Just a few ground-breaking discoveries my HI (human intelligence) algorithms brought in recent research:
* Fly less (maybe that business trip could've been a conference call or an e-mail)
* Use trains instead of planes where possible
* Use the train instead of the plane to get to lay-over airport
* Raise taxes on fuel to make half-empty flights un-economical for shareholders
These algos are incredible!
@cweickhmann I wish we had the necessary rail infrastructure on this side of the pond for that to be feasible...
But the other issue is raising the cost of fuel also raises the entry barrier for new pilots to learn, especially lower-income ones. With an ongoing pilot shortage, that's not a good idea.
@LouisIngenthron
That'd be good: less pilots would mean higher salaries, would mean higher prices too.
@cweickhmann There's already a major pilot shortage that leads to people getting stranded during the holidays.
Fewer pilots is not a good thing.
@LouisIngenthron Well, in order to reduce aviation's CO2 emissions, it is.
@cweickhmann The only CO2 emissions in aviation we should be worried about are the private jets that are taxis for rich individuals. Fuck those guys.
The rest of the commercial airlines are saving us CO2 emissions because they're way more environmentally efficient than all those passenger groups individually driving cars to their destinations. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the CO2 produced per person per mile is an order of magnitude less for commercial passenger jets than it is for gasoline automobiles.
But more importantly, we should strive to improve efficiency, not reduce supply. Reducing supply of something so essential as air travel just drives up prices and exacerbates income inequality far more than it reduces demand.
@LouisIngenthron
And the main reason for the efficiency gains you see in aviation is precisely reduced supply or better higher fuel prices and taxation/fees.
What you wrote is pretty much counterfactual.