AEROFAN
Posts: 1740
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 9:47 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sat Jul 13, 2019 11:56 am

WayexTDI wrote:
a320fan wrote:
Train travel is much more convenient up to a 3 hour trip maybe even 4. You go from city centre to city centre, the process is a lot more relaxed, no hassle with security, waiting around terminals, lining up to check in, security, board flights, waiting for any bags, transport into and from city centre. I've done a few month long backpacking trips around Europe and if the train can get me there within 4 hours I won't even consider a flight unless it's significantly cheaper (greater than 50%)

As if most businesses were located in city centers...


They are not? Where are they located at airports? Close to airports?
 
MartijnNL
Posts: 708
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 11:44 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sat Jul 13, 2019 12:42 pm

ME270, again: why are a few daily flights ridiculous compared to millions of very short drives (less than a few kilometers)?

And what does your personal complaint about KLM add to this discussion? Nothing at all.

I love KLM (and many other airlines, but not Air France) and will continue to fly them as long as possible. Next month from Amsterdam to Brussels!
 
MartijnNL
Posts: 708
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 11:44 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sat Jul 13, 2019 1:06 pm

SierraPacific wrote:
Fewer burgers sold equals less money made by the company which is the whole reason to have a business rather than being "woke".

Not if the price of the burgers goes up a little to compensate for this. People not always go for the cheapest product. They are willing to pay more if a business has a good story to tell. I can buy a 50 EUR jacket from a cheap brand, but I choose to spend 400 EUR on one of a quality outdoor brand.

SierraPacific wrote:
The CEO has the direct responsibility to make the most money as possible for the company which he is doing the opposite of and just gave competitors the soundbite of the century.

In my opinion the CEO has the responsibility to ensure that the business is sustainable in the long run. Maybe in the United States it's only about making the most money as possible. But I think there is more than just that. On the other hand, why would flying a little less equal less income for the airline?

SierraPacific wrote:
I am a 100 percent believer in climate change but a CEO advocating against his companies product for social media points is the stupidest idea ever (It's business 101)

KLM isn't telling people to stop flying. They just want people to think before they travel. In the long run KLM (and other airlines) might axe short routes and earn more on long routes.
 
HugoJunkers
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2019 3:23 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sat Jul 13, 2019 1:25 pm

Planetalk wrote:
AirFiero wrote:
janbrubel wrote:
In Europe recently flying, especially short haul, has received a lot of criticism from environmentalist organisations. They do have a valid argument seeing that it is scientifically proven that the impact on the environment is a lot higher per mile / per pax when you fly, compared to taking a (high speed) train. Numbers aren't unanimous but no matter how you calculate it, the train is always better for the climate.

Purely practical it's another matter. That is why it surprises me that KLM is supporting this argument. It is part of their business and there are no signs that this business is threatened in any way in the next decades, besides maybe a travel tax imposed on tickets (many European governments are considering this, it's sold as caring for the environment but of course it's mostly a way to support the national bank account) and a few people consciously choosing for the more environment friendly option. Unless a massive high speed rail infrastructure upgrade would be magically realised in the next years or unless flying would be taxed so drastically high that the price advantage is completely lost (not going to happen, no politician could sell this), short haul flights aren't going to loose a lot of their popularity.

Flying at this moment is simply more practical and, more importantly, a lot cheaper, even a flying tax won't change that. Train tickets are almost always more and often a lot more expensive. There are developments towards low-cost high speed trains like Ouigo in France. The cost cutting concept however adds a lot of the hassles that are considered to make flying the less practical option, like being at the train station x time before the train departure, check in procedures, luggage limitations, ...

Next to that, the high speed rail network in Europe might seem well developed, when you want to go outside the core network or cross national borders, you're certainly not in for a more practical or faster trip. Think connections with waiting times, even switching between different rail stations in a city, commuter trains to reach your actual destination, ...

I can only assume that KLM is making this statement to try and support a climate friendly image. Still awkward. Too easy to call their bluff, they fly to Brussels and Paris. The high speed rail line between those cities is probably the best developed and most used in Europe, one of the few lines where the train is actual a better option to travel practically. I'd say time to put your money where your mouth is ...


The problem is, it is not scientifically proven that carbon dioxide is the major forcing of temperature over the last hundred years. It is assumed that it is and it is supposedly backed up by computer models projecting warming, the problem though is that the computer models have to date been spectacularly wrong. There has been no warming for 20 years. That is a scientific fact, and you can tell because there of been a number of excuses by the very same scientist trying to explain the so-called pause. Another factor is that climate sensitivity to forcing has been revised downward at least three times. Sensitivity to forcing is a major factor in the whole theory, and so far their projections have been proven to be wrong.

This carbon dioxide reduction bogeyman is turning out to be the biggest scam in human history.


Please don't state your opinion as 'scientific fact'.

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/c ... -stop-1998


I refuse to accept propagandist government website that uses ironic “cartoons”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/07/12/ ... te-change/
 
MartijnNL
Posts: 708
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 11:44 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sat Jul 13, 2019 1:36 pm

AMALH747430 wrote:
Europe is playing a dangerous game here. We all need to be environmentally conscious but buying into this "flight shaming" drama is a bridge too far.

Why would it be dangerous to fly a little less?

AMALH747430 wrote:
First off, commercial aviation has made great strides in terms of efficiency and the carbon footprint. Jet engines are getting more efficient all the time.

Too bad we are flying ten times more than in the past.

AMALH747430 wrote:
All airlines around the world also seem to be in the process of up gauging most of their equipment. 50 seat jets are becoming rarer. In the US, we are seeing main line jets supplant regional jets to small and medium-sized cities.

That's why the A380 sold so well, especially in the United States. :roll:

Why are the airlines upgauging? To lower frequencies or to transport more people? Bigger jets pollute more than smaller jets.

AMALH747430 wrote:
I don't understand why these people are vilifying commercial aviation, it would appear to me that two people flying around in a corporate jet are the problem.

