My statistics are better than yours
If the impact of air travel on climate change is to be tackled, then I can't help but think that there are more effective approaches than nibbling at the edges like this. Let alone whether that goal is even meaningful in the wider context of environmental degradation.
Come fly with me
How prophetic. Within a couple of days of Greenpeace and Possible mithering over frequent flyers, comes news that India has ridiculed long-term targets for net zero greenhouse gas emissions as pie in the sky
.
Despite being the world's fourth largest emitter of greenhouse gases, India focuses on the larger per capita emissions of more developed nations. Statistics are all a matter of how you view the data. And thus the political infighting drags on.
Raj Kumar Singh, India's minister for energy, harked back to the past:
Mr Singh pointed out that while it was the richer countries who had burned most of the fossil fuels that have caused the problems, they now wanted developing countries to stop - that was unfair, he said. "The developed world has occupied almost 80% of the carbon space already, you have 800 million people who don't have access to electricity. You can't say that they have to go to net zero, they have the right to develop, they want to build skyscrapers and have a higher standard of living, you can't stop it," he told the meeting.
Matt McGrath, BBC environment correspondent
While he has a point, Mr Singh conveniently, and short-sightedly, overlooks the fact that most of those emissions occurred before their environmental impact was understood and climate change had become an issue. Consequently, emissions-control was not a prime consideration; pollution was largely a concern only for those who lived within the vicinity of the source; and emissions-control technologies were nascent.
Things have changed on all fronts since then, Mr Singh, whether or not you choose to acknowledge it. Focusing on historic practices that are no longer relevant, in terms of both scientific and technological development, doesn't really help in addressing the problems of the future.
Both India and China see themselves as developing economies and want to retain some sense that richer Western nations have to take the lead on climate.
Matt McGrath, BBC Environment correspondent
Yet India and China contribute substantial proportions of dangerous emissions to a global climate that's shared by, and serves, us all. And thus, through tit-for-tat political petty-mindedness, the world goes to hell in a handbasket. This is where the likes of John Sauven and Alethea Warrington could really make a difference, rather than soundbites for clout. Warrington, for example, could debate with Singh on the definition of unfair
. Perhaps that'll help both of them to see sense; stop being so petty-minded; put things into perspective; and broaden their outlook.
But let's not hold our breath, eh kids?