Latest news with #Transport&Environment
Boston Globe
14 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Private jets polluted more than all flights from Heathrow combined, study finds
Advertisement The study spotlights the outsize impact of the United States on emissions. Globally, private jets emitted up to 19.5 million metric tons of greenhouse gases in 2023: Aircraft departing from the United States accounted for 65 percent of global private jet flights, and 55 percent of those gas emissions. That year, private jets polluted more than the total of all commercial flights departing from London's Heathrow Airport, Europe's busiest hub. Researchers identified 22,749 private jets by unique tail number that operated over 3.57 million flights. The analysis is the first effort to combine flight trajectory information with publicly available emissions models to allocate private jet activity to specific airports. The study also modeled air pollution, meaning it considered not only greenhouse gases, but also nitrogen oxide pollution and fine particulate matter - both associated with significant human health risks. Researchers found that 18 of the 20 most polluting airports for private jet use are in the United States. And the majority of these flights are short-haul trips, lasting under two hours. Advertisement 'If you look at individual airports that are polluted from private jets, Van Nuys Airport [in Los Angeles] popped out,' Rutherford said. 'This is getting a lot of visibility because it's where the celebrities and influencers are all parking their planes.' Short-haul flights, defined as covering distances less than around 930 miles, account for roughly a third of aviation's annual carbon output. Airplanes burn a significant amount of fuel when taking off and climbing to altitude, making these trips less efficient than longer ones. France imposed a ban on short-haul domestic flights in 2023, but because it was limited to trips within its borders, analysts described the policy's impact as modest. Private jets generate between five and 14 times more greenhouse emissions per passenger than commercial planes, according to the European clean transportation nonprofit group Transport & Environment, and 50 times more emissions than trains traveling that same distance. While private jets often show up in large numbers in big events, from the World Economic Forum at the Swiss resort of Davos to the Super Bowl, the United States still ranks higher than other wealthy countries. The new data shows 687 private jet flights per 10,000 people in the United States, compared to just 117 in the United Kingdom and 107 in France. Florida and Texas alone generated 543,815 flights - more than the entire European Union. 'With smaller, private aircrafts, you don't have as many passengers to distribute the emissions across, so you lose some economies of scale,' said Colin Murphy, associate director of the Energy Futures Research Program at the UC-Davis Institute of Transportation Studies, who was not involved in the study. Advertisement 'We have a lot of millionaires and billionaires,' Rutherford said. 'We're a highly unequal society, and so that generates a lot of traffic.' This week dozens of private jets are expected to arrive in Venice for Jeff Bezos's wedding. (Bezos is the owner of The Washington Post.) Policy efforts to cut down on emissions from private aviation have largely fallen short. Legislation introduced in 2023 would have raised the federal fuel tax on private planes nearly ninefold, from $0.22 to $1.95 per gallon, but the bill never came to a vote. At the same time, a Federal Aviation Administration program implemented last year allows some owners to remove their flight data from public distribution, making it more difficult to track private aircraft. 'The very important insight is that the global growth in emissions is coming from the top, from more people entering the very affluent classes that can afford private aviation,' said Stefan Gössling, professor of Tourism Research at Linnaeus University and Human Ecology at Lund University, who was not involved in the study. 'That is a trend that is quite powerful and ongoing and will mean that we will not be able to meet our climate goals simply because there's so much growth in the system that we cannot compensate.' Still, researchers say that the data offers a stark picture of an elite mode of travel with an outsize climate footprint - one that has increased its emissions by 25 percent over the past decade. Advertisement 'Private jets are like the canary in the coal mine here for a hyper unequal warming world,' Rutherford said.
