BA on Panaroma 11th Nov - Criticism of "Tankering" Practice
Nov 11, 2019, 9:52 am
#62
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 726
Fair point, it's obvious BA are pretending to be green to keep people happy, but this extreme green approach is ruining many things, including a 3rd runway that should have been built 20 years ago.
Even worse is flight shaming, it's almost as the world is on the verge of going backwards instead of forwards.
Especially with the BBC, it was obviously shown on Panorama, but the BBC's agenda is generally questionable at the very least.
If the greenies want to save the environment, they can stay home then and walk everywhere.
Even worse is flight shaming, it's almost as the world is on the verge of going backwards instead of forwards.
Especially with the BBC, it was obviously shown on Panorama, but the BBC's agenda is generally questionable at the very least.
If the greenies want to save the environment, they can stay home then and walk everywhere.
Stay at home AND walk everywhere? You haven't really thought this issue through have you?
BA aren't pretending to be green to keep people happy - they're doing it to reduce costs. Being 'greener' is, in many cases, cheaper. The likes of RR, GE, P&W etc aren't making more fuel efficient engines to save the planet - they're doing it so that airlines have lower fuel bills and / or longer range for the same amount of fuel. It just so happens that these efforts also reduce co2 emissions so companies loudly trumpet their green credentials wherever they can (see the slideshow at last week's Capital Markets Day).
This programme shows that BA are guilty of greenwashing - pretending to be concerned about the environment when the reality is that anything that saves them a few quid that isn't environmetally friendly is kept out of public view until details emerge at some point.
They're not the only ones of course but they're making big noises about the environment at the moment so they deserve the scrutiny.
Last edited by Schind; Nov 11, 2019 at 9:57 am
Nov 11, 2019, 10:21 am
#64
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Vale of Glamorgan
Programs: BAEC Gold
Posts: 2,991
Nov 11, 2019, 10:28 am
#65
Fontaine d'honneur du Flyertalk
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Morbihan, France
Programs: Reine des Muccis de Pucci; Foreign Elitist (according to others)
Posts: 19,179
A BA pilot was moaning about a scenario to me the other day. They'd left LHR for Scotland and were tankering round-trip fuel. At the last moment they were persuaded to take some standby crew who wanted to get home, one on the flight deck. As they approached the destination my friend starts to realise that with the extra pax - something like 400kg - they're going to be overweight. .
Nov 11, 2019, 10:35 am
#66
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: London, UK
Programs: BAEC GGL/GFl, HH Diamond, BW Diamond, Virgin Voyages Deep Blue Extra, Blue Peter Badge Holder
Posts: 3,937
If this practice was banned- the cost of tickets would definitely increase. Airports fuel providers would have a monopoly and could charge what they liked...
Nov 11, 2019, 10:40 am
#67
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: LHR Air Traffic Control
Programs: BAEC Silver
Posts: 875
I’ll get on it straight away!
Nov 11, 2019, 11:26 am
#69
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Las Vegas
Programs: BA Gold; Hilton Honors Diamond
Posts: 3,228
Nov 11, 2019, 11:40 am
#70
Moderator, Iberia Airlines, Airport Lounges, and Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
Join Date: Feb 2010
Programs: BA Lifetime Gold; Flying Blue Life Platinum; LH Sen.; Hilton Diamond; Kemal Kebabs Prized Customer
Posts: 63,811
Just to welcome you to Flyertalk and welcome you to the BA forum Flyinghigher1. It's good to see you here, and welcome on board. I think the hub/spoke model - which is the hallmark of successful legacy carriers - is very much open to question here. I do wonder if it would be worth taxing seats (empty or filled) on a sliding scale, so allowing airlines say 200 free seats on a route per day, thereby preserving the network particularly to vulnerable locations, but then ramp up the tax on inefficient aircraft and low loaded services.
Nov 11, 2019, 12:30 pm
#71
Suspended
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 19
The increase in passengers over the past 30 years has been a factor in global warming.
Nov 11, 2019, 12:40 pm
#72
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: LHR/ATH
Programs: Amex Platinum, LH SEN (Gold), BA Bronze
Posts: 4,489
i am 31!
Global warming will happen regardless. How did the last ice age happen? Not because of humans. I’m all for new technologies to reduce fuel burn ( I drive a diesel to use less fuel and save money) but people are exaggerating climate change, and China and India, the worlds biggest polluters by far, could care less about European trends so even if UK is carbon neutral or even carbon plus, nothing will change.
haha good joke, ‘increase taxes’ so the govt can spend it on more stupid things. Might as well increase my tax bill, oh wait I’m already paying over 40%.
and the biggest growth from aviation is coming from ‘developing countries’ and trust me they could care less about their emissions.
and the biggest growth from aviation is coming from ‘developing countries’ and trust me they could care less about their emissions.
Nov 11, 2019, 1:02 pm
#73
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Economy, mostly :(
Programs: Skywards Gold
Posts: 7,801
i am 31!
Global warming will happen regardless. How did the last ice age happen? Not because of humans. I’m all for new technologies to reduce fuel burn ( I drive a diesel to use less fuel and save money) but people are exaggerating climate change, and China and India, the worlds biggest polluters by far, could care less about European trends so even if UK is carbon neutral or even carbon plus, nothing will change.
haha good joke, ‘increase taxes’ so the govt can spend it on more stupid things. Might as well increase my tax bill, oh wait I’m already paying over 40%.
and the biggest growth from aviation is coming from ‘developing countries’ and trust me they could care less about their emissions.
Global warming will happen regardless. How did the last ice age happen? Not because of humans. I’m all for new technologies to reduce fuel burn ( I drive a diesel to use less fuel and save money) but people are exaggerating climate change, and China and India, the worlds biggest polluters by far, could care less about European trends so even if UK is carbon neutral or even carbon plus, nothing will change.
haha good joke, ‘increase taxes’ so the govt can spend it on more stupid things. Might as well increase my tax bill, oh wait I’m already paying over 40%.
and the biggest growth from aviation is coming from ‘developing countries’ and trust me they could care less about their emissions.
Nov 11, 2019, 1:28 pm
#74
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: London, UK
Programs: BAEC GGL/GFl, HH Diamond, BW Diamond, Virgin Voyages Deep Blue Extra, Blue Peter Badge Holder
Posts: 3,937
As for the rise in pax numbers in recent decades, it is a small factor, whilst inefficient boilers and other forms of transport being far more responsible.
Although the programme portrays it as small amounts per flight, if every BA fight saved £10, that’s £4.75m a year saved.
Last edited by navylad; Nov 11, 2019 at 1:39 pm
Nov 11, 2019, 1:41 pm
#75
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: YYC
Programs: BA bronze, Aeroplan peon
Posts: 4,746
Both of these can be configured as 7 seaters. One weighs 1/3 ton more than the other. Guess which is which?
