Climate Change - Airshows

[Stagger2]

Naturally, it's easy to target public events for scrutiny such as RIAT & F1, but you don't have to expand much further to see unbelievable wasteful contributions to climate change. As this is an aviation forum I'll stick with the obvious. Is it possible that the 3 air-show days of RIAT 2018 contributed less to reduced air quality than the single pathetic Global Airpower Mission which briefly saw the B2 over Fairford on the Saturday?
Not forgetting, that these exercises happen regularly but we don't see them. I'm sorry, but cutting my weekly shopping trip to Tesco aint gonna make a s***s bit of difference to climate change whilst these events are happening! Even though some would have you believe "Every little helps"

[iaint]

I recall this news piece from very recently...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44980493

Granted it’s about Heathrow’s high temperatures, but it does look briefly at the impact of aircraft movements there to the heat island...

[Dan213]

Andyph,

While I never like to predict anything at all, I will say this, on the eve of the 2010 RIAT (I believe it was) as I drove away from the East view parking area I was tuned to the local radio station. The local news came on and prominent among the Bulletins was RIAT. They had on a short interview with a local representative of the Green Party. I can't quite recall, but I believe, not at all unexpectedly, he listed his credentials as an aeronautical engineer in order to establish the thought that he knew what he was about. Even further away from the unexpected, he attacked RIAT for hastening our planet's demise by filthying up the air. He described the event as 'frivolous'. Now I don't know if he perhaps trained as an aviation engineer and suddenly got the climate change bug, but of course he certainly wasn't a fan, he wouldn't be sacrificing a fixture on his Summer Calendar if the Fairford Airshow was indeed banned. However, I don't know how many Rock Festivals and such like he had attended or how he got about, he wasn't pressed on this by the programme's interviewer, but I imagine the thought of banning all such gatherings, Glastonbury et al, had never once crossed his polarized mind. Of course it came as no surprise to find someone of his like making sweeping demands for air shows to bite the bullet in particular. Its straight forward enough when you don't give a toss or actually hate the damn things!

FB

This was my old A level maths teacher who did indeed have an aeronautical engineering degree from a top university and spent some time in the industry. I believe he now works in climate research for a top US University. Although many of his viewpoints that were directed towards RIAT were quite extreme, his overall research in climate change was pretty sound and well thought out. His work went far further than RIAT and despite not agreeing with him on many matters, he most certainly had the credentials and background to be talking about it!

[MiG_Eater]

Airshows are a drop in the ocean. Ban them on account of climate change and you'd be a hypocrite to allow any large gathering at all. Motor-racing, music festivals, sports tournaments... the lot.

Frankly, the best thing for our climate would be to give up on science, technology and industry all together and go back to living in caves and hunting with spears... Having said that, there is more to life than living 'healthily' enjoying life really ought to be a considered factor as well!

[Brevet Cable]

Never trust what the so-called experts tell you about anything.
Look at all the massive reversals as to what's good/bad for you to eat, drink & smoke,for example.

[Paul_Reflex]

Never trust what the so-called experts tell you about anything.
Look at all the massive reversals as to what's good/bad for you to eat, drink & smoke,for example.

Can you give an example of a genuine massive reversal? A lot of stories that portray this are terrible misrepresentations of both the previous and new studies they refer to. If you're waiting for a reversal of the science on climate change then you'll be in for a long wait.

[Paul_Reflex]

Airshows are a drop in the ocean. Ban them on account of climate change and you'd be a hypocrite to allow any large gathering at all. Motor-racing, music festivals, sports tournaments... the lot.

Frankly, the best thing for our climate would be to give up on science, technology and industry all together and go back to living in caves and hunting with spears... Having said that, there is more to life than living 'healthily' enjoying life really ought to be a considered factor as well!

That's exactly what people are getting wrong:;addressing climate change will require more science, technology and industry rather than less.

The last part of your post is really baffling, you seem to have personal wellbeing mixed up with environmental responsibility. A bit like when my dad gets political correctness mixed up with health and safety.

[MiG_Eater]

No man is an island. Doing anything will impact on somebody else in some way, and its really important that we don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Climate change is clearly something that needs looking at, but a world without the opportunity to enjoy yourself is just as bad as a world with rising sea levels. Quality of life is just as important as quantity.

It is such a complex issue with so many aspects that concentrating hard on reducing fossil fuel usage is, in my view, a bit of a red herring. Individual aspects of the problem need to be looked at individually and impacts need to be considered holistically.

Solutions will come as they are necessary.

