"Ask yourself how sustainable a business is" So how is air transport sustainable? Buying a different cleaning product makes a difference but choosing to travel thousands of km make no difference? If nothing changes nothing will change. How much change to the environment does making your on cosmetics make? How much change to the environment does making reducing your air travel make? is just having the warm fuzzy feeling what is important rather than actually achieving anything?
I agree -- for most of us, the sustainable efforts any one individual takes in their day-to-day lives won't change the environment. There are many things I do that would be considered somewhat sustainable, like riding my bicycle, taking public transportation every day to work, having reusable water bottles, re-using canvas bags for groceries, and recycling pop/cat cans at the scrap yard. While I understand that these things have a degree of sustainability, my motives are usually more driven because 1) I just happen to like doing these things, and 2) they often save me extra cost on little things.
Hmm... I kind of don't share your point of view here. The first one in particular: Plane demand has already fallen in Europe which currently leads to a stronger train network. It's not all about boycotting the plane industry but also about supporting more environmentally friendly alternatives. And we can definitely see that change of mind in the public. Of course that's not possible for all routes, such as going intercontinental. But I think we should all try to reduce our flights as much as we can.
plane demand has not really fallen in europe. The air traffic has fallen because of covid, but it's already going back to it's pre covid values. The base-scenario of the EUROCONTROL 7-year forcast published in october 2021 showed that the air traffic will full recover (compared with 2019 traffic) at the end of 2023. And the extimations actually changed in favour of a more optimistic scenario. So the traffic lowered because of covid, but the demand is the same. And before covid the demand raised continously for so many years that I highly doubt it will stop raising now.
@@WhatashameMaryJane I think consumerism matters, but I also see where companies are pushing the responsibility towards us. I could agree with your final conclusion.
Non puoi cambiare la società. Per cambiarla dovresti cambiare prima gli individui che sono affamati di comforts e benessere. Ma non è possibile. Tutte le specie viventi tendono al comfort=benessere. Putroppo gli umani a differenza degli animali identificano il loro benessere non solo nei beni di sussistenza ma anche in migliaia di cose/prodotti assolutamente superflui, e si inventano qualsiasi giustificazione pur di sentirsi liberi di comprare, consumare, viaggiare, divertirsi e tutto il resto. E come se non bastasse gli umani tendono anche ad accumulare i beni oltre il necessario. Pensa ai collezionisti o a quelli che accumulano beni al fine di venderli e trarne un utile. Io stimo chi ha il coraggio di fare delle scelte personali, di rinunciare a dei comforts (come prendere l'aereo), a chi decide di fare un passo indietro in questa società di consumi sfrenati perchè sente il dovere morale di farlo. Ciao
Ciao Sandro. Non mi trovi d’accordo sulla dinamica individui-società. Non credo nemmeno che sia vero che tutte le specie tendono al comfort. Tutte le specie tendono alla sopravvivenza, la nostra è una delle poche che tende al benessere. Mi fermo qui perché l’argomento è amplissimo e utilizzo già i miei video per condividere la mia opinione in proposito. Però grazie per il contributo, apprezzo molto ricevere opinioni diverse. Sarebbe bello discuterne a quattr’occhi.
