Contrarian-brained take by Mr. People's Republic of Walmart himself. This is actually a few weeks old and part of the Great Twitter Banana Debate, but I forgot about it.
In your ideal society, do you imagine there would be no private jets anymore, or would there be private jets for all?
There would be no private jets.
They are “the ultimate example of excessive consumption,” wrote climate campaigner Aaron Eisenberg
Indeed. Chinese HSR traveling at a speed of 350 km/h consumes 210 joules per passenger-meter. The Tesla Model 3 consumes 450 joules per passenger-meter. Passenger airplanes average 1,400 joules per passenger-meter. The Concorde appears to have consumed about 4,035 joules per passenger-meter. Back-of-the-napkin math shows that with 6 passenger seats, the Cessna Citation CJ3+ consumes about 2,770 joules per passenger-meter at full capacity or a whopping 16,624 joules if just one passenger is traveling. Norway, the country with the most electrified car fleet in the world, consumed 2,758 watts per capita in 2022 while the world average was 350 watts. We would have to increase global electricity production by something like 1,000 times if we want everyone to have the energy needed to own a private jet. In terms of money, the Cessna Citation Mustang costs two million dollars. The global average yearly income is $10,000. We'd need the world to be 100x richer. There is no way to argue private jets are not excessive consumption.
Ban private jets? They’ll just spend their mega-cash on mega-yachts. Fine, then we ban mega-yachts, too, I hear you say. But the problem is this: Taylor and Elon and Oprah will always find something else
Duh. That's why we need communism. No more bourgeoisie, no more excessive spending!
Aviation as a whole, not just private jets, is one of the handful of sectors, like cement and many industrial processes, that are ”hard to abate,” meaning that we do not yet have technological solutions at commercial scale that can sharply mitigate or eliminate their greenhouse gas emissions.
Hence why we must ban unnecessary flights, such as private jets.
Abolition of private jets would also bring a halt to essential rapid air delivery of medical services, in particular organs for transplant, organ-transplant patients themselves or the surgeons and other medical staff required for such interventions.
The solution to this is to fund hospitals so they have access to rapid air freight, not give everyone a passenger jet. This is like saying everyone needs a car so that hospitals can use ambulances. No, just give the hospitals ambulances!
I suppose we might call the vehicles that carry out British Columbia’s publicly funded air ambulances and aerial medical evacuation and organ transport
Yes correct, you're showing why your argument is stupid. Why did you keep it in then? Because you are a debate pervert.
In the medical sense at least, this is a call for private jets for all.
So stupid.
Technological progress in the future could take the private jet from luxury good to mass consumer item.
Have you ever heard of traffic? It is the reason why luxury items such as airplanes and automobiles simply cannot become mass consumer items.
