Over the past few years, there has been a growing concern over how we can protect our planet. This has spawned a completely eco-friendly frenzy. The figurehead of this movement is the 17-year old Swedish, Greta Thungberg. She has made it her number one priority to fix climate change, and one of her biggest targets is the aviation industry, through something called flight shaming.
What is flight shaming?
Flight shaming is where people, mainly celebrities and public figures, are attacked on social media (and in the media) for taking a flight in a private jet. Activists believe that private jets should be banned, alongside business and first classes on commercial airliners.
They believe that an all-economy configuration, as seen in many low cost European carriers, is the way forward. This is because there are more people in an all-economy configuration, which means that there is less of a carbon footprint for everyone on board.
(These activists also believe that everyone who flies on a commercial airliner should be forced (either socially or by law) to contribute to carbon offsetting schemes.)
The real effects of flight shaming…
As expected, the flight shaming has had an effect on the aviation industry, in no small part due to the media coverage of Greta Thunberg, and her use of mediums to attract people of all ages to her cause.
In the beginning, it was just Greta Thunberg stood outside the Swedish parliament with a sign demanding action. Now, it is a worldwide movement with thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of followers, who have the ability to flight shame even royals.
1. Increased number of private jet flights
You’d probably expect that the negative media coverage of celebrities and public figures who fly private, would deter others from doing the same. But you would be wrong.
From our study of 5 regional private airports in the UK, around major towns and cities, they have all seen an unprecedented rise in private jet and charter flights.
It seems, that even though activists like Greta Thunberg are flight shaming left and right, more and more businessmen, celebrities and public figures are taking to the air in their private jets.
2. Less commercial air travel
Whilst businessmen, celebrities and public figures may be taking to the air now more than ever, the same cannot be said for commercial airliners.
Flight shaming is making many non-celebrities think twice about booking a flight. The movement has caused many of them to think “Can I take a train there? Can I drive there?”
According to a UBS survey, 21% of passengers (globally) have said that they have tried to cut back on the amount that they fly.
This spells big problems for major world airlines, as this will see their numbers drop. However, this is expected to be great news for low cost carriers, as this will mean that there will be more travelers coming to them rather than the largest airlines. This will not only be because of the lower prices, but also the lower carbon footprint that the flight will have per person.
3. More focus on electric aircraft
There has been a large focus on electric aircraft over the past few years. Many aviation analysts and activists alike believe that electric aircraft are the future of aviation.
Companies that produce all-electric aircraft, such as Pipistrel and MagniX have seen increased media coverage and investment from several major aircraft manufacturers.
Whilst we won’t see a 747-type all-electric aircraft until at least the 2040’s, we are starting to see light jets and very light jets that are 100% electric. There are even business jets that are currently in the production phase that are/will be 100% electric powered.
So, in the next 10-20 years, you could find yourself, not on a gas-guzzling jet airliner, but on a carbon neutral, 100% electric aircraft.
4. Rise in interest of alternative fuels
Currently, we use kerosene to power our aircraft, however, many activists believe that whilst we wait for all-electric aircraft to become the norm, we need an alternate fuel source. Preferably, one that isn’t so damaging for the environment.
There are currently two contenders for this: Biofuels and electrofuel.
Electrofuel
Electrofuel is probably the most sci-fi-sounding alternative fuel out there. Essentially, it would be a fuel that takes carbon dioxide from the air and breaks it down into carbon and oxygen. The aircraft would then release the oxygen back into the atmosphere, and take the carbon to be used as its fuel.
Energy.gov claims that it is even more efficient than photosynthesis.
It is believed that if electrofuels were to be introduced to every aircraft, both commercial and private, it would stop Greta Thunberg and other activists from flight shaming celebrities.
Biofuels
Biofuels are probably the least-preferred alternative to kerosene. This is mainly due to the fact that it does not release any less carbon into the atmosphere than regular kerosene does.
However, it is much better than regular kerosene as it takes trash from landfill, grinds it down, and is added to a base layer of kerosene. This then, obviously, stops the terrible effects of landfill on the climate, however, just not the carbon released through the physical flight itself.
5. Increased interest in offsetting programs
Most people who take regular flights, feel a little guilty of doing so. Whilst they aren’t the ones who the flight shaming is aimed at, they feel as guilty, if not more guilty than the ones who are being flight shamed!
This has lead to an industry that is into getting rid of your guilt from flying so much- offsetting.
The most famous offsetting program type is carbon offsetting. This entails the enrolees paying a given amount per flight or per month in order to get rid of more carbon dioxide than they create through flying.
The money is then taken and invested. It is usually invested into planting new trees and forests, building wind turbines, creating solar farms and subsidies for electric car manufacturers.
Many people who have been on the receiving end of flight shaming have used carbon offsetting schemes to show the media and the public that they are doing more for the environment than they are harming it.
Many people who are doing the flight shaming are beginning to see that carbon offsetting should be the way forward for those who fly. Some have claimed that it should be mandated by law or at least by society as a whole, that all people who fly on an aircraft, no matter how big or small, should be forced to pay for carbon offsetting. The more they fly, the more they pay!
Do you believe that flight shaming is the right thing to do? Are there any other better alternatives? Tell me in the comments!