It would appear to me the thirty thousand airliners flying around are a bigger 'problem' than corporate jets. And nobody is vilifying conmercial aviation. Just one airline is asking people to travel a little more responsably, maybe by taking a few flights less. No big deal.

Personally I think cars and ships are causing bigger environmental concerns than aircraft.

AMALH747430 wrote:
Finally, Europe may find that it becomes uncompetitive. If it becomes more expensive to do business in Europe due to draconian environmental regulations.

Again, nobody is talking about draconian measures here. Think more in the line of taking a few flights less, a few trains more and a few skype calls more.

AMALH747430 wrote:
China and India aren't going to slow things down just because Europe wants to. Europe will be cutting off its nose to spite its face.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. China is heavily investing in cutting down emissions by moving away from coal, building high speed rail networks and solar power plants. China wants to become 'greener' too.
 
MartijnNL
Posts: 708
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 11:44 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sat Jul 13, 2019 1:42 pm

HugoJunkers wrote:
I refuse to accept propagandist government website that uses ironic “cartoons”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/07/12/ ... te-change/

Why do you quote an entire discussion to add a reply of one sentence?

I am sure there are other publications without ironic 'cartoons' available for you. Didn't Al Gore make a movie about it?
 
Planetalk
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 5:12 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sat Jul 13, 2019 1:54 pm

HugoJunkers wrote:
Planetalk wrote:
AirFiero wrote:

The problem is, it is not scientifically proven that carbon dioxide is the major forcing of temperature over the last hundred years. It is assumed that it is and it is supposedly backed up by computer models projecting warming, the problem though is that the computer models have to date been spectacularly wrong. There has been no warming for 20 years. That is a scientific fact, and you can tell because there of been a number of excuses by the very same scientist trying to explain the so-called pause. Another factor is that climate sensitivity to forcing has been revised downward at least three times. Sensitivity to forcing is a major factor in the whole theory, and so far their projections have been proven to be wrong.

This carbon dioxide reduction bogeyman is turning out to be the biggest scam in human history.


Please don't state your opinion as 'scientific fact'.

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/c ... -stop-1998


I refuse to accept propagandist government website that uses ironic “cartoons”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/07/12/ ... te-change/


Sigh. Linking that website is like someone handing me a bible 500 years ago to 'proove' the earth is flat.

You'll have to explain why you believe the discredited papers on that website, and ignore the errors they are stacked with, but you don't believe the scientific consensus? I guess you'd have been one of the people cheering on the tobacco industry when it funded 'research' to discredit tobacco's health effects. A lot of people probably died early because of that.

The psychology of it fascinating actually. You can have a rigerous scientific papers, and someone will refuse to believe a word of them, but will completely buy another one, despite it being junk, because it says what they want to hear. Such people are generally not scientists and don't know how to find obvious flaws in scientific papers.

Anyway, well done you on being smarter than all, those government scientists. It's a good job the igernet wasn't around in the renaissance period, one can only imagine how any scientists making progressive discoveries would have been hounded, and human progress lost.
 
VSMUT
Posts: 2893
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:00 pm

SurlyBonds wrote:
VSMUT wrote:
It also takes anywhere from 3:18 to 4:10. The proper HSR doesn't run between Köln and Amsterdam.


What the heck are you talking about? I took an ICE train from Cologne to Brussels a few months ago. There were also ICE trains going to Amsterdam. And I personally took one about two years ago.


Brussels isn't Amsterdam. It is about as far from Brussels to Amsterdam as it is from Köln to Amsterdam.

And you are right, there are trains, even a few ICE's between Köln/Düsseldorf to Amsterdam, but the line isn't capable of more than 160 km/h and has multiple stops. It takes 2:50 to Amsterdam Centraal, after which you must connect to the airport.

By comparison, Thalys between Schiphol to Brussels takes 1:35, while ICE and Thalys take 1:50 between Köln and Brussels. Schiphol - Gare du Nord takes 3:10, but is well over twice the distance!
 
TheOldDude
Posts: 134
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:02 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:22 pm

How much will KLM’s action change climate? Hint: the impact is zero. It’s simply marketing by virtue signaling. Depending on the market segment they serve it might be smart marketing. But future sales are the only measurable impact.
 
VSMUT
Posts: 2893
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:29 pm

AMALH747430 wrote:
First off, commercial aviation has made great strides in terms of efficiency and the carbon footprint. Jet engines are getting more efficient all the time. All airlines around the world also seem to be in the process of up gauging most of their equipment. 50 seat jets are becoming rarer. In the US, we are seeing main line jets supplant regional jets to small and medium-sized cities. I don't understand why these people are vilifying commercial aviation, it would appear to me that two people flying around in a corporate jet are the problem. You won't see this problem attacked though, because it will hit the politicians and their fat cat donors too hard.


Aviation pollutes far, far more than any other method of transport. Relatively speaking, very few people travel by air, but it still makes up a much greater percentage of total transport.
They are only rough numbers, but CO2 emissions per km per passenger are:
Plane: 223 grams
Ferry: 170 grams
Diesel car: 160 grams
Train: 37 grams
Bus: 27 grams

The numbers are rough, and based on Denmark where most trains are from the 1980s and still run on diesel. But even a 50% reduction in emissions by aircraft don't bring them close to trains.


AMALH747430 wrote:
Second, I don't believe trains are the panacea that the greens would have us believe. First off, they require very inflexible infrastructure. The beauty of aviation is demand can be moved around from city to city fairly easily when demand changes.


HSR is built between major population centers where demand doesn't fluctuate.

You can also increase and decrease service by changing the rolling stock composition. Need more? Just put 4 multiple unit sets together. Less? Just run a single set.


AMALH747430 wrote:
Finally, Europe may find that it becomes uncompetitive. If it becomes more expensive to do business in Europe due to draconian environmental regulations. Folks may also elect to spend their tourism dollars elsewhere. Europe is also much more vulnerable to TK and the ME3 than the US 3 are. If it becomes too expensive for the US 3 to transport passengers on their European joint venture partners, they may re-examine the agreements. UA may cozy up to TK and shift some of their onward connection traffic there vs LH. Turkey, the UAE and Qatar a very pro aviation policies. China and India aren't going to slow things down just because Europe wants to. Europe will be cutting off its nose to spite its face.