@@WhatashameMaryJane Che le tutte le specie tendano al comfort è stata una mia esagerazione, un'esasperazione del concetto. La sopravvivenza non la definirei una "tendenza", ma come la scontata necessità di base perchè tutto il resto abbia luogo. E' la conditio sine qua non. La ricerca del benessere inutile (oltre una ragionevole necessità), dei comforts come li chiamo io, è quello che ci frega in termini ambientali. La ricerca esasperata del piacere materiale e psicologico nell'acquisto di un bene o di un servizio, è cio che ci porta, che mi porta, ad avere oltre il necessario per la nostra, per la mia felicità. E' una forma di compensazione di qualcos'altro? Io non ho mai comprato un'auto inquinante per la "sopravvivenza", ma potrei dire in modo superficiale di averlo fatto per necessità. Ma a guardar bene quella necessità (di spostamento verso il luogo di lavoro) era solo il desiderio/bisogno di un maggior comfort rispetto all'uso dei mezzi pubblici. Perchè spendere 3 ore sui mezzi pubblici se in 30 minuti con l'auto risolvo il problema? Perchè pedalare mezz'ora con la bici per fare la spesa se posso fare la stessa cosa in 5 minuti con l'auto (e faticare meno)? Ora se mi guardo attorno vedo una casa piena di cose inutili che non ho mai acquistato allo scopo di garantirmi la sopravvivenza. Se indago sui processi produttivi (praticamente tutti in qualche modo inquinanti e deleteri per l'ambiente) che stanno dietro a questi oggetti che mi circondano, dall'estrazione di una materia prima, al trasporto della stessa, all'energia che è servita per trasformarla in un bene di consumo, alla distribuzione del prodotto finito e mille altri passaggi, mi sento per forza anch'io responsabile e mi viene male. E quanti aerei ho preso anch'io, e quanti viaggi in auto ho fatto solo per il piacere di farli? L'argomento non è amplissimo, è infinito. Continua assolutamente a fare i video. Ciao e grazie
I feel guilty so I don't do it much. If you want to feel good about your impact on the planet you should logically start from largest to smallest impact. Flights are by far the largest impact you can have (outside of having Children). It's also hard for many in the west to give up - just like beef. I feel like "the experience" economy has become a mad consumerist fetish where you must visit every city, have every experience rather than being grounded with nourishing relationships and connections to where you actually live
In my opinion, a minimum margin whose amount is linked to the product life solves all problems. A 'washing machine' that is five times as expensive is not more expensive if it also lasts five times as long. It's about reversing planned obsolescence. Turning away from selling products by price. A socialist idea, isn't it? It reduces the demand for resources to one-fifth of the original demand. This also applies to working time - with full wages. The initial need of capital can be done just like today by our central banks. Quantity becomes quality, money doesn't care. What do you think?
I agree that we certainly need to make planned obsolescence illegal. Is that what you meant, or you would suggest reversing it in another way? Can you explain “turning away from selling products by price”? How would you sell them? For example I would promote the sell of a product linked to the sell of a guarantee/replacement/reparation for a certain number of years. You pay more for a washing machine for example, but you get free repairs by the company’s technicians for n years.
@@WhatashameMaryJane Today, products are primarily sold on the basis of price. This means that the 'same' washing machine is bought where it is cheapest. Basically, it can be said that the manufacturing costs are comparably high. We will leave out the details here for the sake of understanding. How can I bring a product to market that costs me exactly the same as my competitors? By reducing my margin. What does reducing profit mean for me, in terms of a single product? Quite simply, if I can only earn half on one washing machine, then I have to sell two of them. How do I do that? By halving the duration of use of the washing machine. Planned obsolescence.
If I say that a washing machine has to last 25 years, then I have to make sure that the manufacturer makes the same amount of money as if he sells five washing machines that last 5 years. Minimum wages are not everything, we also need a minimum profit margin. If a Chinese worker only has to make one pair of pants instead of two, he only has to do half as much work in China. That only works if you have to pay twice as much for one pair of pants. Which is possible if I can wear the pants twice as long. Ideally, we will go back to the tailor in the future. The point is not to reduce profit, but to require fewer resources.
Prohibitions I do not like bans. Nobody likes prohibitions, right? Instead, it's about the better alternative. It gives me a choice. I keep my power of choice instead of losing it to a ban. Example: Instead of banning cars, it makes more sense to make buses and trains available to all citizens for free. Who's going to use a car if they don't really need it? Problem solved.
Warum sollte ich fünf Waschmaschinen bauen, wenn ich mit einer Waschmaschine das gleiche verdiene? Dazu muss ich als Unternehmen die Möglichkeit haben. Klar?
It's interesting when one loves to talk about what they are doing to impact climate change.......Until it affects them personally and takes away their own agenda, then not so much. Yes I am referring to 9:17.
