Climate activists from Last Generation disrupted Munich airport by gluing themselves to a runway, leading to flight cancellations and delays over a busy weekend.
Archived version: https://archive.ph/OaVXl
Climate activists from Last Generation disrupted Munich airport by gluing themselves to a runway, leading to flight cancellations and delays over a busy weekend.
Archived version: https://archive.ph/OaVXl
Grounding planes is probably one of the most effective ways a person can cut emissions.
I’m absolutely for eliminating domestic flights within European countries. Let’s get some good trains going instead. But traveling the skies is one of humanities greatest achievements and lets us explore other cultures in a way we otherwise never could. Let’s not get rid of those. I don’t want to be trapped here. Ban 30€ flights from Germany to Mallorca? Absolutely! Ban flights from Germany to APAC, Africa or the Americas? Please don’t.
As a Mallorca resident, I’ll take the 40 minute flight from Barcelona over the 6 hour boat trip thank you very much
I’m sorry, I was referring to Germans that head down to Mallorca for a weekend to get shitfaced. It doesn’t make sense that a train ride from Hamburg to Munich costs 5 times as much as a flight from Hamburg to Mallorca.
Inner European flights are also important, until we have a dedicated highspeed train network that connects all of Europe’s larger cities with each other.
To be clear, I am all pro trains. In Spain trains are also 3 to 5 times more expensive than the same trip on a plane which I find bizarre
This is peak entitlement
Literally, I am not entitled to fast and comfortable methods of transportation just for living on an island?
We can speak about reducing the frequency of flights, finding more efficient ways to fly, or faster boats. But planes still have a use case
Well, no you’re not, if it was up to me. Same with flying from Munich to Berlin. You have the choice do it, but you shouldn’t, because it’s emitting like 200x the amount of CO2 and you know it. So take the less damaging option, for the sake of all of us and our children. How else are we supposed to drop emissions to zero in the next 25 years if everyone feels entitled to “fast and comfortable”?!
The least damaging option is to go back to a hunter gatherer lifestyle, let’s not be extremists.
Plus according to This web page , a 100km economy class plane ticket emits 1.2x the amount of co2
This is not possible anymore. But you taking a boat is. :)
deleted by creator
The jury is still out on that. I’ve found research and surveys pointing in both directions. The positive and negative effects of such forms of protest are not sufficiently studied yet. Also historically, there are good examples for both.
Therefore, I wouldn’t judge yet.
From what I know about that activist group, they always ensure safety. On street blockages, they make room for ambulances, they also inform emergency services.
I haven’t looked it up for this case, but I can imagine, that they considered this.
I think, planes usually have enough fuel to land at another airport for such cases. There are emergency protocols for stuff like that anyway. So no one is really endagered here. Just inconvenienced.
What do you have in mind?
Not really though.
Despite that, every member knows the risk. They know what they are doing. They are not stupid and think about such protest actions thoroughly.
deleted by creator
I’ve had this kind of talk a lot of times. And when it actually comes to “those alternatives”, which critics say activists should pursue instead, one common reaction is silence, as they are lacking ideas about those.
I’ll leave you with that.
As far as I know, it is. If there are new studies, which I don’t know of and which come to a clear conclusion, I’d be thankful if you could link them here.
Well, that’s your decision. If you don’t believe in facts, then don’t. But then it’s not surprising if people call you out on that, if you don’t provide proof for your position.
If you’re interested – which you don’t seem to be – I’ll happily share the studies, historical examples, reports and surveys I’ve collected on that topic.
I didn’t promote it. Maybe you can explain what gave you the impression?
I agree that nobody should hurt themselves. Although I can understand if people see themselves driven to such measures out of desperation and/or in order to prevent worse.
Regarding that activist group “Letzte Generation”, I couldn’t find any reports about injuries due to glueing.
Also I wonder where you get the “your political message” from as I didn’t make any statement about my political stance on that.
deleted by creator
That took a very uncivilised turn.
Why are you so angry?
deleted by creator
No, did I make the impression?
I am just trying to understand you and have a civilised discussion with you.
No it’s not. If there was a right way to protest everyone would do it. But protest is always messy, some people will hate you, some will applaude you. So choose something and try it. Or sit on the couch and comment on the internet like you are not part of the collapse thats coming.
The opposite of love is not hate but indifference. Indifferent to the problem and indifferent to the solutions.
deleted by creator
These people ruin their (financial) lifes to protest for your future. Everything else failed, so they desperately try something more risky and you dare to call them fucking stupid.
deleted by creator
People have done all the things you propose. Repeatedly. It maybe gets some minor local attention, and a police crackdown, but hasn’t changed much of anything. That’s why people have resorted to stuff like putting soup on the glass protecting artworks or gluing themselves to runways.
deleted by creator
I was trying to tell a VERY brief story of 50 years of protest that did not change anything, co2 just rises. So people try new stuff.
But I agree, this topic is too complex for a random internet fight not even in my native language. Had to look up sealioning, what are you talking about?! I am not awful, you are the one throwing around insults. Am I debating 17 year olds again?
After reading through several of their comments and having engaged in a discussion with them myself, I get the impression that they don’t care about respectful and civilised discussions and I think it’s possible they are trolling. As they also resort to throwing insults around, evading questions and not really showing interest in conducting a line of arguments, it’s probably best to disengage.
deleted by creator
True! Now they can sit on the ground engines running and going nowhere.
I doubt they leave the engines and even if they did leave them idling it’s better than flying
I’d assume there has to be some engine use for electricity generation, climate control, etc. even when grounded.
Burning fuel to no effect is better than burning fuel to get somewhere? A quick search suggests a 747 burns 5 gallons per mile. An idling engine achieving nothing is burning infinity gallons per mile. Which if you check the number line you’ll find is slightly higher.
Only if you do it per mile. Not if you do it as gallons burned.
Also 0/1 isn’t infinity it’s undefined.
You probably meant 1 / 0.
0 / 1 is 0.
You’re right about one thing: 1/0 = inf is sloppy and lazy. The better way to write it is: the limit as x approaches zero of 1/x is infinity.
You require more fuel to move compared to fuel consumption while running idle.
Yes, but if the plane isn’t going to move then there’s no point it burning fuel.
Sure. But it’s still less.