So what you are saying is that UA will not put passengers on a flight connecting onto an ICE from Frankfurt because it is costly and takes more time, but will happily send passengers via Istanbul to the same destination instead?


ME720 wrote:
1. Car is personal freedom. Public transport does not fit everyone s life style or choices.


A myth if there ever was one. You are limited by traffic and speed limits. You can't do anything while driving, not even speak on the phone. Parking is always limited. If flying from somewhere, you must return to the same airport where your car is parked. Can't drink. Expensive. I could go on and on. The car might make sense for many, but it is no better at providing personal freedom than a good public transport network.
 
AirFiero
Posts: 1323
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:43 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sat Jul 13, 2019 4:07 pm

HugoJunkers wrote:
Planetalk wrote:
AirFiero wrote:

The problem is, it is not scientifically proven that carbon dioxide is the major forcing of temperature over the last hundred years. It is assumed that it is and it is supposedly backed up by computer models projecting warming, the problem though is that the computer models have to date been spectacularly wrong. There has been no warming for 20 years. That is a scientific fact, and you can tell because there of been a number of excuses by the very same scientist trying to explain the so-called pause. Another factor is that climate sensitivity to forcing has been revised downward at least three times. Sensitivity to forcing is a major factor in the whole theory, and so far their projections have been proven to be wrong.

This carbon dioxide reduction bogeyman is turning out to be the biggest scam in human history.


Please don't state your opinion as 'scientific fact'.

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/c ... -stop-1998


I refuse to accept propagandist government website that uses ironic “cartoons”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/07/12/ ... te-change/


Amen, brother.

When governments are literally throwing billions of dollars at scientists to prove a theory correct rather than simply investigating what is happening, it’s what we call “the fix is in”. And the climategate emails showed us the peer review process was rigged and corrupted against any papers contrary to the catastrophic warming narrative couldn’t get published.
 
AirFiero
Posts: 1323
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:43 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sat Jul 13, 2019 4:11 pm

Planetalk wrote:
HugoJunkers wrote:
Planetalk wrote:

Please don't state your opinion as 'scientific fact'.

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/c ... -stop-1998


I refuse to accept propagandist government website that uses ironic “cartoons”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/07/12/ ... te-change/


Sigh. Linking that website is like someone handing me a bible 500 years ago to 'proove' the earth is flat.

You'll have to explain why you believe the discredited papers on that website, and ignore the errors they are stacked with, but you don't believe the scientific consensus? I guess you'd have been one of the people cheering on the tobacco industry when it funded 'research' to discredit tobacco's health effects. A lot of people probably died early because of that.

The psychology of it fascinating actually. You can have a rigerous scientific papers, and someone will refuse to believe a word of them, but will completely buy another one, despite it being junk, because it says what they want to hear. Such people are generally not scientists and don't know how to find obvious flaws in scientific papers.

Anyway, well done you on being smarter than all, those government scientists. It's a good job the igernet wasn't around in the renaissance period, one can only imagine how any scientists making progressive discoveries would have been hounded, and human progress lost.


What proof do you have the paper he posted is “junk”. Did you check their math or data? Weren’t you the guy with the gall to tell me that I couldn’t state facts, yet you just did the same? Good job calling yourself a hypocrite.

And if you believe something simply because the government did it, then you are NAIVE and not to be taken seriously.
 
ME720
Posts: 164
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 3:40 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sat Jul 13, 2019 4:19 pm

MartijnNL wrote:
ME270, again: why are a few daily flights ridiculous compared to millions of very short drives (less than a few kilometers)?

And what does your personal complaint about KLM add to this discussion? Nothing at all.

I love KLM (and many other airlines, but not Air France) and will continue to fly them as long as possible. Next month from Amsterdam to Brussels!


Difference is that there is a more ecological and efficient alternative to the flights between amsterdam and brussels. Many people might not be able to take public transport to their work! They need their cars.
Most of those who can, would rather cycle or take a bus if there is a good connection. When there isnt’t the only alternative is a car. Unlike the situation between amsterdam and brussels. That s the difference.
 
MartijnNL
Posts: 708
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 11:44 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sat Jul 13, 2019 4:52 pm

ME270, thank you for the answer.
 
Kilopond
Posts: 458
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 10:08 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sat Jul 13, 2019 5:37 pm

Researchers suggust a sythesis of fuel from carbon dioxide and water vapor. The central "miracle" would by achieved by cerium dioxide acting as a catalyst.

"[...]Theoretically, a plant the size of Switzerland – or a third of the Californian Mojave Desert – could cover the kerosene needs of the entire aviation industry.[...]"

[The video embedded in the article is in German with English subtitles.]

https://ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/eth- ... inery.html
 
Pi7472000
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2018 3:26 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sat Jul 13, 2019 5:39 pm

Great to see some environmental responsibility from airlines! Meetings should be done via technology vs. flying and contributing more to climate change. It would be great to see KLM cut back on most short hall flying and maybe start KLM trains for long haul connection. The U.S. should follow Europe’s lead. We also need to see a ban on private jet flying. It is amazing to see some airlines like KLM putting people and the environment over profits!!
 
User avatar
exFWAOONW
Posts: 649
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:32 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sun Jul 14, 2019 12:22 am

Plant a few trees next to the airport. Call it a day. That will have bigger impact than any of the pablum regurgitated here.
Is just me, or is flying not as much fun anymore?
 
User avatar
SierraPacific
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun May 13, 2018 1:48 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sun Jul 14, 2019 12:31 am

Pi7472000 wrote:
Great to see some environmental responsibility from airlines! Meetings should be done via technology vs. flying and contributing more to climate change. It would be great to see KLM cut back on most short hall flying and maybe start KLM trains for long haul connection. The U.S. should follow Europe’s lead. We also need to see a ban on private jet flying. It is amazing to see some airlines like KLM putting people and the environment over profits!!