I think the notion that the global community will suddenly want to become less connected in a substantiated way is both unrealistic and counter-progressive. We, as humans, have got better connected since our origins. This would be the first time in history we’ve gone the other way. It’s just not going to happen. There are other ways to support growth in a less harmful way. Rail could take over domestic flight demand (though here in the UK rail is 3x the cost of flying!) And plane manufacturers are researching hydrogen and other green tech. Though, ironically, they will need us to by plane tickets to fund that research.
Change the system? But how are you going to accomplice that? Let's be honest, you just aren't. Most you are doing is to raise awareness... to change people's habits. But yet you don't mind flying, which is very very polluting. Your flights on their own won't make a big difference, but what if all people think like you? This is all very vague, I am sorry. We do need to change our consumption. We can admit that we aren't 100% able to do that, but let's just be honest about that.
What if is not helpful. Coulda, woulda, woulda.... Whoever sits back and lets others do their work would do well to impose some criticism on the "others" as well? How do you want to save the world?
Gas from Russia through a pipe was a seemingly acceptable way to deliver gas, "naturally sourced" gas. Fracked gas is an environmental nightmare. Then shipping the dirty gas halfway around the world and then using an empty ship to pick it up again is... pretty stupid. MJ is just scratching the surface of our real problems.
I work for a company that offsets carbon emissions (CO2) by diverting waste from landfill and processing it without emitting gases. We generate carbon credits for each tonne of CO2 that we reduce. We then sell these credits to a polluter such as an airline. In summary, airlines are financially penalized by our government for polluting, so instead they purchase credits from us to avoid heavier fines. The airline emits 1 tonne of CO2 and we reduce 1 tonne of CO2, offsetting emissions. We are a small business but hope to make a bigger dent in the coming years. You can't get rid of all emissions so this is why governments and companies like ours play a crucial role in healing the environment.
Hi Leonidas. The small company you work for should be praised for that. Nonetheless, I have mixed feelings about the whole system of carbon compensation. Just like I have for recycling. They're great practices but they're often taken as the n.1 thing one should do to cover their environmental footprint. The real deal is to reduce your footprint, not to cover the traces.
New research and technology have paved the way to less waste and energy consumption in many areas, but human population growth may be counterproductive to the gains. In the aviation industry, shorter flights should be shifted to rail transportation, as was stated by KLM, but in the US the rail system is primitive, and has an inefficient network that cannot compete with Europe.
Great video, i’m sorry because i can only imagine the effort put into making this kind of videos, i feel like you deserve a lot more. Hope you the best❤
@@WhatashameMaryJane In Norway its just an excuse for the gov to squeeze the average norwegian of more money re : airplane tax , little to do with saving the earth
Hi Mary Jane 👋 - One of the leading environmental activists in the world is Al Gore who travels via his own private jet. It allows him to go to many places where commercial flights are not viable. It clearly also affords him the luxury of avoiding airliners & allows him the convenience to be in California in the afternoon & back in bed in Tennessee at night. It's a perk he's earned for years of service & advocacy. Now , of course there are others with a different take ..
greta thunberg took a yacht/boat to america some time ago to avoid flying that plane from sweden left for new york without her anyways and still flies the same route life goes on
That means absolutely nothing. She's a public figure and her gesture was symbolic. She made thousands of people stop and reflect about the transportation choices, life did not just go on.
@@WhatashameMaryJane my point is, if i don't fly it won't change a thing just like me voting for some politician won't change anything either, its just 1 vote
Airplane travel is not good, any fast moving transport done by a motor is bad: because it disconects you with the effort that you put to reach a destination. For example: When you hike to the top of the mountain you really enjoy and appreciate the views, but when you go to the top of the mountain by funicular then you kind of like the views but is not the same as going to the top by foot. So in the example going by foot and using your phisical effort allows you to really be connected with the mountain (birds, rivers, trees, views, that are in the mountain), and when you go up with a funicular the feeeling is: "meh: what's next?" . Even small mountain hiked by foot are really enjoyable. The same happens with: "airplane traveel" vs "walking or cycling" , when you walk to a destination you really enjoy the travel and the destination. For example 2000 years ago when a person walked 1000 kilometers, then that person finds a whole new world, I'm from Uruguay and in 1970 going 200 km to the east coast was an adventure, nowadays you can go by car in 2 hours, so you don't enjoy the destination and you don't have an adventure. Same happen when I go by bicycle like 100 km, I really enjoy the adventure, I feel like I'm one of those explorers (Charles Darwin, Humboldt, Columbus, etc). I think that travel is something that should be done with physical effort, doing so is not necessary to go to other continent (like from Europe to America) to enjoy and discover new things.
