Richard Branson's Environment Pledge

[Owl-Light]

[quote=eeyore]

Originally Posted by Sheryl LaBouchardiere

If I've got tis right, Bransons aim is to keep his travel industry going but invest ALL profits in finding more environmentally friendly fuels. QUOTE]

technically wasnt it all profits for a given period of time , not like for ever . and it depends on how you interpret "profits" if it is a real deal then all credit to him , but it would be awfully easy for him to weasel out once the gesture has dropped below the publicity horizon.

Ang on, just checking the beeb...

Ah here it is "The Virgin boss said he would commit all profits from his travel firms, such as airline Virgin Atlantic and Virgin Trains, over the next 10 years... The funds will be invested in schemes to develop new renewable energy technologies, through an investment unit called Virgin Fuels." Source

Thats a hefty investment. If nothing else consider the chain reaction, whatever the motivation. I think we spend too much time worrying about absolutes. Absolutes are rarely possible. Every something adds up. Every time environmental issues are brought into the public spotlight it effects someones thinking and perhaps their future actions just a little. The cumulative effect might just be what makes the difference.

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by Sheryl LaBouchardiere

Ah here it is "The Virgin boss said he would commit all profits from his travel firms, such as airline Virgin Atlantic and Virgin Trains, over the next 10 years... The funds will be invested in schemes to develop new renewable energy technologies, through an investment unit called Virgin Fuels."

so he's not actually donating any money to chairties , hes actually using the profits from one part of virgin group to set up another part of virgin group. Which will presumbably have the patent on whatever biofuel it develops , thus increasing his profit even further. hmmm more spin than substance ....

[speckled wood]

[quote=Alan]As far as mono-culture goes, it's interesting to note that just before the turn of the century 30% of all crops where aimed at providing fuel for transport. That transport being Horses!
QUOTE]

The section of the Montgomery Canal between Newtown and Welshpool was built in isolation and part of the reason for it being built was to reduce the number of horses needed to transport goods and thereby transfer the crops needed to feeding cattle, it actually probably applied in the case of other isolated canals where 100 + packhorses could be replaced by just one hauling a canal barge carrying 25 tons.

[speckled wood]

Originally Posted by matt_xyz

[edit: I've just found some firmer stats. In the EU, aviation is currently responsible for 4% of total CO2 emissions]


Matt

Where do these "firmer" statistics come from?

[Mr Mag00]

As far as mono-culture goes, it's interesting to note that just before the turn of the century 30% of all crops where aimed at providing fuel for transport. That transport being Horses!

and these waste products from these exhausts would have been used to grow more crops lol

[matt_xyz]

Originally Posted by speckled wood

Where do these "firmer" statistics come from?

I have a number of sources that put aviation's contribution to total CO2 emissions at 3 to 4%. For the EU15, Eurostat puts the figure at 4%, for the US the US Env. Protection Agency puts the figure at 3.5% and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change provides a global estimate of around 3%.

I have highly detailed energy data at work and I can recall that it indicates that aviation's contribution to total energy use (million tonnes of oil equivalent) is in the same ballpark.

As I said above, the significance of aviation is not that it currently is a large contributor to greenhouse emissions but (a) it is the single fastest growing source of emissions and (b) it is a sector that is considered to be under-taxed.

Matt

[eeyore]

I remember reading somewhere that one jumbo flight put out the equivalent ammount of CO2 as a car does in its entire lifetime , also isnt aviation related polution more damaging because it is released at altitude ?

[matt_xyz]

the so-called radiative forcing (i.e. the contribution to actual warming) of aviation is greater than that for other emissions sources (per unit of pollution released) because of a number of factors, one being the presence of the vapour trails left by aircraft.

Nevertheless, aviation is still a relatively small contributor to warming (not just emissions).

Matt

[eeyore]

It might also be interesting to look at the carbon footprint of actually building the planes - i presume virgin have a new fleet fairly frequently as new models come out , so what happens to the old ones , are they recycled , boneyarded , or just sold to easy jet ?

[matt_xyz]

they're sold to the developing world aren't they? Seriously, they buy most of their aircraft from the developed nations once we consider them to be no longer serviceable.

Matt