I would love to see you tell Gulfstream that they are out of business now if you have your way or tell the most powerful people in the world that they can no longer use their 70+ million dollar jets for a nebulous reason. I really understand people who do not believe in climate change because the other side is on another planet and would rather destroy the economy to cut emissions by a meaningless percentage. Gradual changes to more sustainable fuels are going to do a hell of a lot more than cutting jobs and wrecking the economy in the process.

PS the only reason for a for-profit company is to make a profit so without government subsidization, it is not a smart idea to trash your business. Youll never see Phillip Morris's CEO saying that smoking cigarettes are bad and that is a hobby that is a hell of a lot more damaging than global warming.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1165
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:24 am

AEROFAN wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
a320fan wrote:
Train travel is much more convenient up to a 3 hour trip maybe even 4. You go from city centre to city centre, the process is a lot more relaxed, no hassle with security, waiting around terminals, lining up to check in, security, board flights, waiting for any bags, transport into and from city centre. I've done a few month long backpacking trips around Europe and if the train can get me there within 4 hours I won't even consider a flight unless it's significantly cheaper (greater than 50%)

As if most businesses were located in city centers...


They are not? Where are they located at airports? Close to airports?

There is more than just airports outside of city centers; so, hoping on the train (which most of the time leaves from downtown) is not necessarily an easy feat and might be longer, more expensive and more polluting than going to the airport.
 
AMS18C36C
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 7:11 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sun Jul 14, 2019 9:32 am

steeler83 wrote:
I've read through some of these posts, and quite honestly I don't understand why people are making such a fuss over this. Isn't AMS connected to scores of other cities in Europe by a rather extensive high-speed rail network? Not to mention, I know someone who went to Germany and said you could travel between any two given points by rail. In Europe, the cities are closer; not separated by as much open space/woods as places in the US.

If this were the US, I would understand the outcry. Then again, perhaps this would give us a push at pursuing more sustainable infrastructure improvements.


From the airport itself, there are only high-speed rail links to Belgium/France/UK. Taking the ICE to Germany will require one connection in Utrecht, and the high-speed line only starts in Germany. Problem is also that Schiphol Airport train station is rather congested, as NS Dutch Railways runs a rather extensive domestic operation.
 
leghorn
Posts: 880
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:13 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sun Jul 14, 2019 10:22 am

KLM would prefer Dutch caravans and mobile homes trundling along the autobahns through Germany.
German Colleagues talk about them with much disdain.
 
AEROFAN
Posts: 1740
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 9:47 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sun Jul 14, 2019 1:31 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
AEROFAN wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
As if most businesses were located in city centers...


They are not? Where are they located at airports? Close to airports?

There is more than just airports outside of city centers; so, hoping on the train (which most of the time leaves from downtown) is not necessarily an easy feat and might be longer, more expensive and more polluting than going to the airport.

Huh?
 
Jetty
Posts: 945
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2015 12:27 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sun Jul 14, 2019 1:41 pm

leghorn wrote:
KLM would prefer Dutch caravans and mobile homes trundling along the autobahns through Germany.
German Colleagues talk about them with much disdain.

They should be happy it are Dutch and not Irish travelers with their mobile homes.
 
raffy
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2019 7:56 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:25 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
spinotter wrote:
And everyone and everything needs to be refashioned so that less CO2 emissions are produced.


You're going to find a lot of people in this forum who do not accept the science behind that position.


I’ll add that there are many people in this forum who don’t accept the fake pseudoscience behind that position. We have to realize that CO2 is absolutely ESSENTIAL to life on this planet, human and otherwise. Without it, the human race will cease to exist. And we need more CO2 concentration in our atmosphere than we now have (which is roughly 400 ppm). Real scientific experiments have shown that plants grow to larger sizes and produce much more fruit at CO2 concentrations of 600 ppm, 900 ppm and higher. More plant fruit means more food for animals and humans, which is a good thing. For more info, check out co2science.org. It’s time for truth on this issue, not nonsense propaganda.

I know some of you will flame me for saying this. I won’t say any more here because it is starting to drift from the OP topic, although it is related.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 11726
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:30 pm

AirFiero wrote:
The problem is, it is not scientifically proven that carbon dioxide is the major forcing of temperature over the last hundred years. It is assumed that it is and it is supposedly backed up by computer models projecting warming, the problem though is that the computer models have to date been spectacularly wrong. There has been no warming for 20 years. That is a scientific fact, and you can tell because there of been a number of excuses by the very same scientist trying to explain the so-called pause. Another factor is that climate sensitivity to forcing has been revised downward at least three times. Sensitivity to forcing is a major factor in the whole theory, and so far their projections have been proven to be wrong.

This carbon dioxide reduction bogeyman is turning out to be the biggest scam in human history.


Well I don't know where you live, but here in metropolitan France, a very temperate country, each summer for the last 15 years has been hotter than the last. Each winter too, sometimes we don't even have a winter to speak about. Glaciers are not melting, they're disappearing. If that's not warming, then what is it ?
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 11726
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:35 pm

raffy wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
spinotter wrote:
And everyone and everything needs to be refashioned so that less CO2 emissions are produced.


You're going to find a lot of people in this forum who do not accept the science behind that position.


I’ll add that there are many people in this forum who don’t accept the fake pseudoscience behind that position. We have to realize that CO2 is absolutely ESSENTIAL to life on this planet, human and otherwise. Without it, the human race will cease to exist. And we need more CO2 concentration in our atmosphere than we now have (which is roughly 400 ppm). Real scientific experiments have shown that plants grow to larger sizes and produce much more fruit at CO2 concentrations of 600 ppm, 900 ppm and higher. More plant fruit means more food for animals and humans, which is a good thing. For more info, check out co2science.org. It’s time for truth on this issue, not nonsense propaganda.

I know some of you will flame me for saying this. I won’t say any more here because it is starting to drift from the OP topic, although it is related.