[MiG_Eater]

p.s. My reference to healthy living was simply referring to the fact that our environmental responsibility exists to preserve the health of others. There is no sense in protecting the environment to an extent where personal liberty is curtailed to such a degree that enjoyment is impossible.

Clearly there's got to be a balance but; let's make a specific example - banning airshows for the sake of the climate would be total madness!

[Brevet Cable]

Can you give an example of a genuine massive reversal? A lot of stories that portray this are terrible misrepresentations of both the previous and new studies they refer to

Where to start....
Salt, sugar, butter, meat, alcohol, carbohydrates ( because the 'experts' never used to differentiate ), fats ( again, because the 'experts' never used to differentiate ) .... and that's just off the top of my head.

If you're waiting for a reversal of the science on climate change then you'll be in for a long wait.

because too many people are making too much money out of it and any dissenters are stigmatised & ostracised -- it's the new McCarthyism.

[Paul_Reflex]

Once again I don't think we're going to reach an agreement here. I would say that its good to hear other views, but in this case it's just saddening.

Mig Eater - If you genuinely think that the western world's access to leisure can seriously be balanced against whether Bangladesh should be underwater then I'm glad you're not in charge.

Brevet - I do wonder what you're reading! The parallel to McCarthyism is extraordinarily cynical.

[Dan213]

Can you give an example of a genuine massive reversal? A lot of stories that portray this are terrible misrepresentations of both the previous and new studies they refer to

Where to start....
Salt, sugar, butter, meat, alcohol, carbohydrates ( because the 'experts' never used to differentiate ), fats ( again, because the 'experts' never used to differentiate ) .... and that's just off the top of my head.

If you're waiting for a reversal of the science on climate change then you'll be in for a long wait.

because too many people are making too much money out of it and any dissenters are stigmatised & ostracised -- it's the new McCarthyism.

Brevet, there have actually been relatively few reversals when it comes to primary literature. The problem comes when media outlets take data from scientific studies and then make it say whatever they want it to. The Daily Fail is a prime example of this with their coffee causes cancer, red wine is good for you articles. They will have taken data from a paper looking at a single chemical compound and it’s effect. They then look for anything that that compound is in and write an article about it, without taking into account of the reactions that it had with other chemicals and the levels required to cause problems

[Brevet Cable]

Brevet - I do wonder what you're reading! The parallel to McCarthyism is extraordinarily cynical.

That's because I am extraordinarily cynical.
The ostracising of anyone seen as being a 'climate change denier' ( even if they aren't ) has been happening for years....it even extends to those who opine that governments are going about things the wrong way & are actually causing one set of problems when attempting to tackle others.

Brevet, there have actually been relatively few reversals when it comes to primary literature. The problem comes when media outlets take data from scientific studies and then make it say whatever they want it to. The Daily Fail is a prime example of this with their coffee causes cancer, red wine is good for you articles. They will have taken data from a paper looking at a single chemical compound and it’s effect. They then look for anything that that compound is in and write an article about it, without taking into account of the reactions that it had with other chemicals and the levels required to cause problems

Do you really think I read - let alone believe - rags such as the Mail?
All the examples I quoted ( and I omitted things such as 'margarine better than butter' & 'diesel good, petrol bad' ) are from the likes of the BMJ & have been backed by 'Government experts' & Government policies over the years.

[Andyph]

Once again I don't think we're going to reach an agreement here. I would say that its good to hear other views, but in this case it's just saddening.

Mig Eater - If you genuinely think that the western world's access to leisure can seriously be balanced against whether Bangladesh should be underwater then I'm glad you're not in charge.

Brevet - I do wonder what you're reading! The parallel to McCarthyism is extraordinarily cynical.

I also find it very sad Paul.

If the views shared in this thread are representative of the way the western world see the issue (and probably are) you can see why we are in trouble.
If people's primary concern is airshows or Formula 1 carrying on as is then it is hard to see how politicians can push through anything meaningful.
I'm sure historians in a couple of hundred years will look at this time in history and just shake their head.

I have just watched on You tube 'Churchill's wilderness years' - excellent series! I was really struck by the parallels of Britain not seeing the looming danger - even intelligent well meaning people.

[Brevet Cable]

Don't forget those bloody Vikings, because recent finds would indicate they caused climate change too, as the last ice-age was clearly their fault.
I'd much rather people have a sceptical attitude and question claims than buy into the evangelical fundamentalism currently in vogue.

[frank]

Once again I don't think we're going to reach an agreement here. I would say that its good to hear other views, but in this case it's just saddening.

Mig Eater - If you genuinely think that the western world's access to leisure can seriously be balanced against whether Bangladesh should be underwater then I'm glad you're not in charge.

