Environmentalist jetsetters


Using air travel to plan restricting aviation
I still don't think that human caused global warming has been proven, but it is nice that someone else is noticing that some of the global warming clique are jetsetters.

They are the green jetsetters — environmental campaigners who are leading the fight to restrict aviation and cut greenhouse gas emissions, but who also clock up hundreds of thousands of miles flying around the world on business and pleasure.

In the past year the directors and chief executives of groups such as WWF, Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and the Soil Association have crisscrossed the globe, visiting the Falklands, Japan, Africa and Brazil.

All are running high-profile campaigns to persuade people to change their lifestyles and cut emissions of carbon dioxide.

George Monbiot, a leading environmentalist, said this weekend he was “very disappointed — especially if they are flying on holiday”. Heat, Monbiot’s new book on climate change, warns of disastrous temperature rises unless western countries cut carbon emissions by 90% by 2030, meaning a virtual end to flying.

Among those with the highest air miles is Bob Napier, chief executive of WWF, formerly the World Wildlife Fund, one of the best-known environment groups. In the past 12 months he has visited Spitsbergen, Borneo, Washington, Geneva, and Beijing on business trips and taken a holiday in the Falklands, generating more than 11 tons of carbon dioxide. A typical British household creates about six tons of CO2 a year.

Tony Juniper, director of Friends of the Earth, flew to Malaysia, South Africa, and Amsterdam on business and took his family on holiday to Slovakia in the past year. This weekend he is on a business trip to Nigeria. His trips are estimated to have generated at least eight tons of CO2.

“This is the dilemma faced by all international organisations, including green ones,” said Juniper. “We do all we can to cut travel but we need to do some flying to make decisions.”

The good intentions may be there, but let us talk about the public perception.

Why should one set of rules apply to the "environmentally aware" and another to everyone who is not "enlightened?"

Why should the "morality" or one group govern everyone else?

Why should the beliefs of one group govern everyone else?

In this case, it is environmentalism. But generally, this is the defining issue of our times.

Choose your poison.

Religion in schools?

"Protecting" marriage?

Internet gambling?

"Abusing" painkillers?

And in every case, a certain group wants to be "excused" from the rules.

Morality laws aren't moral by any stretch of the imagination. But claiming moral goals to excuse yourself from the rules violates morality.

— NeoWayland

Posted: Tue - October 10, 2006 at 04:49 AM  Tag


 ◊  ◊   ◊  ◊ 

Random selections from NeoWayland's library


Pagan Vigil "Because LIBERTY demands more than just black or white"
© 2005 - 2009 All Rights Reserved