Except that with higher temperatures and less water, crops fare less well. Wheat yield is already down in France because of this, even though some people expected them to go up.

Corn farmers are considering abandoning the crop altogether as it needs too much water.

I notice your website won't divulge where its founding comes from.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
VSMUT
Posts: 2893
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:59 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
AEROFAN wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
As if most businesses were located in city centers...


They are not? Where are they located at airports? Close to airports?

There is more than just airports outside of city centers; so, hoping on the train (which most of the time leaves from downtown) is not necessarily an easy feat and might be longer, more expensive and more polluting than going to the airport.


These comments about city center train stations are ridiculous, clearly not made by anyone with very much knowledge about the layout of typical European cities.

There is rarely more than one airport somewhere outside the city, so unless the business is in the rough direction of the airport, you have to pass the city center anyway.
Further, any country that invests heavily in HSR will also have an extensive local public transport network, a network which typically runs in a hub and spoke model, with the hauptbahnhof as the center! In other words, unless you live on the rail/bus/tram line to the airport, you will be passing through the station from which the high speed trains run from anyway.

And really, what do you think city centers are filled up with? They are office blocks for the most part. You know, the typical dwelling and spawn point for business travellers.

Car commuting stations are also becoming more common. These cater to those who rely on their car, and offer easy road access and parking spots, similar to airports.
 
AirFiero
Posts: 1323
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:43 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sun Jul 14, 2019 3:11 pm

Aesma wrote:
AirFiero wrote:
The problem is, it is not scientifically proven that carbon dioxide is the major forcing of temperature over the last hundred years. It is assumed that it is and it is supposedly backed up by computer models projecting warming, the problem though is that the computer models have to date been spectacularly wrong. There has been no warming for 20 years. That is a scientific fact, and you can tell because there of been a number of excuses by the very same scientist trying to explain the so-called pause. Another factor is that climate sensitivity to forcing has been revised downward at least three times. Sensitivity to forcing is a major factor in the whole theory, and so far their projections have been proven to be wrong.

This carbon dioxide reduction bogeyman is turning out to be the biggest scam in human history.


Well I don't know where you live, but here in metropolitan France, a very temperate country, each summer for the last 15 years has been hotter than the last. Each winter too, sometimes we don't even have a winter to speak about. Glaciers are not melting, they're disappearing. If that's not warming, then what is it ?


1. Urban heat island
2. Which glaciers?
 
Planetalk
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 5:12 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sun Jul 14, 2019 3:35 pm

AirFiero wrote:
Planetalk wrote:
HugoJunkers wrote:

I refuse to accept propagandist government website that uses ironic “cartoons”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/07/12/ ... te-change/


Sigh. Linking that website is like someone handing me a bible 500 years ago to 'proove' the earth is flat.

You'll have to explain why you believe the discredited papers on that website, and ignore the errors they are stacked with, but you don't believe the scientific consensus? I guess you'd have been one of the people cheering on the tobacco industry when it funded 'research' to discredit tobacco's health effects. A lot of people probably died early because of that.

The psychology of it fascinating actually. You can have a rigerous scientific papers, and someone will refuse to believe a word of them, but will completely buy another one, despite it being junk, because it says what they want to hear. Such people are generally not scientists and don't know how to find obvious flaws in scientific papers.

Anyway, well done you on being smarter than all, those government scientists. It's a good job the igernet wasn't around in the renaissance period, one can only imagine how any scientists making progressive discoveries would have been hounded, and human progress lost.


What proof do you have the paper he posted is “junk”. Did you check their math or data? Weren’t you the guy with the gall to tell me that I couldn’t state facts, yet you just did the same? Good job calling yourself a hypocrite.

And if you believe something simply because the government did it, then you are NAIVE and not to be taken seriously.


Well I have a masters in econometrics and statististical methods, so I have a reasonable ability to read scientific papers and judge how sound their methods are. I have spent my career writing summaries of statistical research, so yes, I think I can say what is junk. I love planes and grew up obcessed with them. I still am. I'm mature enough though that my love doesn't make me blind. And I won't live in denial.

I don't believe anything simply because anyone says it. I was taught to think critically. Something sadly missing from the website linked and it's followers. Something sadly missing in a remarkable amount of the world. A classic example is people who have an instinctive judgement that public health care is 'bad' without even knowing why its bad. Even though countries with public healthcare spend less money and deliver better outcomes than those with entirely private healthcare. I always use that as a baseline to judge whether someone bases their opinion on evidence, or how the state brainwashed them as a child. It's ironic how Americans who think they are anti-government, were told to be anti-government by elites in government.

There are bad papers that support the theory of anthropogenic global warming. There's even reasonable papers that question it. But overwhelmingly the data comes to one conclusion.

Anyway I'm sure you have all the qualifications to judge the science, and are not just choosing based on your pre-formed opinion.
 
jetfan
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 12:35 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sun Jul 14, 2019 3:40 pm

The governments should stop subsidizing ridiculous small regional airports and invest all the saved money in fast and affordable train connections. Indeed for a country like Germany maybe 4-5 airports are sufficient if well linked to the high speed rail system.
Small regional airports can only offer a very limited number of destinations, but very short local connections in a small country make little sense and clog up the airspace, causing delays and even more pollution from waiting and circling regional flights.
KLM is right here, connect to an efficient airport by train and fly the routes which make sense to fly.
 
AirFiero
Posts: 1323
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:43 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sun Jul 14, 2019 3:51 pm

Planetalk wrote:
AirFiero wrote:
Planetalk wrote:

Sigh. Linking that website is like someone handing me a bible 500 years ago to 'proove' the earth is flat.

You'll have to explain why you believe the discredited papers on that website, and ignore the errors they are stacked with, but you don't believe the scientific consensus? I guess you'd have been one of the people cheering on the tobacco industry when it funded 'research' to discredit tobacco's health effects. A lot of people probably died early because of that.