Time of India
3 days ago
- Entertainment
- Time of India
'Selfish behavior': Taylor Swift slammed for climate crimes after flying private jet just to watch Travis Kelce play
Taylor Swift faces criticism for a 37-minute private jet flight from New Jersey to Baltimore (Getty Images) Taylor Swift is once again in the center of controversy—this time for her environmental footprint. The pop superstar is facing renewed backlash after details emerged about a 37-minute private jet flight she took from New Jersey to Baltimore, reportedly just to catch a football game featuring her boyfriend, NFL tight end Travis Kelce . Short trip sparks long-lasting outrage over carbon emissions The flight, which covered just over 100 miles, was flagged by a Reddit user last year, in a community that tracks celebrity air travel. While it may have been convenient, critics were quick to question the environmental cost. 'This is plain and simple selfish behavior and her success as a musical artist (which had plenty of luck and privilege involved) does not justify it,' one Redditor bluntly stated in response to defenders of Swift. Private jets are notorious for their excessive carbon emissions. According to Transport & Environment, they can emit up to 14 times more pollution per passenger than commercial airlines—and up to 50 times more than trains. National Geographic also reports that frequent private jet users produce nearly 500 times more carbon dioxide annually than the average person. While Swift's representatives have previously said she offsets her carbon footprint through various environmental initiatives, critics aren't convinced. Many question whether carbon offsetting justifies frequent use of private jets for short, non-essential trips—especially when alternatives like trains or electric vehicles exist for such short distances. Taylor Swift isn't alone as calls grow louder for accountability Taylor isn't the only celebrity being called out. Kylie Jenner previously drew heat for taking a 3-minute private jet flight, highlighting a larger issue of elite figures making choices that contradict global sustainability efforts. The backlash reflects growing frustration among climate-conscious individuals who believe celebrities should set better examples. 'There are plenty of hard-working people who use reasonable means of transportation,' another Redditor wrote in response to a fan defending Swift. As awareness grows, so do demands for change. Many are calling for stricter regulations on private air travel, especially when public alternatives are readily available. 'Perhaps it's time to subject private jet use to closer scrutiny and stricter policies. After all, we all share the same sky,' The Cool Down article states. Also Read: Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce's public image questioned after close friend reveals surprising truth Whether the stars are ready to give up their sky-high luxuries remains to be seen. But the pressure is mounting—and the public is watching. For real-time updates, scores, and highlights, follow our live coverage of the India vs England Test match here . Game On Season 1 kicks off with Sakshi Malik's inspiring story. Watch Episode 1 here
Spectator
21-06-2025
- Automotive
- Spectator
It's time to ban the Chelsea tractor
City dwellers across Europe will have noticed an ominous and growing presence on our streets, nudging cyclists onto pavements, looming over pedestrians crossing the road, and generally spoiling the view. It is gratifying to learn that we are neither going mad nor shrinking in the wash: cars really are becoming huge. The bonnets of newly-sold cars across Europe now average 83.8cm in height, up from 76.9cm in 2010 – coincidentally the perfect height for caving in a toddler's head. That's according to a new report from Transport & Environment (T&E), an advocacy group for clean transport and energy that is campaigning against what it calls 'carspreading'. A resident of Zone 3 has no business owning a car that can trace its lineage to the Jeep Ironically for a vehicle so closely associated with mums doing the school run, the Chelsea tractor is a clear danger to primary-aged children, making it much likelier that the driver will squish them into the tarmac. A similar fate awaits adults, though the lucky ones will merely absorb the impact in their torso, where they keep their vital organs. This shows there's only one thing for it: it's time to ban four-wheel drives from Britain's cities. Bluntly put, a resident of Zone 3 has no business owning a car that can trace its lineage to the Jeep, a vehicle literally built to fight Nazis. Whatever the shortcomings of Sadiq Khan, no London street is sufficiently dangerous that you need a light utility vehicle to navigate it – or at least, no street that a man who could afford a Land Rover might live in. The yummy mummies of Clapham, the financial bros of Hampstead, or the international wealth treating Chelsea as their playground – none of them should be allowed a four-wheel drive. The growing height of car bonnets is partly down to an increasing number of SUVs, to use the American term for a four-wheel drive. T&E reckon they account for a little over half of new cars sold in Europe, with many 4×4 bonnets sitting more than a metre off the ground. Four-wheel drives are therefore likely to account for a growing proportion of the nearly 