You're actually not! You relies 73k people have to tune in your channel which requires energy in fact you require more energy than the 80% of the world.
1. they don’t have to, and they don’t - check on views. 2. please tell me how much energy is used by MJs customers? Tipp: it’s for sure less than one fully charged Alfa 147 needed until next stop at its gas station… 🥱 for 4 years of WASMJ in total.
I don’t really take planes for a big phobia of mine which is flying. I’ve done it before just I don’t like it because I’m so glued to to my seat that I am just white as a ghost. I am more of a water person as boats and water just appeal to me and the fact that I live in Florida where you are pretty much on the water somewhere every weekend. You learn to swim before the age of 3 and you can outrun an alligator by age 4. You literally live on the water down here. I don’t mind the fuel consumption on planes as they are trying to switch to more environmentally friendly alternatives like soy or recycled oils from fast food places which burn exactly the same way just less carbon is outputed. It’s called biodiesel and I’ve been hearing good things about it.
"Ask yourself how sustainable a business is" So how is air transport sustainable?
Buying a different cleaning product makes a difference but choosing to travel thousands of km make no difference?
If nothing changes nothing will change.
How much change to the environment does making your on cosmetics make?
How much change to the environment does making reducing your air travel make?
is just having the warm fuzzy feeling what is important rather than actually achieving anything?
I agree -- for most of us, the sustainable efforts any one individual takes in their day-to-day lives won't change the environment. There are many things I do that would be considered somewhat sustainable, like riding my bicycle, taking public transportation every day to work, having reusable water bottles, re-using canvas bags for groceries, and recycling pop/cat cans at the scrap yard. While I understand that these things have a degree of sustainability, my motives are usually more driven because 1) I just happen to like doing these things, and 2) they often save me extra cost on little things.
But if millions of individuals do all those sustainable habits, then the environment will change for the better.
Hmm... I kind of don't share your point of view here. The first one in particular: Plane demand has already fallen in Europe which currently leads to a stronger train network. It's not all about boycotting the plane industry but also about supporting more environmentally friendly alternatives. And we can definitely see that change of mind in the public. Of course that's not possible for all routes, such as going intercontinental. But I think we should all try to reduce our flights as much as we can.
plane demand has not really fallen in europe. The air traffic has fallen because of covid, but it's already going back to it's pre covid values. The base-scenario of the EUROCONTROL 7-year forcast published in october 2021 showed that the air traffic will full recover (compared with 2019 traffic) at the end of 2023. And the extimations actually changed in favour of a more optimistic scenario. So the traffic lowered because of covid, but the demand is the same. And before covid the demand raised continously for so many years that I highly doubt it will stop raising now.
I agree with you. Maybe I explained myself poorly in some parts of the video?
@@WhatashameMaryJane I think consumerism matters, but I also see where companies are pushing the responsibility towards us. I could agree with your final conclusion.
Non puoi cambiare la società. Per cambiarla dovresti cambiare prima gli individui che sono affamati di comforts e benessere. Ma non è possibile. Tutte le specie viventi tendono al comfort=benessere. Putroppo gli umani a differenza degli animali identificano il loro benessere non solo nei beni di sussistenza ma anche in migliaia di cose/prodotti assolutamente superflui, e si inventano qualsiasi giustificazione pur di sentirsi liberi di comprare, consumare, viaggiare, divertirsi e tutto il resto. E come se non bastasse gli umani tendono anche ad accumulare i beni oltre il necessario. Pensa ai collezionisti o a quelli che accumulano beni al fine di venderli e trarne un utile. Io stimo chi ha il coraggio di fare delle scelte personali, di rinunciare a dei comforts (come prendere l'aereo), a chi decide di fare un passo indietro in questa società di consumi sfrenati perchè sente il dovere morale di farlo. Ciao
Ciao Sandro. Non mi trovi d’accordo sulla dinamica individui-società. Non credo nemmeno che sia vero che tutte le specie tendono al comfort. Tutte le specie tendono alla sopravvivenza, la nostra è una delle poche che tende al benessere. Mi fermo qui perché l’argomento è amplissimo e utilizzo già i miei video per condividere la mia opinione in proposito. Però grazie per il contributo, apprezzo molto ricevere opinioni diverse. Sarebbe bello discuterne a quattr’occhi.