The psychology of it fascinating actually. You can have a rigerous scientific papers, and someone will refuse to believe a word of them, but will completely buy another one, despite it being junk, because it says what they want to hear. Such people are generally not scientists and don't know how to find obvious flaws in scientific papers.

Anyway, well done you on being smarter than all, those government scientists. It's a good job the igernet wasn't around in the renaissance period, one can only imagine how any scientists making progressive discoveries would have been hounded, and human progress lost.


What proof do you have the paper he posted is “junk”. Did you check their math or data? Weren’t you the guy with the gall to tell me that I couldn’t state facts, yet you just did the same? Good job calling yourself a hypocrite.

And if you believe something simply because the government did it, then you are NAIVE and not to be taken seriously.


Well I have a masters in econometrics and statististical methods, so I have a reasonable ability to read scientific papers and judge how sound their methods are. I have spent my career writing summaries of statistical research, so yes, I think I can say what is junk. I love planes and grew up obcessed with them. I still am. I'm mature enough though that my love doesn't make me blind. And I won't live in denial.

I don't believe anything simply because anyone says it. I was taught to think critically. Something sadly missing from the website linked and it's followers. Something sadly missing in a remarkable amount of the world. A classic example is people who have an instinctive judgement that public health care is 'bad' without even knowing why its bad. Even though countries with public healthcare spend less money and deliver better outcomes than those with entirely private healthcare. I always use that as a baseline to judge whether someone bases their opinion on evidence, or how the state brainwashed them as a child. It's ironic how Americans who think they are anti-government, were told to be anti-government by elites in government.

There are bad papers that support the theory of anthropogenic global warming. There's even reasonable papers that question it. But overwhelmingly the data comes to one conclusion.

Anyway I'm sure you have all the qualifications to judge the science, and are not just choosing based on your pre-formed opinion.


The temperature data that has been “adjusted” on more than one occasion, and always the adjustment is upward (except the James Hansen embarrassing Y2K downward adjustment he had to make)? You were aware of the adjustments to the data, and the inexplicable downward adjustments of historical temperature data, which makes the rate of upward change seem “unprecedented”, right?

Between those adjustments, the elimination and relocation of temperature sites and the urban heat island effect, ALL of the warming can be accounted for without CO2 as a forcing. Without CO2 forcing causing additional feedbacks (water vapor, cloud cover changes, tudra methane release), there’s no runaway effect. Without all that, and with lower climate sensitivity than originally theorized, this is a non-problem.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 11726
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sun Jul 14, 2019 4:49 pm

So permafrost in the middle of nowhere is melting because of cities, is that what you're saying ?
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
User avatar
PA727
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2011 5:09 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sun Jul 14, 2019 4:59 pm

ikramerica wrote:
spinotter wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
As if most businesses were located in city centers...


In Europe this is more often the case. Listen people, either we are serious about the measures we adopt to lessen the harmful effects of travel, or we are not. I know it's a heartbreaking realization on a website like a.net, but human beings, do you want your descendants to live and prosper or not? If so, there are a lot of current habits which need to be changed, including LESS travel altogether - less airline travel, less train travel, less automobile travel, more bicycling and more walking - and for people to fashion their lives so that MUCH less travel is necessary.

Thanks for the lecture.

You define a problem based on your set of criteria, then you suggest an unworkable solution, plus a guilt trip.

What if you knew a problem would happening in the future, yet you did nothing to prepare for it. Rather than adapt and modify your infrastructure to accommodate the upcoming problem, you bury your head in the sand and tell everyone to repent. It's like praying for no earthquakes rather than installing shear walls and uplift prevention hardware.

This is what global warming doomsayers do. YOU MUST CHANGE YOUR BEHAVIOR! Well, what if you can't get the other 4-6 billion people to do that (you can't)? Wouldn't a better course of action be to harden your infrastructure against rising temperatures and sea levels? Find more ways to produce energy to support life rather than claiming you can somehow turn everything off and still survive? Concentrate on ways to reduce other forms of pollution, on ways to increase food yields and better harness clean water.

I want a future for my kids. Just not the same future you seem to want. I want a future where we deal with increased temperatures in a rational way, not one where we pretend that we can change the actions of 6 (7) billion people in such a meaningful way that we can reverse warming. In my world, 10,000 people won't die due to a heat wave and no AC (see the EU a few years back). In your world, totalitarian regimes will be required to enforce restrictions for the greater good, where every year more freedoms are taken away to save us all. I don't want my kids living in your world.


ikramerica, such a brilliant post, and far too little conversation around it. This thread serves as a microcosm of society at large. Both sides screaming "LISTEN TO ME" towards deaf ears with few pragmatists in the middle actively working on a solution. I no more believe KLM - as an organization - is more committed to green causes than it is its operating model. If green can make green, then green it shall be. Win-win. I also don't believe KLM - as an organization - has any desire to harm the environment. What they have is a desire to optimize their business. There's also nothing wrong with that.

It's called human nature, and the sooner we realize human nature will not and cannot be changed by science OR politics, the quicker we can get on with a pragmatic solution that actually addresses societal problems. Business should look at this as an opportunity and not be ashamed. We believe in helping the earth, and we believe in making more money. Talk about your partnership with rail and how it's good for society. Incent people to try the service, even if it's not turning a profit at first. Invest in said service. If you are partnering on the true solution, it's like any other business opportunity - it will make money in the long run. Find me something in that space - that's where I want to be! Neither good nor evil is extreme black and white. Shades of gray.

Resume screaming!
 
leghorn
Posts: 880
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:13 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:06 pm

Jetty wrote:
leghorn wrote:
KLM would prefer Dutch caravans and mobile homes trundling along the autobahns through Germany.
German Colleagues talk about them with much disdain.

They should be happy it are Dutch and not Irish travelers with their mobile homes.

Irish Travellers don't do that. The Travellers will just steal a Fendt or Knaus caravan locally and spirit out of the country.
 
Ellofiend
Posts: 124
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2017 11:13 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Mon Jul 15, 2019 1:44 am

Why are the airlines upgauging? To lower frequencies or to transport more people? Bigger jets pollute more than smaller jets.

