Flight risk: can we take the carbon out of air travel?

Re:Flight risk: can we take the carbon out of air travel? by reaperducer on Monday September 02, 2019 @07:58PM (#20862623)

That's basically $100 per person on a 100-person flight, enough to prevent many people from flying.

I don't think there are many trans-Pacific flights with just 100 people on board.

The last flight I took on Singapore Air was around 350 people. So the tax would be about $30 per person. Certainly not enough to prevent people from flying.

Emirates has A380's with 615 people on board. That's just $17 per passenger.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Flight risk: can we take the carbon out of air travel? by JumpCrisscross on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @01:09AM (#20863839)

> Certainly not enough to prevent people from flying

That’s fine. The point isn’t the dictate what people do. It’s to offset their negative externalities.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Flight risk: can we take the carbon out of air travel? by lotsofpulp on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @05:39AM (#20864974)

I am under the impression that the problem is excess consumption. Without reducing consumption, i.e. changing what people do, how is it possible to “offset” negative externalities?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Flight risk: can we take the carbon out of air travel? by esotericn on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @07:25AM (#20865462)

Carbon capture is a possible solution.

The issue with offsetting is that it's not actually enough. The idea is basically to help less developed economies grow in a more sustainable way.

But we could delete the entire developing world and still be emitting too much, so capture and/or reduction are necessary, yes.

[ Parent | on HN ]