Its just sooooooo delicious innit.
They are the ones telling us to trust the computers (the horrendously complicated models) yet they themselves don’t even trust the computers to exchange tedious humdrum information between themselves (email, cloud sharing, teleconference etc)
They have to do it face-to-face. They don’t even trust each other.
And for exactly the reason I’ve repeated dozens of times here, its possible to hide the dead-give-away telltale signs of your mendaciousness when using a computer. Or simply that you haven’t a clue about that of which you speak.
What would happen if anyone told them that?
(Assuming you survive the initial torrent of personal abuse that is)
“they themselves don’t even trust the computers to exchange tedious humdrum information between themselves (email, cloud sharing, teleconference etc)”
You touch on a good point there – the “in person” meetings are possibly used as a way to avoid more information that is “discoverable” via FOI legislation, so that the “sound bites” can be more carefully orchestrated without revealing the “man behind the curtain” malfeasance.
A tad conspiratorial with a shade of paranoia there “AGW is not a science”.
“Recently received my alumni magazine. My alma mater, once a highly rated science and engineering school, not so much anymore, actually hardly at all anymore, is soooo politically correct now it almost made me puke. ”
Thought of paying my old uni a visit sometime. However, looking at the website it now sounds a lot like yours.
When you think about all that pointless plane travel though, it makes sense to do that if they actually believe that CO2 causes warming, and their funding depends on the climate continuing to warm.
All of this Carbon Dioxide is not really a problem. Remember it is at 40,000 ft… up there somewhere… pie in the sky … so to speak
Ex-President Obama of ‘Clean Power Plan’ and “[E]lectricity rates would necessarily skyrocket…” fame has recently visited Oz by air, travelled around with at least 5 large, no doubt heavily armoured thus fuel inefficient, vehicles plus police escorts and left after a day or two for another junket in another country, again by air.
I’d be pretty safe to assume he did not pay for a meal and that the Oz Government (meaning us, the tax payers) picked up most of his expenses while in country.
Maybe he is competing with Al for ‘The World’s Greatest Hypocrite’ award, to be presented in front of several hundred adoring lesser hypocrites at a luxury resort somewhere far from the hoi polloi but paid for by the same slaves to their moral authority.
Bumpersticker above liberal tailpipe:
DO AS I SAY
NOT AS I SPEW
Perfect! Now we just need to attach one to each of Fat Albert’s fleet of SUVs and limos.
Remember, these people want the rest of us to reduce our emissions (Read, lifestyle) so that they can offset their emissions (Read, continue THEIR lifestyles) at our expense. When politicians started talking about “climate change” in the 90’s and then “actors” got involved too, my suspicion that AGW driven climate change via emissions of CO2 was a sc@m. And sure enough, as each year passes since the late 80’s (Thanks Thatcher), the sc@m is proven.
I don’t know how many academics there are at Washington Uni, but if there were 3000, they claimed for 45,000 air miles each last year. That’s quite a few round trips to Cancun.
Very good. Now let’s address the financial incentive to beat the drum of global warming threats and keep the grant money flowing in.
“But might their own carbon-profligate lifestyles undermine their moral authority to demand that coal miners, Teamsters working on oil pipelines and mining-dependent Native American tribes sacrifice their own economic well-being to fight climate change?”
Absolutely. I bet they use fast food drive-thru’s too.
Obama grants and international climate meetings are great for frequent flyer miles.