The reputation of the American singer is well established. His popularity is such that his concerts in Singapore increased the country’s GDP by 0.2%, which still represents $205 to $275 million in additional revenue.
But in addition to being in the spotlight, Taylor Swift is also under fire from critics.
The takeoff of a plane represents the majority of GHG emissions during a flight. Short journeys will therefore have a larger environmental footprint than long journeys. (Patrick Woodbury/Archives Le Droit)
“The use of one’s private jet resulted in carbon emissions estimated at 8,300 tonnes in 2022, or approximately 1,184 times the annual emissions of an average human being,” revealed the marketing agency Yard, thus causing a stir. A rain of insults then fell on the megastar.
His numerous trips by private plane emit negative externalities. Which means that jet travel imposes significant and unfavorable environmental costs on society. And the consequences on the environment are increasingly visible.
“The wealthiest class has a much less sustainable lifestyle than other social classes. I would not put environmental responsibility on a young family who has been saving for a long time to afford a trip to Walt Disney,” says Andréanne Brazeau, senior policy analyst for Quebec at the David Suzuki Foundation.
The example of Taylor Swift is an atypical case. Very few people can afford the luxury of constantly traveling by private jet. However, we should not ignore the negative externalities that a simple plane trip imposes.
“A Montreal-Paris flight is equivalent to the gasoline consumption of a car for a year,” explains Ms. Brazeau. If the aviation sector were a country, it would be among the top 10 global emitters.”
Especially since the increase in the middle class across the globe puts pressure on the environment because more and more people have the means to travel.
A report from the World Tourism Organization and the International Transport Forum also suggests that CO₂ emissions from transport-related tourism are expected to increase from 1,597 million tonnes to 1,998 million tonnes between 2016 and 2030, which represents a increase of 25%.
The scourge of petty theft
The takeoff of a plane represents the majority of GHG emissions during a flight, indicates Luc Baillargeon-Nadeau, director of sustainable development at LCL Environnement.
Luc Baillargeon-Nadeau is director of sustainable development at LCL Environnement and is responsible in particular for calculating GHG emissions. (LCL Environment)
“Short flights are going to have a bigger footprint than long flights. The environmental footprint of a Quebec-Montreal flight is therefore higher than that of a Quebec-Paris flight,” he gives as an example.
The carbon footprint can be measured by the average emissions of air carriers in the United States — which is used as a benchmark for Canada — divided by the number of passengers on a flight.
For a short flight, a passenger emits around 0.12 kilograms of CO₂ per kilometer. For a long flight, a passenger emits around 0.10 kilograms of CO₂ per kilometer.
“It’s a noticeable difference. There are approximately 20% fewer GHGs for long journeys.”
— Luc Baillargeon-Nadeau, director of sustainable development at LCL Environnement
This is why Luc Baillargeon-Nadeau and Andréanne Brazeau advocate slow travel or slow tourism according to the Office québécois de la langue française.
“Instead of traveling two to three times a year for a week, we travel only once for three weeks. We have just cut our plane travel by three,” suggests Mr. Baillargeon-Nadeau.
“Once there, we take the time to settle in and explore the surroundings. And if we want to travel to another city or another country, we avoid taking the plane and we favor other means of public transport such as the train or the bus,” says Ms. Brazeau.
The latter believes that this is the best solution if we are not ready to give up our air travel.
To have a better environmental awareness, travelers can also consult the GHG emissions of their plane journey using Google Flights.
“Journeys with a stopover necessarily emit more GHG emissions, as there is more than one takeoff. But some companies will have a higher environmental footprint than others because their aircraft fleet is older. A recent device consumes less,” says Luc Baillargeon-Nadeau.
In the atmosfair Airline Index, which compared and ranked the carbon efficiency of the 200 largest airlines in 2018, Air Transat ranked 26th while Air Canada found itself in 32nd position.
Pay to reduce your footprint
As a last resort, according to Andréanne Brazeau, a traveler can offset their environmental footprint by purchasing carbon credits.
“It’s as if we were paying someone to reduce GHG emissions for us,” explains Mr. Baillargeon-Nadeau. He gives as an example the Quebec organization Planetair which offers this type of service.
The money spent on carbon credits is invested in renewable energy projects, such as replacing a coal-fired power plant with a solar power plant to give just one example.
“However, this should not be a solution to absolve oneself of all responsibilities. The compensation systems are imperfect, and the effects on the environment are difficult to measure.”
— Andréanne Brazeau, senior policy analyst for Quebec at the David Suzuki Foundation
“It is therefore important to ensure that the projects are verified, so that another organization certifies that the investments are real and that the GHG reductions are sustainable over time,” adds the director of sustainable development at LCL Environnement.
For example, Planetair’s portfolio is made up of Gold Standard certified climate projects.
“The Gold Standard, internationally recognized for its rigor and effectiveness in reducing GHG emissions, ensures the quality of these projects. Each ton of GHG offset by these projects is traceable thanks to a certificate,” it is written on the organization’s website.
Related News :