That’ll definitely save the world.
Considering aviation is 2.5% of global CO2 emissions, you could get rid of all the aviation emissions and still be very far off from saving anything.
Oh no, it’s such a low reduction! Might as well do nothing then.
I’m not saying “do nothing”. I’m saying efforts are better spent elsewhere as they’ll have much more dramatic effect.
Air travel should be addressed after massive emitters like industrial sources. Otherwise we’re going to greatly disrupt the lives of normal people trying to see their grandma for very little benefit.
And yet they are part of the obvious low hanging fruit for reducing emissions
Are they obvious? If they account for 2.5%, shouldn’t the focus be on something that doesn’t produce an emotional response (i.e. planes burn so much fuel! They bad for environment!) But is a bigger contributor to polution?
Ships come to mind. Biggest 5 polute as much as all cars on earth. Yet car electrification is brough on constantly in the discourse, when using bunker fuel on ships is met wirh silence
They are obvious because they are rarely irreplaceable. We can live without mass tourism and fast deliveries.
I mean, we can also live with the 2.5% polution they cause
Not really. People in developed countries need to divide their emissions by approximately ten times. Every little bit helps. And we should start with the easy ones.