AMALH747430 wrote:
I don't understand why these people are vilifying commercial aviation, it would appear to me that two people flying around in a corporate jet are the problem.

It would appear to me the thirty thousand airliners flying around are a bigger 'problem' than corporate jets. And nobody is vilifying conmercial aviation. Just one airline is asking people to travel a little more responsably, maybe by taking a few flights less. No big deal.

Bigger jets pollute more than smaller jets but if there are 8+ small jets for an equivalent bigger jet then the pollution is vastly higher, do the math
And your second retort does not address the statement being made of how the inefficiency of private jets (at brief glance some 20,000 private jets) carrying roughly 2-6 people vs 30k commercial aircraft carry between 50 and 400 people - that’s a difference of 880 000 (give or take a few for aircraft fuel disparity from 6 to 50 capacity aircraft) people who could have travelled for the same emission cost as those 120k private jet flyers (1.5mil at 50 people p/aircraft vs 120k at 6 people/aircraft) so it would seem to me that in fact private jets alone are the far larger threat to a stable ecology than the vile commercial aircraft you indict.
 
Jomar777
Posts: 365
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 8:45 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Mon Jul 15, 2019 9:19 am

WeatherPilot wrote:
As an American what are trains?


Trains are something that are very fast (altough sometimes plagged by strijes) in France, extremely punctual (albeit on the slow side) in Russia, quite comfortable in Germany and very very expensive (and usually crowded (london Suburban) and late) in Britain :-D
 
Dreamflight767
Posts: 488
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 10:43 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Mon Jul 15, 2019 9:45 am

I don't need KL to tell me to travel by air less. TSA, Delays, Crappy service, Nickle and dimming, Overly complicated fare structures, Rude crews, Freaky a$$ PAX, Overly crowded airports has done the trick for me.

Oil, auto, and any other car related company will ensure that ground based public transportation will NEVER prosper.

Finally, is a 30 minute flight really a 30 minute flight? Maybe chocks off to on is, but start the clock from the minute you leave for the airport to the minute you arrive at your actual reason for travel.
 
leghorn
Posts: 880
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:13 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Mon Jul 15, 2019 10:47 am

exFWAOONW wrote:
Plant a few trees next to the airport. Call it a day. That will have bigger impact than any of the pablum regurgitated here.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/envi ... ant-trees/

And it is trees, deciduous trees preferably, that you need. They have huge surface area. Much greater than a field of grass.
Industrial conifer is like a green desert because intensive conifer forests don't support much animal life.
 
HugoJunkers
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2019 3:23 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Mon Jul 15, 2019 1:23 pm

Planetalk wrote:
HugoJunkers wrote:
Planetalk wrote:

Please don't state your opinion as 'scientific fact'.

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/c ... -stop-1998


I refuse to accept propagandist government website that uses ironic “cartoons”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/07/12/ ... te-change/


Sigh. Linking that website is like someone handing me a bible 500 years ago to 'proove' the earth is flat.

You'll have to explain why you believe the discredited papers on that website, and ignore the errors they are stacked with, but you don't believe the scientific consensus? I guess you'd have been one of the people cheering on the tobacco industry when it funded 'research' to discredit tobacco's health effects. A lot of people probably died early because of that.

The psychology of it fascinating actually. You can have a rigerous scientific papers, and someone will refuse to believe a word of them, but will completely buy another one, despite it being junk, because it says what they want to hear. Such people are generally not scientists and don't know how to find obvious flaws in scientific papers.

Anyway, well done you on being smarter than all, those government scientists. It's a good job the igernet wasn't around in the renaissance period, one can only imagine how any scientists making progressive discoveries would have been hounded, and human progress lost.


Funny how when arguments are used to refute 'consensus facts' we get accused of being medieval for using fact based arguments.

Lets look at your 'factual' government website:
1 It uses 1830 and 1970 as the reference years for the graph. That's because 1970 was an incredibly cold year and so were the early to mid 1830's. Its why Dickens novels have "White Christmas's" because Dickens lived at that time. The Roman Optimum and the Medieval warm period were global events of warm weather over the entire earth and much warner than today. They were very comfortable. They were a period of great improvement for mankind.
2 Your NOAA website used a satirical cartoon to mock people questioning their data.
3 Taken over the last 500 ,2000 years the temperature variations in the last 30 and 180 shown on that graph are normal variations.
4 Your NOAA website uses "Fahrenheit" i.e. 1.8F =1C to magnify a trivial 1C variation in temperature. No scientific organisation uses "F" anymore.
5 Consensus is baloney. Sheep have got consensus. Manufactured consensus is as valid as a the polls that predicted a Hillary Clinton presidency.
6 Your NOAA website graph is seriously suggesting that a few English steam engines and trains started a near linear temperature rise in exactly 1830.
We know that the consensus opinion started with Al Gore for political purposes. He wanted anxiety and panic so he had a crisis to use. In general big government wants regulation and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Alarmism is the way to get it. As they say "its hard to dissuade a man from an opinion if his income depends on him keeping it"
 
rta
Posts: 1413
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:01 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Mon Jul 15, 2019 1:33 pm

While KLM isn't wrong, its weird that they're publicly taking this position. I hope they don't start flying around with lower load factors, because thats not going to help the environment.

If they're serious about it, they should just cancel routes that they deem are too short to fly.
 
HugoJunkers
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2019 3:23 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Mon Jul 15, 2019 1:38 pm

Kilopond wrote:
Researchers suggust a sythesis of fuel from carbon dioxide and water vapor. The central "miracle" would by achieved by cerium dioxide acting as a catalyst.

"[...]Theoretically, a plant the size of Switzerland – or a third of the Californian Mojave Desert – could cover the kerosene needs of the entire aviation industry.[...]"