@@WhatashameMaryJane Che le tutte le specie tendano al comfort è stata una mia esagerazione, un'esasperazione del concetto.
La sopravvivenza non la definirei una "tendenza", ma come la scontata necessità di base perchè tutto il resto abbia luogo. E' la conditio sine qua non. La ricerca del benessere inutile (oltre una ragionevole necessità), dei comforts come li chiamo io, è quello che ci frega in termini ambientali. La ricerca esasperata del piacere materiale e psicologico nell'acquisto di un bene o di un servizio, è cio che ci porta, che mi porta, ad avere oltre il necessario per la nostra, per la mia felicità. E' una forma di compensazione di qualcos'altro?
Io non ho mai comprato un'auto inquinante per la "sopravvivenza", ma potrei dire in modo superficiale di averlo fatto per necessità. Ma a guardar bene quella necessità (di spostamento verso il luogo di lavoro) era solo il desiderio/bisogno di un maggior comfort rispetto all'uso dei mezzi pubblici. Perchè spendere 3 ore sui mezzi pubblici se in 30 minuti con l'auto risolvo il problema? Perchè pedalare mezz'ora con la bici per fare la spesa se posso fare la stessa cosa in 5 minuti con l'auto (e faticare meno)? Ora se mi guardo attorno vedo una casa piena di cose inutili che non ho mai acquistato allo scopo di garantirmi la sopravvivenza. Se indago sui processi produttivi (praticamente tutti in qualche modo inquinanti e deleteri per l'ambiente) che stanno dietro a questi oggetti che mi circondano, dall'estrazione di una materia prima, al trasporto della stessa, all'energia che è servita per trasformarla in un bene di consumo, alla distribuzione del prodotto finito e mille altri passaggi, mi sento per forza anch'io responsabile e mi viene male. E quanti aerei ho preso anch'io, e quanti viaggi in auto ho fatto solo per il piacere di farli? L'argomento non è amplissimo, è infinito. Continua assolutamente a fare i video. Ciao e grazie
I feel guilty so I don't do it much. If you want to feel good about your impact on the planet you should logically start from largest to smallest impact. Flights are by far the largest impact you can have (outside of having Children). It's also hard for many in the west to give up - just like beef. I feel like "the experience" economy has become a mad consumerist fetish where you must visit every city, have every experience rather than being grounded with nourishing relationships and connections to where you actually live
In my opinion, a minimum margin whose amount is linked to the product life solves all problems.
A 'washing machine' that is five times as expensive is not more expensive if it also lasts five times as long. It's about reversing planned obsolescence.
Turning away from selling products by price.
A socialist idea, isn't it?
It reduces the demand for resources to one-fifth of the original demand.
This also applies to working time - with full wages. The initial need of capital can be done just like today by our central banks.
Quantity becomes quality, money doesn't care.
What do you think?
I agree that we certainly need to make planned obsolescence illegal. Is that what you meant, or you would suggest reversing it in another way?
Can you explain “turning away from selling products by price”? How would you sell them?
For example I would promote the sell of a product linked to the sell of a guarantee/replacement/reparation for a certain number of years. You pay more for a washing machine for example, but you get free repairs by the company’s technicians for n years.
@@WhatashameMaryJane Today, products are primarily sold on the basis of price. This means that the 'same' washing machine is bought where it is cheapest. Basically, it can be said that the manufacturing costs are comparably high. We will leave out the details here for the sake of understanding.
How can I bring a product to market that costs me exactly the same as my competitors?
By reducing my margin.
What does reducing profit mean for me, in terms of a single product?
