That doesn't alter the fact that total emissions are higher with more passengers on board.

 

But not by a massive amount. It's not as if we're talking about doubling the amount of fuel here, the aircraft would only use marginally more fuel in air it's the amount burned at take off that's the difference and even then it's not that large an increase.

 

Airtravel isn't environmentally friendly, it never has been, but like all forms of transport that have been daemonised by the green tards they are a lot more fuel efficient and environmentally friendly now than they have been and technological advances mean that they will continue to get cleaner.

 

The motor industry for one was set some pretty tough emissions regulations by the EU where car firms have to drop their average CO2 output to bellow a certain level. Which has seen Renault-Nissan invest billions in electric vehicles and the whole European industry strive to make cleaner engines.

 

Hell, even Aston Martin are releasing a Supermini [and an electric one] to reduce it's footprint.

 

 

The victimisation of the automotive and aeronautical industries has gone on for far too long. They contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, yes, but they are not the sole cause nor the root of the problem.

The A380 carbon emissions are 17% lower than that of a 747, it is also the only commercial plane in the world capable of running on alternative fuels, there will never be such thing as a totally 'green plane' but the A380 is a significant advance in that direction.

Never say never. We could be using hydrogen to fuel aircraft in 50years.

 

Never say never. We could be using hydrogen to fuel aircraft in 50years.

 

Yeah I can see that as a serious possibility in the future, probably not in my lifetime but certainly in yours.

 

I have been on an A380 many times and it is so quiet you would seriously think you are gliding and the engines have stopped, when on a 747 you can't hear yourself think for all the engine noise so no doubt the quieter engine is much more environmentally friendly than 747's.

 

I am not too bothered about the environment if truth be known, would love to see the global warming loony's explain to me how my mum had 15" of snow on her drive late last November. The global warming loony's make me cynical about anything to do with the environment as they have no credibility.

Yeah I can see that as a serious possibility in the future, probably not in my lifetime but certainly in yours.

 

I have been on an A380 many times and it is so quiet you would seriously think you are gliding and the engines have stopped, when on a 747 you can't hear yourself think for all the engine noise so no doubt the quieter engine is much more environmentally friendly than 747's.

 

I am not too bothered about the environment if truth be known, would love to see the global warming loony's explain to me how my mum had 15" of snow on her drive late last November. The global warming loony's make me cynical about anything to do with the environment as they have no credibility.

I was on three 747's in 2009 when i did my RTW trip to BrisVegas. Didn't think they were particularly noisy.

 

Would love to go on a A380, even though Brisbane can take them Qantas weren't flying them there, nor on the LHR-SIN leg of my flight [Which went on to Melbourne iirc]

I was on three 747's in 2009 when i did my RTW trip to BrisVegas. Didn't think they were particularly noisy.

 

Would love to go on a A380, even though Brisbane can take them Qantas weren't flying them there, nor on the LHR-SIN leg of my flight [Which went on to Melbourne iirc]

 

Once you have been on an A380 you won't want to travel on anything else, even in cattle class the seats are wide and the legroom is such that you can completely stretch your legs out not to mention even with cheap airline headphones the ICE sound system sounds better playing albums than my iPod does.

 

Every flight I take now is with Emirates.

Once you have been on an A380 you won't want to travel on anything else, even in cattle class the seats are wide and the legroom is such that you can completely stretch your legs out not to mention even with cheap airline headphones the ICE sound system sounds better playing albums than my iPod does.

 

Every flight I take now is with Emirates.

The word legroom sold me on A380's. I have issues with the lack of legroom on most airline. Ryanair are particularly horrid.

 

I'm flying AirFrance this summer on RJ85's and Boeing 777's :(

The word legroom sold me on A380's. I have issues with the lack of legroom on most airline. Ryanair are particularly horrid.

 

I'm flying AirFrance this summer on RJ85's and Boeing 777's :(

 

Oh dear :( 777's are ghastly just 747's without the upper deck and 2 less engines but the legroom on the A380 economy class and seat comfort is amazing, if you fly long haul you should make Emirates your first choice you won't regret it

Oh dear :( 777's are ghastly just 747's without the upper deck and 2 less engines but the legroom on the A380 economy class and seat comfort is amazing, if you fly long haul you should make Emirates your first choice you won't regret it

I'm skint so i went with the cheapest flights from a proper airline :lol: Still £700, although I booked Delta with Airfrance Flight numbers/aircraft and saved £60-70 for a seat on the same flight :funky:

 

I'm heading to the US, so Emirates was out of the question. I've heard a lot of good things about them though.

I'm skint so i went with the cheapest flights from a proper airline :lol: Still £700, although I booked Delta with Airfrance Flight numbers/aircraft and saved £60-70 for a seat on the same flight :funky:

 

I'm heading to the US, so Emirates was out of the question. I've heard a lot of good things about them though.

