All excellent words and mostly ones we prefer to apply to other people rather than ourselves.
They come to mind because of a couple of issues that arose last week.
Let’s consider the first one but start with a bit of background.
In 2001 two billion people took air flights. There were 6b of us at the time so on average that’s one in three taking advantage of air travel.
In 2010 the number of air passengers rose to 2.7b and there were 7b of us – I’m responsible for three of those extra humans – so that’s nearly 40% winging around.
By the end of this year there will have been 4.6b passengers sitting in an aircraft seat sipping their water and tea from plastic cups.
As I write, there are 7,740,601,000 souls alive but with a net growth of 88,000 people a day, when you read this, there will be about another half million. So that’s about 60% of humans flying this year.
The trend of rapidly increasing population, 10b in 2060, and an increasing number of air flights is expected to continue.
I’ve worked this out because I see Wellington airport, like most others around the world, is gearing up for the increase in flights. It anticipates a doubling in passengers by 2040.
So, it has offered Miramar Golf Club $31 million for nines holes to park the planes. If the golf club turns it down, Waipukurau Golf Club would be interested in talking to the airport. It also wants to put a runway extension into Cook Straight and all up wants to spend a billion dollars to get bigger.
The major shareholder of the airport is Wellington City Council – the very same council that called a climate emergency in August and is planning to be carbon neutral by 2050.
Which words in the first sentence do you think apply to this situation or do you have some choicer ones?
By the way, the airline industry is not required to pay any emission tax on the fuel it uses anywhere in the world. In NZ it is not required to enter the Emissions Trading Scheme.
Next time a greenie points out what they think are subsidies for agriculture in the ETS, point out tourism’s complete exemption.
If this country is serious about reducing emissions perhaps we should borrow from Bhutan’s tourism policy.
It restricts tourist numbers with strict entry requirements including a $65 daily tariff that pays for tourism infrastructure and to provide the citizens free health care and education. The aim is for tourism with high value and low impact. Sounds sensible.
The other issue that had me thinking along similar lines was research that found the top three money mangers have US$300b in their portfolios invested in the fossil fuel industry.
Anyone in this country with a managed fund, particularly if its passive, or with Kiwisaver is most likely investing in the fossil fuel industry and thus driving increased investment in that sector, which is handy if you want your aircraft filled up with aviation fuel but not so great if you are waving a placard demanding zero carbon.
Everyone wants to make the world a better place and do their bit.
Birth control and choosing to stay at home would be a good start.