[The video embedded in the article is in German with English subtitles.]

https://ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/eth- ... inery.html



The extraction of CO2 from the atmosphere and its synthesis with Hydrogen from electrolysis over catalysts (Fischer-Tropsch reaction) is extremely plausible. In about 1990 the German ZSW produced methanol using this method and powered a car (VW Golf) and more recently synthetic natural gas was created to use excess wind energy. Efficiency of the ZSW process was 38.7% but it was basically just large lab production and a full plant could be 60% efficient. The US Navy actually did experiments using nuclear power aboard its aircraft carriers so as to generate jet fuel for their naval fighters.

1 Remove CO2 from atmosphere by absorbing into NaOH solution, split the resulting Na2CO3 back into NaOH and CO2 via electrodialysis. You can also use HCl and recover the the HCl from the NaCl
(Energy cost is about 1Kw.Hr/Kg of Co2)
2 Synthesis of hydrocarbon will work over catalysts (cobal, cadmium or iron) for hydrocarbons such as jet fuel, Copper/Zink for alcohol and others for methane.
There are no much more efficient ways of absorbing and harvesting CO2 using polymer absorption.

Its not as efficient as batteries but
1 Does not wear out
2 Energy Storage is much more dense, can store months of power.
3 Energy easily transportable (from ocean or dessert)
What matters is cost.

At the moment we would be looking at about $1/kg to $2/kg
 
Sokes
Posts: 224
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Mon Jul 15, 2019 1:48 pm

andrefranca wrote:
not going to fly less, or recycle or anything, there is 60% less of animals now because of us, humans HAVE to go...

I don't understand. Can you give an example?
Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
 
User avatar
N14AZ
Posts: 3772
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 10:19 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Mon Jul 15, 2019 2:01 pm

I guess KLM see themselves as the bio meat producer of aviation. That’s why they promote „fly less but in case you do, make sure it’s our bio meat.... ahemmmm... bio flight connection“
 
User avatar
767333ER
Posts: 966
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:14 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Mon Jul 15, 2019 2:12 pm

I’d rather fly because it’s safer than the train will ever be.

Aaaand Skype and face time don’t work half the time because the telecom companies are outright taking our money and screwing us over in return. There’s plenty of idiocy to go around the world but some of these European ideas...
Been on: 732 733 734 73G 738 752 763 A319 A320 A321 CRJ CR7 CRA/CR9 E145 E175 E190 F28 MD-82 MD-83 C172R C172S P2006T
 
User avatar
dangerhere
Posts: 95
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2018 2:35 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Mon Jul 15, 2019 2:12 pm

I remember flying through Schiphol last year and seeing Amsterdam - Bremen flight crammed with people, screaming kids ect. Who in their right mind would choose to fly that distance when you can kick back with a beer and stretch out on the train. It's literally faster point to point than flying, security ect and just €44 booking on the day.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1165
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Mon Jul 15, 2019 3:03 pm

767333ER wrote:
I’d rather fly because it’s safer than the train will ever be.

Do you have any statistical data??? Because train accidents in Europe are extremely rare, and deadly ones even more so.
 
AirFiero
Posts: 1323
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:43 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Mon Jul 15, 2019 3:09 pm

Aesma wrote:
So permafrost in the middle of nowhere is melting because of cities, is that what you're saying ?


Eh, not exactly.

1. I’m not saying it, climate advocates are, however...
2. The claim is that human source CO2 is allegedly causing temperatures to rise at a arctic latitudes which is theoretically leading to melting of permafrost which would release methane which would add another greenhouse gas which would increase warming. That is the forcing-feedback part of the catastrophic warming theory, and because CO2 can’t produce enough warming by itself. No feedbacks, no warming catastrophe.
 
User avatar
767333ER
Posts: 966
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:14 am

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Mon Jul 15, 2019 3:30 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
767333ER wrote:
I’d rather fly because it’s safer than the train will ever be.

Do you have any statistical data??? Because train accidents in Europe are extremely rare, and deadly ones even more so.

Typical response, let’s pull out or geeky calculators and compute some numbers. The point is flying is still statistically safer and you can’t deny that, but I also feel safer flying. And who knows whack job will hop on the train and do something stupid with all the dangerous nationalism on the rise in Europe.
Been on: 732 733 734 73G 738 752 763 A319 A320 A321 CRJ CR7 CRA/CR9 E145 E175 E190 F28 MD-82 MD-83 C172R C172S P2006T
 
User avatar
N14AZ
Posts: 3772
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 10:19 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Mon Jul 15, 2019 3:49 pm

dangerhere wrote:
I remember flying through Schiphol last year and seeing Amsterdam - Bremen flight crammed with people, screaming kids ect. Who in their right mind would choose to fly that distance when you can kick back with a beer and stretch out on the train. It's literally faster point to point than flying, security ect and just €44 booking on the day.

Is there a direct train connection between Bremen and Amsterdam? As I posted earlier in this thread I fly frequently HAJ - AMS when traveling to Asia but so far I didn’t find a reasonable train connection...

767333ER wrote:
There’s plenty of idiocy to go around the world but some of these European ideas...


767333ER wrote:
And who knows whack job will hop on the train and do something stupid with all the dangerous nationalism on the rise in Europe.

Just because your president talks in a very unfriendly way to his European allies, I am not sure if we should go down to the same level here on a.net... :scratchchin:
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1165
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: KLM calls for people to fly less

Mon Jul 15, 2019 3:52 pm

767333ER wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
767333ER wrote:
I’d rather fly because it’s safer than the train will ever be.

Do you have any statistical data??? Because train accidents in Europe are extremely rare, and deadly ones even more so.

Typical response, let’s pull out or geeky calculators and compute some numbers. The point is flying is still statistically safer and you can’t deny that, but I also feel safer flying. And who knows whack job will hop on the train and do something stupid with all the dangerous nationalism on the rise in Europe.

So, you're saying flying is statistically safer, but cannot pull said statistics...

You might feel safer flying, but, when all hell breaks loose, chances of survival are much greater in a train...
I do feel safe flying, have no problem with it; I feel safer on a train.

Do you really believe that dangerous nationalists haven't done anything to airplanes? Ever heard of MH17?

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos