<< WOMAN ABUSED ~ MAIN ~ SEA PLASTIC SAVES LIVES >>

SEATS EMPTY

At the very least, they could’ve taken Al Gore:

British Airways has sparked an environmental row by flying a jumbo jet 6,000 miles to Hong Kong without a single passenger on board.

The Boeing 747 made the 11-hour trip manned by just four flightdeck crew, while all 300 seats behind them remained empty.

During its journey from Heathrow, BA Flight 0027 burned a massive 140 tons of fuel – the equivalent of filling 5,400 family-sized cars – and emitted 329 tons of CO2.

None of that matters. The important thing is, were its lights on?

Posted by Tim B. on 03/17/2008 at 01:05 PM
  1. In the minds of Warmenistas, an aircraft can sit on the tarmac until enough passengers come to fill it up. It’s not like it’s part of a schedule and has to get to where another bunch of passengers are waiting to board it.

    Posted by Dave S. on 2008 03 17 at 01:35 PM • permalink

  2. Dave S., don’t be silly.  That’s logical thought processes, something anathema to many of these folks.  Remember, these are the people who have seized upon dodgy science and dodgier celebrities and then based their entire world view on it.  Rationality is not their strong suit.

    Posted by MikeTheLibrarian on 2008 03 17 at 01:42 PM • permalink

  3. The important thing is, were its lights on?

    The lights were on, but it’s okay since the bulbs were those curvey Earth-friendly ones. The important thing is, did the crew smoke?

    Posted by Deborah Leigh on 2008 03 17 at 01:44 PM • permalink

  4. Gore would have needed two seats. Plus the rest of the plane to haul his Gaia-hugging sycophants.

    Posted by Gary from Jersey on 2008 03 17 at 02:26 PM • permalink

  5. One advantage of flying an empty aircraft is the reduced risk of “blue ice deliveries“.  That’s gotta count for something with the greenies, no?

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2008 03 17 at 02:37 PM • permalink

  6. Evidently they think planes just teleport to HK to fly back to Britain on their normal schedules?

    Posted by Sigivald on 2008 03 17 at 04:11 PM • permalink

  7. I’m sure British Airways was delighted to burn all that fuel for nothing.

    Posted by Dminor on 2008 03 17 at 04:40 PM • permalink

  8. A suggestion for North Korea’s tourism bureau: “If you care for the environment, come to North Korea, where every hour is Earth Hour!”

    Posted by Dminor on 2008 03 17 at 05:12 PM • permalink

  9. Yet when self-publicist Sir Richard Branson flew an empty 747 from London the Amsterdam, he was applauded. The difference was his plane was powered by bio-fuel made out of food.

    Posted by Contrail on 2008 03 17 at 05:20 PM • permalink

  10. #9
    Bio-fuel made out of food.
    Good, best use of airline “food”.

    Posted by kae on 2008 03 17 at 05:47 PM • permalink

  11. I am unwise, but curious, in matters chemistry.

    How can burning 140 tons of kerosene create 329 tons of co2 ?

    Posted by Pickles on 2008 03 17 at 06:06 PM • permalink

  12. #11
    Maybe they burnt the plane, too?

    Posted by kae on 2008 03 17 at 06:08 PM • permalink

  13. Yes Kaye, that would be about right I think a 747 weighs about 200 odd tons.

    Why would they burn a perfectly good plane ?

    Has Malkovich made another movie ?

    Posted by Pickles on 2008 03 17 at 06:13 PM • permalink

  14. How can burning 140 tons of kerosene create 329 tons of co2 ?

    Burning adds oxygen from the atmosphere to carbon from the fuel.

    I was one of two passengers on an Eastern Airlines L-1011 jumbo from Newark NJ to Miami FL, about a thousand miles, long ago.  You got upgraded to first class so the stewardess (short straw drawerer, I imagine) didn’t have to walk so far, two steak dinners and a free bottle of wine to take home.

    Typically these are aircraft repositioning incidents, and they throw on what odd passengers are standing around, if any are.

    Posted by rhhardin on 2008 03 17 at 06:53 PM • permalink

  15. This going to make test flights on new aircraft designs a lot more fun…

    Posted by Dan Lewis on 2008 03 17 at 07:08 PM • permalink

  16. #11

    How can burning 140 tons of kerosene create 329 tons of co2 ?

    They include the carbon emitted during transport of the kerosene, by the trucks which deliver it, by the car used by the truck drivers to get to work, by the heat used to cook the breakfast eaten by the truck driver etc.

    Don’t get me started on refining.

    Posted by Dan Lewis on 2008 03 17 at 07:11 PM • permalink

  17. #11
    I’m pretty sure some dead science guy said you can’t get something for nothing.
    Which means a shit-load of polar bears must have suffered an unexpected change of state to keep everything in balance.

    Posted by lotocoti on 2008 03 17 at 07:16 PM • permalink

  18. They should have deconstructed the thing and floated it on solar powered barges to where they needed it.
    Maybe a friendly passing whale could have assissted?

    Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2008 03 17 at 07:17 PM • permalink

  19. Positioning trips happen all the time, every airline does them. Only time the pilots get to have a little fun, with no weight and no pax.

    Posted by Ozwitch on 2008 03 17 at 08:53 PM • permalink

  20. #10 - I actually like airline food in general.  Not sure about drinking kero, though.

    #19 - Practising their 1G rolls so the drinks don’t spill.

    Posted by Razor on 2008 03 17 at 11:24 PM • permalink

  21. Tim,
    My longest living “Best Bud” makes his current living, $1,000 a day, flying empty airplanes from one hemisphere to another.  Lease planes returned, used planes delivered, whatever.
    A lot of passenger empty planes are being ferry’d round the world every day for a positive economic impact.
    Idiots!

    Posted by Mike on 2008 03 18 at 12:46 AM • permalink

  22. Phatty cancelled his booking?

    Posted by egg_ on 2008 03 18 at 01:13 AM • permalink

  23. I love it when pig-ignorant “journalists” get all hot and bothered over something they know nothing about- the procedure of positioning flights has been going on since the airline industry started, and transport would grind to a halt without it. Empty aircraft still have a schedule to meet, and pick up pax on the next leg- this also ignore the fatc that the cargo hold would’ve had any number of units and pallets on board, and would be picking up a shitload more in Honkers. Cargo flights never carry passengers. so why isn’t shit-for-brains carrying on like a pork chop over that disgraceful waste? Any space cubic meterage in the hold could be stuffed with steerage class backpackers.

    A senior BA management type told me years ago that if the passenger deck on a 200 series 747 was fully manifested it just covered the cost of kero- the hold carried the profitable part of the trip. Most airlines would be happy if they never carried another whiny tourist, pissed sports team or gaggled of unacompanied brats sugar-loaded and ready for petulance- their don’t have to feed, supply drink, provide dunnies or allocate cabin crew for cargo cans.

    Christopher Lake should be pitched into one, with concrete floaties.

    Posted by Habib on 2008 03 18 at 03:10 AM • permalink

  24. #20; Practicing their 8 point rolls ?

    Posted by dean martin on 2008 03 18 at 06:08 AM • permalink

  25. Is wasting fuel and then not buying carbon credits the enviros’ version of the mile high club?

    Posted by andycanuck on 2008 03 19 at 12:57 AM • permalink

  26. Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Members:
Login | Register | Member List

Please note: you must use a real email address to register. You will be sent an account activation email. Clicking on the url in the email will automatically activate your account. Until you do so your account will be held in the "pending" list and you won't be able to log in. All accounts that are "pending" for more than one week will be deleted.