Skip to content

Shipping and airline travel must be eliminated in their current forms to stop climate change, scientists warn

June 30, 2018

By Paul Homewood


h/t Patsy Lacey


From the failed Independent:




Airline travel and long-haul shipping are among the “tough-nut” sectors that will require a radical rethink if humanity is to stand any chance of avoiding climate catastrophe.

The world has made significant progress in its efforts to reduce greenhouse emissions, but predictably some of the hardest industries to decarbonise have been left largely untouched, according to a new analysis.

Many of these industries currently lack viable alternatives, and will therefore require major investments to get them off the ground and reach the target of zero emissions in the coming decades.

The findings come after the Committee on Climate Change issued a damning report in which it said virtually every part of the UK economy had failed to take steps towards reducing emissions.

While great strides have been made towards making British electricity renewable, transport, construction and other high-polluting sectors had made little effort to meet the nation’s climate targets.

This is a pattern that can be seen around the world, according to the authors of the new study, with key sectors like air travel, shipping and steel and cement manufacture falling behind.

"For better or worse, the long-lived infrastructure built today will shape the future," said Dr Steve Davis, a University of California earth system scientist and lawyer who led the new study published in the journal Science.

"We’re making good progress on things like the cost of solar panels and electric vehicles, but we need to start tackling the more difficult sectors as well.

“These include products and services that are essential to modern society, so we need to figure out how to provide them without added carbon dioxide."

Taken together these sources account for over a quarter of carbon dioxide emissions, and demand for all of them is only set to rise.

Transport secretary Chris Grayling justified the recent decision to expand Heathrow Airport by stating that new technologies would reduce emissions from air transport in the near future.

However, the reality is that for the most part there are no affordable technological solutions ready to address these kinds of heavy-duty emissions.

"Taken together, these ‘tough-nut’ sources make up a significant percentage of global emissions," said co Dr Ken Caldeira of Carnegie Science, one of the study’s co-authors.

"To truly address them will demand coordination and integration across industries."

Future solutions suggested by the scientists include energy dense hydrogen or ammonia-based fuels for aviation and shipping, and effective tools to capture and store carbon emissions.

The scientists said the cost of implementing and scaling up these technologies will be significant, but necessary if the world is to avoid the worst effects of climate change.

"We don’t have a crystal ball to foresee what technologies will exist a century from now," said Dr Caldeira.

"But we know that people will want buildings, transportation and other energy services and we can try to design our energy system so that it is able to take advantage of new inventions as they come along."


Of course, none of this will stop armies of climate scientists and eco-warriors criss-crossing the world by jet, in order to attend their conferences and jamborees.

  1. cajwbroomhill permalink
    June 30, 2018 9:57 am

    These zealots must logically remember CO2 release from volcanoes, including undersea sources, for which means have to be devised for carbon capture.
    A crying need for divers, numbering at least 13000 for work all over marine areas can be foreseen, recruiting of divers to start, fittingly, on All Fool’s Day, so volunteers must be sought now, if climate catastrophy is too be averted!

  2. Power unseen permalink
    June 30, 2018 10:08 am

    I remember on the news many years ago here in the UK a tax on apples was coming in, so many apple orchards would be grubbed up. But the shops would be filled with South African and New Zealand apples, subsidized so they would cost no more. Nice bit of business for supertanker owners.

  3. Derek Buxton permalink
    June 30, 2018 10:17 am

    Brings to mind a quotation from Shakespeare, “Kill all the lawyers”.

    • dave permalink
      June 30, 2018 11:44 am

      “Brings to mind a quotation…”

      And a story, related by the historian Gibbon, about an ancient Italic tribe. Any man could propose a change to ancient laws and traditions, by simply standing up in the assembly and speaking for it. If the change met with general approval he was thanked and given honours. There was a catch, however. While making his argument he had to hold a length of rope in his hand. If the sense of the meeting was that he was just a trouble-maker – he was hanged.

  4. John Scott permalink
    June 30, 2018 10:33 am

    If all the AGW scientists, eco-politicians. and the eco-industry parasites could not travel to their important conferences we are half way to solving the constant ringing of the Climate doomsday alarm.

  5. Athelstan permalink
    June 30, 2018 10:40 am

    I don’t think that the climate dingbat committee can extract any more urine, so really they can’t take the piss anymore.

    • tom0mason permalink
      June 30, 2018 12:09 pm

      But, but … there’s many ‘sustainable’ industries that could be formed by instituting a national urine collection service — see HERE

      So let’s have a government minister for collecting urine and put the honesty back into politics!

