-
I have literally no idea who she is but the mere fact we're discussing her flying in this thread indicates to me that mostly what she has achieved with this action is causing a distraction and negative backlash/coverage which we've all paid for in CO2/NOx/etc. And on that basis we'd almost certainly have been better off if she hadn't bothered.
.
-
I have literally no idea who she is but the mere fact we're discussing her flying in this thread indicates to me that mostly what she has achieved with this action is causing a distraction and negative backlash/coverage which we've all paid for in CO2/NOx/etc. And on that basis we'd almost certainly have been better off if she hadn't bothered.
I agree (as I said upthread). She should have put out a supportive statement, perhaps involving a mea culpa like 'I fly far too much'.
You are reading a single comment by @frankenbike and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
Fox
Oliver Schick
@frankenbike
The question is, how much value are you bringing to the cause by flying across the world*? Is the world better off with Emma Thompson in London and x tonnes of CO2 in the air or with her staying in the US and those emissions not occurring and/or lower demand/profit for airlines?
I have literally no idea who she is but the mere fact we're discussing her flying in this thread indicates to me that mostly what she has achieved with this action is causing a distraction and negative backlash/coverage which we've all paid for in CO2/NOx/etc. And on that basis we'd almost certainly have been better off if she hadn't bothered.
Greta Thunberg on the other hand has had a massive positive impact and the cost of what she's done to the climate is lower. If she was flying, it would still be a net gain.
Pragmatism is needed. Certain people are strongly opposed to the actions of groups like XR and we should be careful not to give them more ammunition. If someone like Emma Thompson wants to fly over to participate then maybe she should collect some data or facts to show that overall it's a worthwhile thing for her to do. Did she help get access to an important person for a meeting, or help create a (positive) media impact, or get a bunch of her fans to sign up to the protests, or whatever? Was there any other way of getting to London that would have achieved the same thing? Could she have taken someone else's seat or a spare seat on a flight, thereby not creating additional demand? If she can say "without me flying over we couldn't have done x y z, and I did it with the lowest possible impact" then she neuters a lot of the criticism.
* I expect almost no one can justify flying around the world really except maybe those directly involved in climate change research/mitigation, in cases where flying makes a dramatic difference to how much work you get done. I know a few big-name climate change academics and their carbon footprints are humongous (conferences, collaborations, instrumentation, fieldwork, etc.). I haven't done any calculations but I'm guessing for most individuals in the world the climate would be in better shape if we died suddenly.