Quite simply, if I can only earn half on one washing machine, then I have to sell two of them.
How do I do that? By halving the duration of use of the washing machine. Planned obsolescence.
If I say that a washing machine has to last 25 years, then I have to make sure that the manufacturer makes the same amount of money as if he sells five washing machines that last 5 years.
Minimum wages are not everything, we also need a minimum profit margin.
If a Chinese worker only has to make one pair of pants instead of two, he only has to do half as much work in China.
That only works if you have to pay twice as much for one pair of pants. Which is possible if I can wear the pants twice as long.
Ideally, we will go back to the tailor in the future.
The point is not to reduce profit, but to require fewer resources.
Prohibitions
I do not like bans. Nobody likes prohibitions, right?
Instead, it's about the better alternative. It gives me a choice. I keep my power of choice instead of losing it to a ban.
Example: Instead of banning cars, it makes more sense to make buses and trains available to all citizens for free.
Who's going to use a car if they don't really need it?
Problem solved.
Warum sollte ich fünf Waschmaschinen bauen, wenn ich mit einer Waschmaschine das gleiche verdiene?
Dazu muss ich als Unternehmen die Möglichkeit haben.
Klar?
It's interesting when one loves to talk about what they are doing to impact climate change.......Until it affects them personally and takes away their own agenda, then not so much. Yes I am referring to 9:17.
Great video and practical solutions. Green is the new Red!
I think the notion that the global community will suddenly want to become less connected in a substantiated way is both unrealistic and counter-progressive. We, as humans, have got better connected since our origins. This would be the first time in history we’ve gone the other way. It’s just not going to happen. There are other ways to support growth in a less harmful way. Rail could take over domestic flight demand (though here in the UK rail is 3x the cost of flying!) And plane manufacturers are researching hydrogen and other green tech. Though, ironically, they will need us to by plane tickets to fund that research.
Change the system? But how are you going to accomplice that? Let's be honest, you just aren't. Most you are doing is to raise awareness... to change people's habits. But yet you don't mind flying, which is very very polluting. Your flights on their own won't make a big difference, but what if all people think like you?
This is all very vague, I am sorry. We do need to change our consumption. We can admit that we aren't 100% able to do that, but let's just be honest about that.
What if is not helpful.
Coulda, woulda, woulda....
Whoever sits back and lets others do their work would do well to impose some criticism on the "others" as well?
How do you want to save the world?
Gas from Russia through a pipe was a seemingly acceptable way to deliver gas, "naturally sourced" gas.
Fracked gas is an environmental nightmare. Then shipping the dirty gas halfway around the world and then using an empty ship to pick it up again is... pretty stupid.
MJ is just scratching the surface of our real problems.
If we don’t change, we will die. Our earth doesn’t care about humans, we have to care about us on our own.
Life on earth works without us.
Clever thoughts.
I work for a company that offsets carbon emissions (CO2) by diverting waste from landfill and processing it without emitting gases. We generate carbon credits for each tonne of CO2 that we reduce. We then sell these credits to a polluter such as an airline. In summary, airlines are financially penalized by our government for polluting, so instead they purchase credits from us to avoid heavier fines. The airline emits 1 tonne of CO2 and we reduce 1 tonne of CO2, offsetting emissions. We are a small business but hope to make a bigger dent in the coming years. You can't get rid of all emissions so this is why governments and companies like ours play a crucial role in healing the environment.
Hi Leonidas. The small company you work for should be praised for that. Nonetheless, I have mixed feelings about the whole system of carbon compensation. Just like I have for recycling. They're great practices but they're often taken as the n.1 thing one should do to cover their environmental footprint. The real deal is to reduce your footprint, not to cover the traces.
You don't need to travel the world to learn new things.
Complimenti Mary Jane...Argomenti importanti ma che fanno riflettere e nel nostro piccolo possiamo fare qualcosa...Sei brava...ciao Gianluca
New research and technology have paved the way to less waste and energy consumption in many areas, but human population growth may be counterproductive to the gains.
In the aviation industry, shorter flights should be shifted to rail transportation, as was stated by KLM, but in the US the rail system is primitive, and has an inefficient network that cannot compete with Europe.