30,000 people killed or seriously injured in Great Britain each year in road collisions. While the bulk of the roughly 1,600 deaths are car or motorcycle users, about a quarter are pedestrians. Such incidents are sufficiently commonplace that we don't normally read about them. One noteworthy exception, however, did catch public attention in July 2023. Driving through Wimbledon, Claire Freemantle lost control of her Land Rover Defender and ploughed through the fence at The Study Prep school, killing eight-year-old Nuria Sajjad and Selena Lau. Initially arrested for dangerous driving, Freemantle was eventually let off without charge on the grounds she had suffered a seizure. The case has since been reopened. Unsurprisingly, Europeans have alighted on the old standby to any problem: more regulation. The heads of various worthy causes have written to the European Commission urging them to commit to months of fruitful work to create limits on how big new cars can be. Their suggested implementation date is a decade hence, by which point we will presumably all be driving SUVs. The response from Brussels has been wholly inadequate, a predictably timid European disappointment. But free from the EU's clutches, the British should act decisively: we should outlaw the Chelsea tractor on our own. Four-wheel drives are no doubt safer for their passengers. Analysis by The Economist of American road accidents last year concluded that the fatality rate of occupants in a Ford F-350 Super Duty pickup truck was about half that of those travelling in a Honda Civic. But such safety comes at the expense of everyone else. As cited in the same report, a 2004 paper by Michelle White of the University of California estimated that for every deadly crash a 4×4 avoids, there are 4.3 more among other drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. The negative externalities pile up from there. Larger vehicles generally pollute more, consuming more fuel to move more weight and emit more CO2. Their tyres leave more particles in the air, water and soil. They also create more potholes in the roads, such damage often being cited as a reason to own a 4×4 in the first place. That's alongside the sheer intimidation of a small tank driving down streets built for horses and carts, as well as the inconvenience to others when you try to park. When they aren't running you over or polluting your lungs, Chelsea tractors make cities uglier and unpleasant for everybody else. Yes, there should be exemptions. Any man in possession of an actual tractor may legitimately be in want of a SUV. Just as we allow farmers to shoot vermin, we should allow them to haul equipment in a four-wheel drive. Jeremy Clarkson need not return to the barricades over this policy. But as for the rest of us, there is simply no need. Get the urbanites off their tractors and back in their hatchbacks.
Irish Examiner
11-06-2025
- Automotive
- Irish Examiner
Higher bonnets in SUVs 'a clear and growing threat' to children, report finds
The bonnet height of new cars across Europe is rising relentlessly, a report has found, bringing a 'clear and growing threat to public safety, especially for children'. Higher fronts on cars significantly increase the death rate when pedestrians are struck. The analysis also found drivers in the tallest cars could not see children as old as nine at all when they were directly in front of the vehicle. In crashes, high-bonneted SUVs are more likely to strike the vital organs in the core of adults' bodies and the heads of children. Hitting pedestrians above their centre of gravity means they are more likely to be knocked forward and down and then be driven over. In contrast, low bonnets tend to hit pedestrians' legs, giving them a greater chance of falling on to the vehicle and being deflected to the side. The report, by the advocacy group Transport & Environment, found the average bonnet height of new cars sold in Europe rose from 77cm in 2010 to 84cm in 2024. The rise matches booming sales of SUVs, from 12% to 56% of all cars over the same period, with the increasing size of vehicles being described as 'carspreading' or 'autobesity'. SUVs are also 20% more polluting on average and this rise in sales is cancelling out the reduction in climate-heating CO2 due to electric vehicles and fuel efficiency improvements. There is no legal limit to bonnet height across Europe. The researchers said a limit should be introduced for 2035 and set at about 85cm. The report used data from Euro NCAP, the safety rating programme for new vehicles, and sales data to assess the growth in bonnet heights. Transport & Environment also commissioned Loughborough University School of Design to test the visibility of children from high-fronted cars. It found a driver of a Ram TRX was unable to see children aged up to nine who were standing directly in front, while a Land Rover Defender driver could not see children aged up to four and a half. A 10cm increase in bonnet height, from 80cm to 90cm, raises the risk of death in a crash by 27% for pedestrians and cyclists, according to a Belgian study involving 300,000 casualties. The Guardian Read More Family of Clare boy killed by van challenge decision to bring no charges over death
The Star
31-05-2025
- Automotive
- The Star
Lessons from big cities that cut back cars