 

Any flights between Sydney-Bangkok-Dubai-London which are the 4 places I only ever travel to I always use Emirates which to be fair were also the cheapest airline which surprised me, I never travel to America but next time you go down under would seriously recommend Emirates

Any flights between Sydney-Bangkok-Dubai-London which are the 4 places I only ever travel to I always use Emirates which to be fair were also the cheapest airline which surprised me, I never travel to America but next time you go down under would seriously recommend Emirates

I'm a Qantas frequent flyer so my loyalty lies with them, but if it's a lot cheaper i'll give them a go. Just a little worried about going to Dubai and saying something retarded and ending up in jail.

I'm a Qantas frequent flyer so my loyalty lies with them, but if it's a lot cheaper i'll give them a go. Just a little worried about going to Dubai and saying something retarded and ending up in jail.

 

I am as straight talking as you can get and have survived each time I have been there :P

 

Unless you have something against Indians, Germans, English or Australians you would be fine lol as despite it being an arab country you don't see many arabs there.

Being an English guy born in Germany who has many Australian friends i'll be fine then :lol:

Being an English guy born in Germany who has many Australian friends i'll be fine then :lol:

 

Yeah lol you can't go wrong there B)

 

Recommend a visit, sand dune racing :heart:

To drag this back on track what that f***ing disgrace of a chancellor failed to mention was the removal of top ups to the Winter Fuel Allowance for pensioners which will result in the over-80s losing out on £100 and others £50.

 

And what was even worse was that the f***ing coward didn't even mention it in his speech.

 

GET THE bast*rdS OUT NOW

I am not too bothered about the environment if truth be known, would love to see the global warming loony's explain to me how my mum had 15" of snow on her drive late last November. The global warming loony's make me cynical about anything to do with the environment as they have no credibility.

 

This attitude scares me. No matter how many times you call people who care about the environment "loonies", the fact remains that there is VASTLY more evidence in favour of global warming being a very real (and most likely at least partially human-caused) problem than not. The idea that these "loonies" have no credibility is frankly absurd. Just because it is colder in one place for one month, doesn't mean global warming is a lie. Climate scientists have always been very clear that global warming is the name given to the latest spell of climate change that we are experiencing, and is called global WARMING because on average the planet is WARMING up. This is not a uniform warming, in fact one of its effects is that (for complex climatological reasons I can't be bothered explaining) the North Atlantic Current may well begin to shift southwards, bringing to an end the temperate climate the UK currently experiences due to our warm prevailing southwesterly winds and creating a climate more in line with northern Scandinavia. Only in Britain could the whole planet warm up and our weather gets even $h!ttier :lol:

Yeah I can see that as a serious possibility in the future, probably not in my lifetime but certainly in yours.

 

I have been on an A380 many times and it is so quiet you would seriously think you are gliding and the engines have stopped, when on a 747 you can't hear yourself think for all the engine noise so no doubt the quieter engine is much more environmentally friendly than 747's.

 

I am not too bothered about the environment if truth be known, would love to see the global warming loony's explain to me how my mum had 15" of snow on her drive late last November. The global warming loony's make me cynical about anything to do with the environment as they have no credibility.

Not that old chestnut again. There is a difference between climate and weather. The climate is changing. That doesn't mean that cold weather is going to be a thing of the past. After all, the existence of left-handed people doesn't alter the fact that most people are right-handed. Or to stick with the weather / climate theme, the UK climate means that in June temperatures here are higher than they are in January. That doesn't mean that every day from January to June is warmer than the previous day.

 

You have been banging on about people studying "real" subjects such as science at university. The vast majority of climate scientists - you know, those people who have studied a "real" subject - agree. What qualifications do you have to say that they are wrong?

This attitude scares me. No matter how many times you call people who care about the environment "loonies", the fact remains that there is VASTLY more evidence in favour of global warming being a very real (and most likely at least partially human-caused) problem than not. The idea that these "loonies" have no credibility is frankly absurd. Just because it is colder in one place for one month, doesn't mean global warming is a lie. Climate scientists have always been very clear that global warming is the name given to the latest spell of climate change that we are experiencing, and is called global WARMING because on average the planet is WARMING up. This is not a uniform warming, in fact one of its effects is that (for complex climatological reasons I can't be bothered explaining) the North Atlantic Current may well begin to shift southwards, bringing to an end the temperate climate the UK currently experiences due to our warm prevailing southwesterly winds and creating a climate more in line with northern Scandinavia. Only in Britain could the whole planet warm up and our weather gets even $h!ttier :lol:

 

I wasn't referring to people who care about the environment as loonies :) I was referring to these 'expert' scientists and I am very very cynical about them, I throw away cans and bottles for recycling so do my bit ;)

 

Yeah last year was some La Nina I think it was called that f***ed up the weather in the southern hemisphere causing all the floods and blizzards etc

I wasn't referring to people who care about the environment as loonies :) I was referring to these 'expert' scientists and I am very very cynical about them, I throw away cans and bottles for recycling so do my bit ;)

 

Yeah last year was some La Nina I think it was called that f***ed up the weather in the southern hemisphere causing all the floods and blizzards etc

El Nino and La Nina have been causing quirks in the weather for a very long time. They are coming round more frequently than before which means freakish weather is becoming more frequent. At the moment, as far as I am aware, there is no evidence to suggest that this is linked to climate change. That doesn't mean there is no link of course. Similarly, no individual climactic event (i.e. the weather) can be said to be definitely down to climate change. However, the general trend (the climate) is undeniable.

