Airlines must monitor vapour trails under new EU climate rules

I can see it now in the Headlines: "Farms must have Fart Monitoring Devices on All Livestock!"

These people are just going over the edge!

How about human farts? No one is talking about those, and they're worse for the environment. What about walrusses? How do we tackle those...?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/interactive/2023/new-zealand-cows-burps-methane-tax/

Everything I've ever read suggests they are a byproduct of the engine exhaust due to the difference in temperature. Wingtip vortices appear under extreme lift generation (e.g., high-g turn) as the water present in them condenses from gas to liquid.

Wingtips??? I call BS. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:B-17_Flying_Fortress.jpg

How about round abouts instead of Traffic lights. I’ve been diving over 3k kms throughout Portugal. In and out through cities and hiways for 6 weeks. If I saw much more than 10 traffic lights outside of Lisbon, that would be too many. Imagine that…
The third world country is here in North America. I’ve driven in Mississauga, Ontario for 1/2 hour and did more stops on Red lights than I did in 6 weeks in Portugal.

EXACTLY! Great point...but there are many more examples (...one being the 'Climate Change Tsar' flying around the world in wifey's jet.)

That was soooooo funny

To be clear, I'm not saying you shouldn't disagree with it, or that this sort of rule making is sensible. I do think that the wording of the headline and some of the article is odd/terrible when they say that they need to measure contrails, when in reality the ask will be (or should be) to measure the carbon output of aircraft operations, which is a fairly easy metric to measure (CO2 emissions by aircraft type are largely known, so estimating output based on fleet size and operational stats is basic). I think it's also important to note that this is a European issue which is a very different operating environment than the domestic US. With a far more developed rail system in most countries when compared to the US, it does seem reasonable to question which modes of transportation are the most effective...whether or not you agree with the climate aspects of it, there are definitely benefits to minimizing short haul flights within Europe where rail service is more efficient (get rid of non-profitable flights, utilize much needed crews on more advantageous routes, minimize use of inefficient RJ aircraft, etc).

Ultimately though, I think that we as a people need to be smarter about these topics in order to shape our own opinions. Whether you choose to vote for someone with an (R) or a (D) after their name on a ballot, the odds are that they know very little about these topics and we as a whole shouldn't allow their own personal agendas to shape our thinking. Personally, if someone told me that plastic pollution isn't anything to worry about before revealing that they're the CEO of a plastic manufacturing company, I probably won't trust that they're being honest and not making statements based on self interest. My point isn't to stir the pot, I'm just saying that instead of trusting what politicians tell us, we should take the time to collectively form our own opinions (which I think is actually very similar to the point you made in your comment).

Have not done any of this. But: my house is a zero energy house with net zero energy consumption. I am driving an all electric which I am charging from my solar installation. On top of that i actually produce more than I need which I sell (for Euros)

I don't and I'm not here to argue with you. But it seems that airlines will have to pay for this regardless of whether or not you and I are for or against it. What I wanted to get through, is that if airlines pay for total climate effects, then it's cheaper for them to fix contrails first.

When it comes to global climate, it goes like this, if I am wrong then we survive and thrive, if you are wrong then it's probably too late to do something about it. That's a very high risk game to play.

Hey, Einstein! It’s not a question of what’s the ideal temperature, it’s a matter of how fast the temperature is rising. We’re looking at as much as a 3°C temperature rise by the end of the century. The last time the global temperature rose 3°C was coming out of the last ice age. But that temperature rise took place over 20,000 years.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/todays-climate-change-proves-much-faster-than-changes-in-past-65-million-years/