Should people be limited to 4 lifetime flights?
 

A French expert on climate change proposes a limit of 4 flights per person in a lifetime.

If it will save the planet, should we do it??

P.S. I assume they are roundtrip so it may be 8 flights.

Great Travel Reset: Poll: 41% of French population favors restricting EVERYONE to ONLY 4 airplane flights in their ENTIRE LIFE to ‘fight against global warming’ • Watts Up With That?

And how many people would this put out of work? How about more research on more efficient engines?

The French have already banned short flights within their country since their train system is so convenient. Also, the transportation system is Europe is far superior to what we have here. You can get anywhere in Europe by train easily. In the summer of 2022, Spain was even offering free train transportation at times to bolster their tourism industry.

It would be a lot harder for Americans to travel if they had to limit themselves to four round-trip flights in a lifetime. The tourist industry would suffer greatly.

I don't think this will ever be enacted in France, and it's certainly a bad idea for the US.

Wow!! I hadn’t heard that!

But the ban does not apply to private jets.

France Legally Bans Short-Haul Flights—Environmentalists Want More

Modern jet engines are very efficient. It boils down to travel. And most not going to limit their travel. Bottom line all about money. France can control it cause they have control. Not like this country. If France concerned then stop world travel to their country. But that boils down to Money again.

In almost all ways, there is no need to strive to be more like France.

On the other hand, if there was a reliable way to make a round trip by train in a day with eight hours at the destination, I would definitely prefer that to a flight. Unfortunately, I have never lived in a US city with train service that could support that.

I believe over 60% of France's total domestic production of electricity is from nuclear power plants. That might be a place to start for the U.S. if your goal is to reduce carbon emissions.

That’s easy to say for a country with a smaller geographic footprint than the state of Texas, people can easily get around the entire country without flying. Not so easy when you live in a country where you own two homes over 1,300 miles apart. A limit of four flights per year wouldn’t be good, forget about four per lifetime.

When I was a Federal employee, we were not allowed to take Amtrak from Washington, DC to New York City, 200 miles. We had to fly because it was cheaper. So, we flew to LaGuardia Airport and took a taxi into Manhattan. Go figure.

Did that save you any time?

I figure getting to the airport would be at least 45 minutes and possibly longer depending on traffic and you have to be at the airport at least 60-90 minutes for security, etc. The flight is about 90 minutes. And then you have to take a cab to the city.

The train ride is 3 to 3.5 hours.

No, we lost time, but they didn't care about the time, just the cost. I don't know about today, but Amtrak was very expensive, even though it was heavily subsidized by the Government.

We should greatly expand production from nuclear power plants. No reason not to.

Guess some bureaucrat made a decision and who knows what that cost us taxpayers in time and money

How many people have a fear of flying?
Between 33% and 40% of all people experience some form of anxiety when it comes to flying.


Is it likely that a significant portion of the 41% could have flight phobia?

The 41% number is meaningless. If you took a similar survey in The Amazon rain forest you would likely find that 98% would be in favor of 0 flights in their lifetime. The topic is dependent upon circumstances. Are you in favor of launches of rockets, flights of military aircraft in peacetime, cruise ships, cargo ships? Probably could get more than 50% of residents of Florida in agreeing to no need for furnaces.

Is the "French expert" a scientist? If so, we have no choice but to follow what he says. That is the way it works with the modern religion of "Scientist-ology". If a scientist says something is true, it must be true, and you are a heretic for believing otherwise.

I agree that some people have a fear of flying and I would oppose a law that required these people to fly.

However, the people that want this proposition seek to limit everyone - even those who like to fly - from flying more than 4 times in their lifetime!

It has nothing to do with fear and more to do with power.

But if it passes I may buy cruise ship stocks!

In UK we have plenty of trains, but they are too expensive, so we all use our cars, which even at our gas prices, is way under cost of train.
If the French really want to be serious about the environment, get them to stop smoking those God awful Gauloise cigarettes!

Should start a anti scientist-ology club for when someone who claims to be a scientist is actually foolish.

First our cars, then our appliances and now our travel. I am afraid to see what’s next.

Aaah, the French. Well, they did come up with the guillotine which did reduce travel.

Georgia nuclear rebirth arrives 7 years late, $17B over cost | AP News
Maybe we should have started to build a plant yesterday
Georgia nuclear rebirth arrives 7 years late, $17B over cost

Should have hired contractors who knew how to build a plant like this

It is the government red tape and lawsuits. It is getting nearly impossible to build a nuclear power plant in the United States anymore. I am not a big fan of federal control but just like printing money and raising an army, the electrical grid is really a national responsibility today. As such, the federal government should fund and contract the construction and operation of nuclear power plants. As we transition from fossil fuels to alternative forms of energy, we will need to drastically upgrade or rebuild our electrical power grids. Otherwise, we are doomed to major power outages and cyber attacks.

Very true but some contractors have experience dealing with the govt and know how to get things done in a timely manner.

Nuclear power plants have become much safer these days and we are missing the boat in not building more immediately.

///

Only if they're to or from France.

Hard to believe that people will allow their government to have this much power over them

I would hope not. If this happened wonder how often this so call scientist would think it is ok to travel around the world by plain.

Perhaps he thinks we should go back to the good old days when ships used the wind to travel.

My buddy's daughter just moved to Spain with her husband and grandchild. I guess they can only visit each other a few more times, and then never see each other again. And if they decide to move back, I guess they'll have to come back via boat since they are over their limit.

Of course it doesn't. Rules for thee, but not for me is the mantra of the Elites.

LOL. Is it any different here?

Will we only allow 1 trip on a private yacht?
How about 5000 in a car or 1200 in a limo each year?

I would agree when you can tell me with 100% certainty if it’s going to rain next Friday

And that will be via sailing vessel as power boats will not be allowed apparently

I'm certain that I had read somewhere semi-recently that a flight from anywhere in the northeast US to Fort Lauderdale created less pollution than the flight passengers driving in cars with 4 passengers per car and it really wasn't that close.

If we finally get to this mythical "Net Zero" emissions target, what happens if the climate still keeps changing?
What will the zealots pick on then?
Electric cars?

Imagine sure China and India will step up and follow that idea!

They will find something. G5g6q by

Freedom doesn't matter til the 1% says no gas golf carts in The Villages. Oh wait, we have "special golf cart gas" here so we should be good.

It won’t. Neither will eating bugs instead of meat.

Why eating insects could help the fight against climate change and save the environment - Discover Wildlife