The Things thelondonpaper Readers Say!
The paper asks "What's more important - cheap flights or reducing carbon emissions?""Until airlines start doing their bit, I am not going to stop flying on short journeys to Europe"
Sarah Bloch, 23
What does this mean? Leaving aside the non-negligible chance that she has been misquoted, it makes no sense. There is an argument that airlines should be doing more to make their planes use less fuel per passenger, either by packing them fuller or by pressurising Boeing and Airbus to make more efficient planes (it's not a brilliant argument, given airlines presumably want to reduce fuel usage). But how the hell is refusing not to fly on them until they do this going to help? It almost sounds as if she thinks she is punishing them by flying with them.
Kirk Adams, 23, doesn't make a lot more sense: "I would be prepared to help the environment but airports are going to get bigger so there is no point". Surely he means "I am not prepared to help the environment as...". Tracey Dunn, 41, adds "It doesn't make much difference what we think because it is all about money and not the environment".
When will people learn that cheap flights are not compatible with saving the environment and just talking about doing good it is not enough? Anyway in other news I'm considering a holiday in New York because I fancy going for pizza at a place Jackie did recently.
Labels: England. environment
posted by Matthew @ 1/08/2007 08:22:00 PM
Comments: 5