      The future is golden, the future is taking the piss...

      ..Go pee,
      …Go pee sustainably,
      …. Go pee ecologically.


      Together we can make the Great Britain a world leader in the technology of taking the piss!

      • Russ Wood permalink
        June 30, 2018 2:30 pm

        Not just a laugh – there was an academic in Cape Town who recommended collecting all of the wee in the city and converting it to fertiliser. Just exactly HOW didn’t seem to cross his academic mind!

      • bobn permalink
        July 1, 2018 12:28 am

        In England in the middle ages there were no sewers.Carts would drive the streets and you would empty your ‘pisspot’ into a barrel on the cart. You were even paid for your pee, those receiving payment were referred to as ‘pisspoor’. The barrels of piss were sold and used to Tan leather, make fertiliser and make soap. Piss is rich in ammonia – nitrogen and other minerals. Anyone who gives a piss about the environment should avoid peeing in a toilet and thus wasting water and a resource. Gardeners and farmers have always returned their piss directly to the soil. So come on – piss it up for the planet!

  6. June 30, 2018 10:54 am

    Since recent global temperatures don’t correlate with the increase in carbon dioxide levels, when are climate obsessives going to start facing up to the facts?

  7. June 30, 2018 11:33 am

    I would love to see battery-assisted takeoff and landing for aircraft, to reduce noise and local air pollution. Somewhat amusingly this would lead to a growth in air travel, e.g. via night flights, and flights would probably consume more fuel than before due to extra weight.

    What a dilemma for greenies, less genuine pollution or more fake pollution?!

  8. Colin Brooks permalink
    June 30, 2018 11:36 am

    Which of the following accepted facts do these twerps not understand?

    In terms of the known temperature range experienced by our planet; current temperatures are bloody cold and a bit of warming would be welcome.

    In terms of the known past levels of atmospheric CO2; today’s levels are rock bottom (top end was around 800,000 parts per million (now around 400 ppm).

    As oldbrew indicates, our emissions have been going through the roof but temperatures have not followed.

    The level of our scientific understanding of any subject is relatively low or do people think that the rate of new discoveries is going to suddenly stop?

    How do we stop our idiot politicians pouring our money down the drain (or into their pockets) ?

  9. tom0mason permalink
    June 30, 2018 11:42 am

    If this plays out like any of the other ‘sustainably’ eco ideas, we can look forward to —

    Official reports saying transport industry costs (over a short period) have reduced and profits have risen — the left screams foul, governments react to kill the very enterprises that earned much, by excessive legally restrictions and/or overtaxing.
    Costs rise, profits fall, and everyone’s tax bill and commodity prices rises.

    And for some reason politicians wonder why industries are failing and unemployment rises.

    Why can’t government do this to windfarms?

    • Charles Wardrop permalink
      July 2, 2018 6:37 am

      John Selwyn Gummer, Ld Deben and the like, coining money and keeping the scams going.

  10. bluecat57 permalink
    June 30, 2018 11:50 am

    The toughest nuts are the “scientists” who are pretending to do science and are wasting money and creating excessive manure.

    • Colin Brooks permalink
      June 30, 2018 12:33 pm

      Dead right!

  11. keith permalink
    June 30, 2018 12:00 pm

    And let’s not forget our own clown prince has joined all the green hypocrites such as Bore and DiCaprio with all his flying around.

  12. It doesn't add up... permalink
    June 30, 2018 12:24 pm

    Ever since the NS Savannah the possibility of nuclear powered vessels for trade. Not on the agenda of these scientists I expect. They’d rather shut down all international trade. Not sure what they’d do about migrants. Perhaps the trireme could make a comeback for crossing the Mediterranean.

    • Russ Wood permalink
      June 30, 2018 2:32 pm

      Trireme? With enough whips, that alone might discourage the would-be immigrants!

  13. Dave Ward permalink
    June 30, 2018 12:28 pm

    “Airline travel and long-haul shipping are among the “tough-nut” sectors. Many of these industries currently lack viable alternatives, and will therefore require major investments to get them off the ground”

    Does the CoCC intend to convert all container ships to battery powered aircraft>

    • Bitter@twisted permalink
      July 1, 2018 12:29 pm

      A return to sail perhaps?
      Six months by slow boat to Australia and a nice dose of scurvy.
      But you would be saving the planet.
      What’s not to like?

  14. Broadlands permalink
    June 30, 2018 12:34 pm

    ” …and effective tools to capture and store carbon emissions.”