Great video, i’m sorry because i can only imagine the effort put into making this kind of videos, i feel like you deserve a lot more. Hope you the best❤
Thank you Manuelito! ❤️
@@WhatashameMaryJane In Norway its just an excuse for the gov to squeeze the average norwegian of more money re : airplane tax , little to do with saving the earth
Hi Mary Jane 👋 - One of the leading environmental activists in the world is Al Gore who travels via his own private jet. It allows him to go to many places where commercial flights are not viable. It clearly also affords him the luxury of avoiding airliners & allows him the convenience to be in California in the afternoon & back in bed in Tennessee at night. It's a perk he's earned for years of service & advocacy. Now , of course there are others with a different take ..
I don't know Al Gore all that much, but I bet his private plane is certainly a very controversial issue.
Greta Thunberg is just as guilty when it comes to air travel along with the many trees that are killed to manufacture her books 👍
While Al Gore likes to preach carbon footprint, he actually has one of the largest footprints of anybody - it is well documented.
Eviro ment?
greta thunberg took a yacht/boat to america some time ago to avoid flying
that plane from sweden left for new york without her anyways and still flies the same route
life goes on
That means absolutely nothing. She's a public figure and her gesture was symbolic. She made thousands of people stop and reflect about the transportation choices, life did not just go on.
@@WhatashameMaryJane my point is, if i don't fly it won't change a thing
just like me voting for some politician won't change anything either, its just 1 vote
@@TL.... But I already covered your point in my video, I don’t understand why you’re commenting on this
@@TL.... every single vote counts, always.
@@Qwerty8 not in politics when all the candidates are corrupt and it makes no difference who is in power
Airplane travel is not good, any fast moving transport done by a motor is bad: because it disconects you with the effort that you put to reach a destination.
For example:
When you hike to the top of the mountain you really enjoy and appreciate the views, but when you go to the top of the mountain by funicular then you kind of like the views but is not the same as going to the top by foot.
So in the example going by foot and using your phisical effort allows you to really be connected with the mountain (birds, rivers, trees, views, that are in the mountain), and when you go up with a funicular the feeeling is: "meh: what's next?" . Even small mountain hiked by foot are really enjoyable.
The same happens with: "airplane traveel" vs "walking or cycling" , when you walk to a destination you really enjoy the travel and the destination. For example 2000 years ago when a person walked 1000 kilometers, then that person finds a whole new world, I'm from Uruguay and in 1970 going 200 km to the east coast was an adventure, nowadays you can go by car in 2 hours, so you don't enjoy the destination and you don't have an adventure.
Same happen when I go by bicycle like 100 km, I really enjoy the adventure, I feel like I'm one of those explorers (Charles Darwin, Humboldt, Columbus, etc).
I think that travel is something that should be done with physical effort, doing so is not necessary to go to other continent (like from Europe to America) to enjoy and discover new things.
You're actually not! You relies 73k people have to tune in your channel which requires energy in fact you require more energy than the 80% of the world.
I'm watching using solar energh. Does that help?
1. they don’t have to, and they don’t - check on views.
2. please tell me how much energy is used by MJs customers? Tipp: it’s for sure less than one fully charged Alfa 147 needed until next stop at its gas station… 🥱 for 4 years of WASMJ in total.
She is not doing BTC - right?
@@karleken2009 yes it helps ❤️
I don’t really take planes for a big phobia of mine which is flying. I’ve done it before just I don’t like it because I’m so glued to to my seat that I am just white as a ghost. I am more of a water person as boats and water just appeal to me and the fact that I live in Florida where you are pretty much on the water somewhere every weekend. You learn to swim before the age of 3 and you can outrun an alligator by age 4. You literally live on the water down here. I don’t mind the fuel consumption on planes as they are trying to switch to more environmentally friendly alternatives like soy or recycled oils from fast food places which burn exactly the same way just less carbon is outputed. It’s called biodiesel and I’ve been hearing good things about it.
stop feeling guilty by not flying when you don't absolutely have to. Vacations are not one of those reasons......