Brevet - I do wonder what you're reading! The parallel to McCarthyism is extraordinarily cynical.

I also find it very sad Paul.

If the views shared in this thread are representative of the way the western world see the issue (and probably are) you can see why we are in trouble.
If people's primary concern is airshows or Formula 1 carrying on as is then it is hard to see how politicians can push through anything meaningful.
I'm sure historians in a couple of hundred years will look at this time in history and just shake their head.

I have just watched on You tube 'Churchill's wilderness years' - excellent series! I was really struck by the parallels of Britain not seeing the looming danger - even intelligent well meaning people.

Look, People aren`t taking this thread seriously because its not the place to raise it in the firsr place. You seem to be someone who has suddenly discovered global warming and trying to discuss it on an aviation forum. Really ?

Have a look at the posts on this thread and realise you are flogging a dead horse.

I and many others know that climate change is occuring despite your comments to the contrary and have known this for many years. For example read my original post on the "Liimits to Growth" by Meadows and Meadows written in the seventies.
Nothing will change our destiny through discussing airshows on UKAR. If you feel strongly about airshow carbon emmsions then dont go.

[MiG_Eater]

My main point was that the aircraft at airshows are irrelevant compared to the amount of road travel emissions associated with them.

I see this over and over again where people attempt to solve a problem with absolutely no regard with the associated consequences. It's like the off-shore wind farms: think about the environmental cost in producing the concrete required to keep them in place. It's insane.

I'm not saying these issues don't need to be looked at, i'm just saying that we need to think about it sensibly and act accordingly rather than making meaningless gestures like cancelling an airshow.

I stand by my point about the importance of enjoying life by the way!

[Dan213]

Don't forget those bloody Vikings, because recent finds would indicate they caused climate change too, as the last ice-age was clearly their fault.
I'd much rather people have a sceptical attitude and question claims than buy into the evangelical fundamentalism currently in vogue.

Depends solely on what is defined as the beginning of the Anthropocene. Early land use change from tree-covered areas to farmland did have a significant effect of atmospheric carbon levels due to release of stored carbon in soil. The magnitude of this effect however, is nothing compared to that of the past 200 years

[Brevet Cable]

A bit of a delay in replying, but...


My comment was a sarcastic reference to the fact that lots of ancient weaponry & artefacts - including from the medieval period - have been found underneath retreating glaciers.
( And human geography formed a large part of 'A'-Level geography when I did it back in the '80s )


Oh, and yet another 'expert' disagreeing with what other 'experts' have been telling us for years : http://uk.businessinsider.com/harvard-speaker-busts-coconut-oil-health-myth-calling-it-pure-poison-2018-8?r=US&IR=T

Coconut oil is “pure poison” and “is one of the worst foods you can eat”, according to a Harvard professor.
In a speech given at the University of Freiburg in Germany, Dr Karin Michels suggested the oil isn’t deserving of its healthy reputation, due to it containing high levels of unsaturated fatty acids.
She claimed the oil, which can be used for anything from cooking curry to roasting parsnips, is more unhealthy than traditional lard.

Dr Michels reportedly went on to say so-called “superfoods” are pointless, because the vitamins we need to be healthy can be gained from bog-standard fruit and veg.

[Victor 23]

I don't think we can do anymore really, this subject of climate change as being going on for years. Governments around the world have being changing ways to reduce emissions etc. We can amend the plastic situation by cutting down on the waste in supermarkets etc, other than that we can't do anymore?

[Brevet Cable]

Nuke China, India, Pakistan & most of the NAME Countries, as they produce the most airborne pollutants & some of them are vastly over-populated.
Oh, and nuke Asia as a whole, as they are the prime source of the majority of the plastic pollution found in the oceans.

The Western nations can wring their hands & impose as much legislation as they want, but until other nations get their act together they're wasting their time.

[CJS]

Well I don't know what NAME countries are BC, but of they don't include the good ol' US of A then please add them to your 'to nuke' list. 16 tons of Co2 emissions per person and more than the EU combined (2015 figures).

Granted they're no China for overall pollution, but they're up their with the worst of them.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of ... _emissions

[Brevet Cable]

To be honest, they're more commonly referred to as MENA -- Middle East & North Africa

[Brevet Cable]

16 tons of Co2 emissions per person and more than the EU combined (2015 figures)

The problem with those figures ( other than being a couple of years old ) are that they don't take into account all the other pollutants being released.

Try these :
https://www.conserve-energy-future.com/top-most-polluted-countries-world.php
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/02/the-best-and-worst-countries-for-air-pollution-and-electricity-use

[Andyph]

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... opa-league

First indication of writing on the wall?