The Lib Dems' stupidity never ceases to amaze me: do they not realise that their pathetic increase in the personal allowance is more than offset by the rise in VAT, in the freezing of child benefit and removal of childcare credits? Increasing the personal allowance is an extremely ineffective way of helping the poorest: because EVERYONE benefits from their personal allowance, the poorest only get 10% of the extra money released by an increase in it. Specifically-targeted tax credits are a way of helping the poor far more as well as being more cost-effective.

 

As for the rest of the Budget: it was the same old lies and unfairness that we're used to from George Osborne. Petrol tax cut by 1p, but not enough to offset the 3p increase he himself instigated in January. Banks get a bigger levy, but then are immediately compensated by a cut in corporation tax. Benefits cut, including for the disabled, again. Bigger taxes for wealthy non-domiciles, but can dodge it if they can "express an interest in investing in British business". He will only "aim" to introduce a tax on private jets. In fact, the biggest genuine tax change now in the pipeline is the scrapping of the 50p rate for earners, which Osborne says will be scrapped if a commission almost certainly entirely consisting of 50p-rate-payers recommends it.

 

And to top it all off - I still find it rather hilarious that Osborne had to begin what was, in his words, "the most pro-growth Budget this country has seen for a generation" by... announcing growth would be slower than expected. :lol: Like Ed Miliband said, it's hurting and it ain't even working.

The Lib Dems' stupidity never ceases to amaze me: do they not realise that their pathetic increase in the personal allowance is more than offset by the rise in VAT, in the freezing of child benefit and removal of childcare credits? Increasing the personal allowance is an extremely ineffective way of helping the poorest: because EVERYONE benefits from their personal allowance, the poorest only get 10% of the extra money released by an increase in it. Specifically-targeted tax credits are a way of helping the poor far more as well as being more cost-effective.

 

As for the rest of the Budget: it was the same old lies and unfairness that we're used to from George Osborne. Petrol tax cut by 1p, but not enough to offset the 3p increase he himself instigated in January. Banks get a bigger levy, but then are immediately compensated by a cut in corporation tax. Benefits cut, including for the disabled, again. Bigger taxes for wealthy non-domiciles, but can dodge it if they can "express an interest in investing in British business". He will only "aim" to introduce a tax on private jets. In fact, the biggest genuine tax change now in the pipeline is the scrapping of the 50p rate for earners, which Osborne says will be scrapped if a commission almost certainly entirely consisting of 50p-rate-payers recommends it.

 

And to top it all off - I still find it rather hilarious that Osborne had to begin what was, in his words, "the most pro-growth Budget this country has seen for a generation" by... announcing growth would be slower than expected. :lol: Like Ed Miliband said, it's hurting and it ain't even working.

You're wrong about the banks. The bank levy is being increased to cancel out the cut in corporation tax.

The Lib Dems' stupidity never ceases to amaze me: do they not realise that their pathetic increase in the personal allowance is more than offset by the rise in VAT, in the freezing of child benefit and removal of childcare credits? Increasing the personal allowance is an extremely ineffective way of helping the poorest: because EVERYONE benefits from their personal allowance, the poorest only get 10% of the extra money released by an increase in it. Specifically-targeted tax credits are a way of helping the poor far more as well as being more cost-effective.

 

As for the rest of the Budget: it was the same old lies and unfairness that we're used to from George Osborne. Petrol tax cut by 1p, but not enough to offset the 3p increase he himself instigated in January. Banks get a bigger levy, but then are immediately compensated by a cut in corporation tax. Benefits cut, including for the disabled, again. Bigger taxes for wealthy non-domiciles, but can dodge it if they can "express an interest in investing in British business". He will only "aim" to introduce a tax on private jets. In fact, the biggest genuine tax change now in the pipeline is the scrapping of the 50p rate for earners, which Osborne says will be scrapped if a commission almost certainly entirely consisting of 50p-rate-payers recommends it.

 

And to top it all off - I still find it rather hilarious that Osborne had to begin what was, in his words, "the most pro-growth Budget this country has seen for a generation" by... announcing growth would be slower than expected. :lol: Like Ed Miliband said, it's hurting and it ain't even working.

 

I see no problem with doing away with the 50% tax rate. It was just Labour throwing a bone to the left wing of the party without the 50% rate having any real revenue raising benefit.

 

Lowering upper end tax rates gives less incentive for tax avoidance and encourages enterprise.

Edited March 24, 201114 yr by Valley Pub