    These incompetent fools do not seem to understand that the gigaton amounts of CO2 to capture are impossibly large. Per-ton stored would cost trillions… and there is no place to bury it. They cannot put 44 tons of CO2 back into a 12 ton geological “bag”. Even the politically motivated IPCC understands that. Do the math for 50 ppm Dr. Hansen. It’s your 350 ppm goal, is it not?

    • bobn permalink
      July 1, 2018 12:34 am

      My effective tool is to release co2 into the atmosphere where trees can capture and store it -problem solved.

  15. Gwynne James permalink
    June 30, 2018 4:14 pm

    I know its down to production reduction but who else cannot help having a quiet giggle at how the current lack of CO2 is causeing panic and mayhem accross Europe and the UK!
    I do hope the irony is not lost on our Green Warming Fascists!

  16. J Martin permalink
    June 30, 2018 8:27 pm

    If we stop shipping arriving at our ports we lose nearly 40% of our food supply, not to mention most of the technology that we buy. Let’s see the idiots that proposed that idea live with consequences of it for a year. Take away everything in their house that wasn’t made in the UK or contains parts that were not made in the UK. Force them to only have 60% of the food they used to buy. I think they’ll soon quietly drop that daft idea.

  17. john cooknell permalink
    June 30, 2018 8:37 pm

    Just because an idea is barmy, with no proof or reason, doesn’t stop that idea developing wings and becoming a human belief.

    • Phoenix44 permalink
      July 1, 2018 11:24 am

      Thomas Sowell wrote, “Virtually no idea is too ridiculous to be accepted, even by very intelligent and educated people, if it provides a way for them to feel special and important.

  18. Gerry, England permalink
    June 30, 2018 9:19 pm

    With the lack of progress so far, come 11pm on 29 March 2019 all the licences of the UK’s airports become void so their dream is closer than they think.

    • bobn permalink
      July 1, 2018 12:45 am

      There was no aviation problem 15years ago when the UKs CAA did all the UKs aviation licensing. Then they merged the CAA licence into a common EU licence. Magically my UK ATPL (Air Transport Pilots License) became an EU ATPL via the stroke of a pen. Next year via another pen stroke UK licences will reappear. Its only semantics and cut n paste to resolve 99% of Brexit issues. But the EU is sulking still wont play. Also Air Transport is regulated by IATA (International). EU and UK are just subsets, returning to UK member status of IATA from the EU member status again takes one pen stroke.

      • Gerry, England permalink
        July 1, 2018 10:49 am

        I suggest you do some research on Notice to Stakeholders and on the EU briefing of the 27 by the aviation director on June 12.

    • Phoenix44 permalink
      July 1, 2018 11:26 am

      The aerodrome licences for the UK are issued by the CAA.The EU plays no role in licensing aerodromes as far as I know?

      In any event, what is the EU going to do if we just carry on as normal?

    • Phoenix44 permalink
      July 1, 2018 11:28 am

      You are confusing aerodrome licences and rights to fly between nations.

    • dave permalink
      July 2, 2018 9:49 am

      “…the licences become void…”

      Not at all.

      The licenses are not subject to some “warranty void if opened,” or “remains the property of Europe” conditions.

      “After withdrawal the UK will cease to participate in the activities of EASA and consequently the UK Civil Aviation Authority will no longer need to ensure compliance by UK-based companies with the EU aviation safety legislation.”

      On March 29, 2019, nothing will change in our airspace. Flying by commercial airliner will continue to be a horrible, taxed-to-death, experience – unless you are twaterati, of course.

  19. July 1, 2018 5:41 pm

    It appears that airplanes, say at 70% capacity, can emit less CO2 per passenger mile than the, say “average” automobile with less than one passenger. Also, It is a fact that aircraft engines keep on increasing their efficiencies, ergo lowering their fuel consumption, et al. Ever heard of over population?

  20. July 2, 2018 6:31 am

    They are starting to realize its hopeless to try and fix climate change. How long before they realize it’s not necessary.

    • dave permalink
      July 2, 2018 8:28 am

      “How long before they realize it’s not necessary?”

      10-20 years; with no possibility of early release from their yammering.

  21. Vanessa permalink
    July 3, 2018 11:07 am

    Starting with the nincompoops who jet around the world to persuade us all to stop “living” ! This will certain dampen their ability to travel to far flung places and stay in hugely expensive resorts to spout about how WE must all save the planet !!!

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: