"I have lived as a nomad for the last nine years, taking 360 flights travelling over 1.5 million kilometers (assuming flight paths are straight, ignoring layovers) during that time."
I guess he really doesn't give a shit about the environment
I guess he really doesn't give a shit about the environment
If someone said they take ICE public buses to commute daily, my guess is the sentiment would be that is environmentally-conscious commuting.
Is this meaningfully different from boarding a plane? I can see a luxury vs necessity angle, but is that it? Over long distances planes are more efficient. And like buses, the idea that a single person's behavior will impact departure schedules feels wrong.
That would be 63% of his 9 nomad years.
Vitalik sitting on non-private flights doesn't meaningfully add to pollution, the flight was already happening. The fuel was already earmarked for burning.
"This person boarded a lot of flights that were going to pollute anyways" is a strange take. Sure he did it a lot, but if an individual contributes no measurable impact by sitting on a plane, then boarding 300+ flights pollutes roughly the same as boarding 0, since those 300+ flights happen anyway.
If you want to argue about market forces, do that. But as a sibling comment said, blaming a consumer here is strange.
The consumer simply saw cheap flights and did what they do best. The root of the issue is elsewhere.
This is scapegoating. Who put them in power?
> The consumer simply saw cheap flights and did what they do best.
The politicians saw lobbyist money and did what they do best. The lobbyists got paid to do what they do best. The special interest groups saw a gameable system and did what they do best. The consumers feed the industries that buy out the politicians. Everyone plays a part and everyone is partly to blame.