I'm doing it again - this is another lazy repackaged piece of "journalism". It's a bunch of links to other publications which did the actual heavy lifting, with some limp commentary thrown in. The "Bloomberg reported" link doesn't even go to the Bloomberg story (it goes to the Guardian... because its actually from the Guardian). The "according to Greenpeace" bit also straight up quotes it wrong (Yahoo says Greenpeace says yearly ghost flights cause pollution equivalent to 1.4 million cars, the Greenpeace headline says yearly ghost flights _in the EU_ cause pollution equivalent to 1.4 million cars).

It's also funny because by fusing together a bunch of semi-unrelated stories, you end up bizarre combinations. The majority of the article isn't about airlines flying empty flights to keep their slots, it's about Qatar straight up avoiding taking up 'slots' (of sorts), but the call to action is about slot preserving ghost flights.

Finally, it's a completely limp call to action, because the obvious solution (increase carbon taxes) is almost certainly unpalatable to the typical target audience of this article.