If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact [email protected]

Eco Green Bullsht

  • 12-11-2022 10:30am
    Registered Users Posts: 6,037 ✭✭✭

    The indo has a story today about how a junior minister travelled by (or was upgraded free to?) business class while Minister Darragh O'Brien remained in economy. But that's not the point. Their big reveal is, "Business class seats are responsible for emitting three times more carbon than economy." WTactualF? The almost triumphal way the journalist drops this nonsense/accusation makes me want to vomit. Reporting reduced to fanciful social media unfounded jibes. And I was almost going to buy an online sub for the Indo. I can read this kind of tripe anyday on twitter, if I wanted to. Three f**g times. Did the junior minister suddenly rush off the plane and drag on his wife and 100kg of extra luggage? Give me a break. The only additional emissions in a business seat are the stored farts of the previous overfed occupant.


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,153 ✭✭✭✭astrofool

    I would imagine the point of the OP is that the seat is still there whether a minister used it or not and the paper's actual "green" point is that any seats other than economy shouldn't exist in the first place, or something.

    But that this can be applied to anything all the way down to fancy cereal when simple porridge would have less of a carbon footprint.

    I.e. the articles green point was completely unthought and misdirected.

  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]

    It's this kind of nonsense that puts ordinary people off the green movement.

    They have plenty of good arguments, yet they resort to this kind of ridiculous nit-picking overbearing Mother kind-of approach.

    It's like the health extremists demanding we put calories on menus.

    Obsessive nonsense forced onto everyone else.

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,793 ✭✭✭FunLover18

    I think the OP's point is clear when they call the accusation that business class passengers are responsible for 3 times more emmisions as a "fanciful" and "unfounded"

    This is the article, I don't really care and it's a bit of a non story but it makes perfect sense to me that business class passengers are responsible for more emissions.

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 16,153 ✭✭✭✭astrofool

    It's a soundbite.

    Coming back to the science, if the "seat exists" on a plane, how is the person sitting in it contributing more emissions?

    My presumption here is they calculate the emissions per space taken up in a plane and that you could fit 2-3 economy seats in the same space as a business class seat.

    That hit occurs whether the seat is used or not and only applies if the plane was full and they could have sold more economy seats.

    The solution to that is to start by banning non-economy seats, making the seats the minimum size a person can bear and only flying full planes.

    And then move to ban flying and holidays etc.

    Then you look at what the customers are paying, a business seat can often be 10x the cost of an economy seat (and sometimes it can be a free upgrade for a frequent flyer) so the business customer is paying 3x per carbon unit than an economy passenger, maybe look at raising prices to that level and putting a tax in place to put into carbon reduction initiatives (hopefully ones that work, not buying tress in a forest that already exists).

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,325 ✭✭✭cuttingtimber22

    Who would be a politician in Ireland? It is horrible. The media engage in click bait nonsense and then ignore real issues. No in depth reporting. They do not even try to understand the issues.

  • Registered Users Posts: 23,553 ✭✭✭✭Strumms

    but, more actual seats equals more people, equals more luggage more catering which ALL equals more weight. More weight means more fuel is required to both be tankered and burned to reach the destination.

    same as a 40 ft truck… hauling a load of 40 tonnes, Cork to Belfast…vs hauling 20 tonnes..

    the 20 tonne trip requires less fuel.

    through more people on the aircraft… whatever about footprints…. You are releasing more emissions into the atmosphere.

  • Registered Users Posts: 23,053 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34

    Oh I dunno, I'd say the media try to skewer Darragh O'Brien on housing issues every hour of the day and rightly so.

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,325 ✭✭✭cuttingtimber22

    They and SF think there are simple silver bullet solutions to everything. There are not and the fact that various Ministers are forced into a new strategy every few months is not helping matters.

    The planning/housing and health systems need a radical overhaul if there will be a longer term solution but instead they are forced into endless short term sticking plaster measures.

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭Economics101

    The bullshit in the Indo was about n individual (DO'B) being responsible for 3 times the emissions just because he turned left instead of right when he got on the plane. At the level of the individual it's clearly a steaming load of bullshit. At the level of the overall structure of aviation and airline seating arrangements, there may be an issue, but that's anther day's argument.

    And while the Indo is at it, maybe they should dump on politicians who ever travel to conferences instead of doing everything via Zoom. This would play well to the unholy alliance between begrudgers and eco-freaks.

  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,957 CMod ✭✭✭✭Ten of Swords

    Are you trying to say that the flight would have produced the same amount of carbon emissions even if the minister wasn't on it at all?

  • Registered Users Posts: 12,396 ✭✭✭✭elperello

    It was Burke who travelled business not O'Brien.

  • Registered Users Posts: 25,970 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko

  • Registered Users Posts: 14 aland123

    "Given our history of colonisation" lol.

    "Siobhan Curran, the head of policy and advocacy at Stop Climate Chaos member organisation Trocaire, said: “Given our history of colonisation and famine, we have a unique opportunity to show solidarity with some of the poorest countries in the world who are experiencing massive losses and damage due to the climate crisis."

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl

    have these people even cracked open a history book. They should Start with Blight. 🤪 And then Ireland as a colony.

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,793 ✭✭✭FunLover18

    It's definitely a soundbite but it's accurate and yes the solution is to get rid on non-economy seating. Also private planes need to go too.

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,793 ✭✭✭FunLover18

    I would assume that planes are already carrying close to maximum weight for fuel efficiency give or take to allow people to carry extra but I would assume people in first and business classes have greater luggage allowances than those in economy. If everyone is economy it would probably even out assuming airlines want to be fuel efficient, I can't see them wanting to spend more fuel on a plane full of economy passengers. That's just pure assumption though, I could be wrong.

  • Registered Users Posts: 23,923 ✭✭✭✭lawred2

    Scummy reporting... The junior minister was traveling twice as far as Darragh O Brien. Whereas Darragh O Brien finished up in Dubai that other lad was on his way to Korea or something..

    I think it's reasonable for that distance for a government minister to take business.

    It wasn't an apples for apples comparison but you had to read the article to get that detail.

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl

    I dunno if its a Green TD fair to criticise. But long haul flights tend to not be half full anyway.

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,536 ✭✭✭Micky 32

    In the last year i have been on 5 transatlantic flights . Plane was full every tine.

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭xxxxxxl

    I'm sure it was after 2 years of on and off lockdowns and unable to really travel by air. I meant past experience Especially Going to Asia or Australia.

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,536 ✭✭✭Micky 32

    I have been going over and back to the US regularly since 2006. The planes were full in 2019 . I remember in the recession years the planes were quite empty at times.

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,037 ✭✭✭deezell

    Just to be clear on this, the Boeing 777 300 flying from Dublin to Dubai has to haul 450Kg of plane for every one of its passengers. The weight of the average passenger plus a decent case is about 100kg, so loaded weight is 550kg per passenger. It's very obvious to anyone with an inkling of physics that the carbon footprint of a full plane is 82% generated by the weight of the plane and the remaining 18% is contributed by the weight of the passengers, regardless where they sit. When a person books a business class seat, the airline does not have to increase its fuel requirement by three times 100kg or 3 by 550kg or any other bull. It's the same fuel penalty per passenger no matter where they sit. This eco nazi journalism would put Goebbels in the shade, and he sure could twist the truth. What really bothers me is that someone as important as a minister of an EU nation would feel he had to endure an Economy seat while on a long BUSINESS flight in order to satisfy the mob. It reminds me of when the FAI put it's blazers in business class, while the players were wedged in Economy, their legs, the most important asset of the trip, bent into their chests.

    We need to set Roy Keane on the tool who wrote this tripe.