In a move revealing just how globe-sprawling the Climate Cult canards have been, New Zealand’s major passenger airline is pulling back from plans to use “sustainable aviation fuels” instead of diesel-based jet fuel in their planes.
Prompting a few questions, such as, “What are ‘sustainable aviation fuels?” “Why are these cost-prohibitive?” and “Why is this indicative of a globe-sprawling problem?”
Angela Symons offers first-blush details, via EuroNews:
“Air New Zealand scrapped its 2030 carbon emissions reduction targets this week, citing delays in building new planes, a lack of alternative fuel and ‘challenging’ regulations and policies.”
And even a booster of both the “Anthropogenic Climate Change” canard and supporter of government schemes and diktats, the group called “Stay Grounded,” has admitted the truth.
“’It’s highly likely that we’ll see more airlines abandoning their emissions reduction goals as it becomes clear that the silver bullet they’re relying on - the use of so-called ‘SAF’ [sustainable aviation fuel] - is not feasible at anything close to the scale that would be needed.’”
“Sustainable aviation fuel” – or “SAF” – being the Newspeak term applied to “non-petroleum” fuels derived from things like used cooking lipids and corn-ethanol, fuel that politicians and their cozy “climate change” friends call “green” simply because the sources are not petrol-based, but which still require inputs of human work, collection, refining, transport, and more.
Such costs for so-called “alternatives” often are hidden by the promoters of the Climate Change canard, even as government policy and rhetoric push various industries to drop real market considerations and adopt the fake “green” schemes.
And part of the rhetorical dance comes in the political practice of establishing a fake, so-called “consensus,” then using that as cover for also-artificial political “agreements,” to which the politicians then claim people must “adhere,” or for “guidelines” by which the politicians claim they must steer – in corrupt, fascist fashion – what should be a free market.
Thus, New Zealand’s political class uses the “don’t question it” term “Science Based Targets initiative” as cover for its witch-doctoring.
Notes Symons:
“New Zealand’s national carrier is one of the country’s biggest companies by revenue. Its withdrawal from the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) was the highest-profile reversal yet of an airline’s commitments to a UN framework for corporations to stay on track to meet the Paris Agreement on emissions reductions.”
And there’s that “pyramid of propaganda” – the fakery of claiming CO2 is causing a climate catastrophe (something that is not proven, as I have noted numerous times for MRCTV), embraced by a gathering of politicians and cronies in Paris, circa 2015, and, though not a Treaty in any legal sense as we know it in the US, utilized by politicians to act as a “standard” to which they “must conform,” by imposing energy diktats, showering tax money on special plans and products, and promoting additional fantasies and government-propaganda.
Resulting in this example, which isn’t isolated to New Zealand.
As Symons writes, the people who actually work in the air-carrier field recognize that the political plan isn’t feasible (unless, as some crony carriers might prefer, the air travel industry gets government subsidies to adopt the new fuels):
“It highlights the hurdles facing carriers and policymakers in cutting aviation emissions.
‘If even Air New Zealand can't do it, it kind of cements the reality that reducing emissions from aviation is an impossible task under the current technical regime,’ says James Higham, a sustainable tourism expert at Griffith University in Australia.”
Ahh, yes. “Sustainable tourism.” If markets are allowed to function, the profit-loss/benefit-cost system reveals what is “sustainable.” But, despite this flash of seeming market-based decision-making, such real market operation is not exactly the position of Air New Zealand. They’re merely “delaying” their plans, in a tactic that clearly indicates their attempt to suck-up to the political gang that can “regulate” them out of business.
Even as they recognize economic reality, they still play the rhetorical game.
“Tuesday’s (July 30) update was a sharp turnaround from a 2022 announcement by Air New Zealand in which it declared itself the second carrier in the world to have its plans validated by the UN’s Science Based Targets initiative aviation framework.
It pledged a 28.9 per cent reduction in carbon emissions by 2030, from a 2019 baseline, with a 16.3 per cent drop in absolute emissions.
So what went wrong?
The airline - which was led until 2019 by the now-Prime Minister of New Zealand, Christopher Luxon - was meant to begin reporting on its 2030 emissions targets during this financial year.
It is now revising its near-term target in line with current challenges.”
Those “challenges” being real market factors like efficiency, fuel availability and cost, engine-retooling, and through-put/power-per-gallon measurements.
All, for an agenda that isn’t based on caring for the consumer, but caring about political power-plays and propaganda.
“Air New Zealand said it was still committed to a target of net zero carbon emissions by 2050, in line with the Paris Agreement.
The carrier would establish new ‘near-term’ emissions reduction targets that would ‘better reflect the challenges relating to aircraft and alternative jet fuel availability’, CEO Greg Foran said in a written statement.”
If those “alternative jet fuels” were economically beneficial, participants in the market would make them more available, but, just as the US government has artificially stimulated the “market for ethanol,” it takes government diktats – aka “regulations” – and subsidies (such as those pushing “electric vehicles”) to fake some facsimile of market value.
Related: SEC Forced To “Halt” Plan To Make Businesses “Report Climate Burden”
The New Zealand Climate Cult is not ending its ritualism, and the same goes for the larger cult, worldwide.
Some digging reveals that in 2022, the European Parliament drafted a target/mandate of 85 percent “sustainable” aviation fuel by 2050, with a staggered “reference point” for fuel content in 2034.
And, of course, the plan includes subsidies, subsidies that will be sourced through government taking money via the EU levying “penalties” on users of petrochemicals, and will be thrown into:
“… a Sustainable Aviation Fund from 2023 to 2050 to accelerate the decarbonisation of the aviation sector and support investment in sustainable aviation fuels, innovative aircraft propulsion technologies, or research for new engines. The Fund would be beefed-up by the penalties generated by the enforcement of these rules and from 50% of the revenues of the auctioning of aviation emission allowances under the EU Emission Trading System.”
For more on the fakery of the “carbon trading” game that U.S. and international politicians and banksters have created, readers can see my work at MRCTV.
It might come in handy as the E.U., U.S., and New Zealand political forces keep pushing their artificial, anti-market preferences on people – preferences that steal money from others, steal opportunities, and impose fraudulent “goals” and paradigms that could not attract voluntary participants in the free market.