CITIES around the world trying to limit driving have faced objections – namely that the measures would limit personal freedom, cost too much, destroy commerce or have negligible effects on air quality. Now the first data from these experiments in New York, London and Paris has trickled in. They offer some clues about whether cutting speed limits, charging traffic for entering a city centre and penalising drivers of the most polluting cars can reduce congestion and improve air quality, without causing too much disruption. These lessons are helpful because cities, where problems with traffic and poor air quality are frequently more severe than in less urban areas, are often moving more quickly in restricting vehicle emissions than countries or states. In Europe, cities are outpacing laws and national regulations to cut traffic pollution, according to the think tank Transport & Environment. As of April this year, 35 cities have committed to introducing 'zero emissions zones' – where diesel and gasoline-powered vehicles will be banned. Still, early results from some cities show reducing traffic is not enough. Take Oslo, which has pioneered lower speed limits, car-free zones and improvements to public transport, walking and cycling. Norway's widespread adoption of electric cars has also helped reduce smog. But the city still suffers from high levels of particulate pollution from tire wear, wood-burning stoves and dust from gravel and salting on icy roads. While restricting fossil-fuelled vehicles won't solve those problems, there is evidence that it helps clean the air and has other benefits too. Here's what policy makers and city dwellers can learn from other early adopters. > New York The city introduced a policy on Jan 5 charging cars up to US$9 (RM38) a day to enter certain parts of Manhattan. Travel time data from the first three months of the charging zone suggests commuting times are down on some of the busiest routes, in particular the bridges and tunnels that connect Manhattan with New Jersey, Brooklyn and Queens. A site run by student brothers Joshua and Benjamin Moshes has been tracking travel times based on Google Maps traffic data on various routes affected by the New York congestion pricing since the policy was introduced in January. They found travel times have also dropped during weekends, while there's been little change on other routes going from one part of Manhattan to another. That suggests people are choosing to take public transport or cutting out less urgent travel, they say. In Boston and Chicago, which the Moshes use as a control, traffic levels have not changed significantly. > Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo introduced 50kph speed limits on the city's outer ring road in October 2024, despite opposition from France's transport minister and conservative opponents. A report from the city's urban planning department found that the new, lower speed limit, introduced on Oct 1 last year, has already had some positive effects. In the following five months, air quality improved by 12% and traffic accidents dropped by 17%, compared to the same period in the previous year. There are also signs that congestion is lower. Hidalgo, who has said she won't seek re-election next year, isn't finished with her plans to reduce car traffic and encourage walking and cycling in Paris. Her office also banned motorised through-traffic from the city centre in November. Local workers, residents and taxis are still able to drive into the zone, but anyone passing through to go somewhere else will be fined €135 (RM651) once enforcement begins. > London The city's ultra-low emission zone has been in place for over five years. The restrictions, which place a daily charge on driving old gasoline or diesel vehicles, initially covered a small area of the city centre. It was subsequently expanded to cover an almost 1,554km square area, making it the largest in the world. London has had a separate congestion charging zone, which means almost everyone who drives into the city's core must pay, since 2003. When London mayor Sadiq Khan announced the expansion in 2022, the decision was met with warnings that high street shops would wither away and small businesses would struggle to survive. ULEZ, as the area is known for short, became a contentious topic in local elections, and Khan's opponent, from the right-wing Conservative Party, made it a central part of her pitch to voters in the mayoral election last year. (Khan won). In March, the mayor's office released data suggesting that ULEZ had a positive impact on air quality, while causing little disruption to shops in the outskirts of London, an area which was only included in the zone in August 2023. In particular the change has cut emissions of nitrogen oxides, air pollutants linked to lung problems, asthma and inflammation, by between 33% and 39%, while footfall and spending in shops has not dropped, according to data from Mastercard Inc. Almost 97% of vehicles driven within the zone are now compliant with the emissions standards, the report said. Vans, which were much more likely to be caught up by the changes, have been slower to switch, but over 90% are now compliant, compared with just 12% in 2017, before the zone was introduced. 'Everyone in the capital is now breathing cleaner air because of ULEZ,' said Christina Calderato, Transport for London's director of strategy, commenting on the report. — Bloomberg News/TNS
