'Awkward' is more or less an understatement here, because not only the presenter took a return flight back which is seen as a 'crime' against the planet due to taking double the CO2 emissions with the risk of getting flight-shamed, it was all for interviewing the a̶c̶t̶o̶r̶ activist herself.
The greenest thing the BBC could have done was to arrange a Skype/FaceTime interview. But instead, in the eyes of 'Queen Greta', the BBC presenter has committed 'CO2 treason' with a return flight which is now double the emissions of a single flight, rather than sailing for two weeks like Greta did. Perhaps Greta thinks its practical for all of us, but it is not I'm afraid and until flights become greener, then flights it has to be for long trips.
But a return flight for a interview with Greta? That is beyond comical for the BBC to do this.
Do you think she's an actor and/or wrong for trying to make a stand and make people think about reducing carbon emissions?
Also, I think going straight to the 'oh, well clearly she thinks everyone needs to sail a yacht instead of flying now' route is a bit childish. All you need to do is think for a second and reduce where you can, which obviously the BBC didn't do here.
> Do you think she's an actor and/or wrong for trying to make a stand and make people think about reducing carbon emissions?
Clearly her scripted speeches, her constant berating to those in power is not only childish, but isn't going to change anyone's minds about cutting emissions. Everyone else is already developing practical/technological solutions to cutting down CO2 emissions like increasing the use of wind turbines, cycling, electric vehicles etc.
I favor those practical solutions that significantly challenge climate change. Her means of changing peoples minds about climate change are by having controlled photos of her on trains, deserts and crowded buses by her aides which gives me the impression of others puppeteering her message and sculpting it like a complete pantomime.
So yes, she is an 'actor' used by climate change extremists.
Your interpretation is contrary to the presented text, which ends:
> Ms Sands said: "Greta is not actually judgmental towards individuals, accepting that other people will not all conform to her high standards and asking only for people to do what they can."
Note that 'CO2 treason' is a phrase you just invented, and not a quote from her. Nor does a DDG or Google search find preexisting uses of that phrase.
While the first relevant hits to "Queen Greta" on DDG link me to The Daily Stormer. Did you make up that term yourself, or are you really spreading American far-right neo-Nazi memes?
You also wrote "sailing for two weeks like Greta did" which is an obtuse interpretation at best.
It's a 2 hour flight from London to Stockholm. Adding travel time to/from the respective airports, plus security, call it no more than 7 hours.
Taking trains from London to Stockholm takes 27 hours. No sailing involved. You'll want to add 8 hours for a layover somewhere to sleep, so call it 35 hours.
(There doesn't appear to be a passenger ferry service from the UK to Sweden. A near daily freight ferry takes 26 hours from Immingham to Gothenburg, plus connection time on both sides.)
4 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 17.0 ms ] threadThe greenest thing the BBC could have done was to arrange a Skype/FaceTime interview. But instead, in the eyes of 'Queen Greta', the BBC presenter has committed 'CO2 treason' with a return flight which is now double the emissions of a single flight, rather than sailing for two weeks like Greta did. Perhaps Greta thinks its practical for all of us, but it is not I'm afraid and until flights become greener, then flights it has to be for long trips.
But a return flight for a interview with Greta? That is beyond comical for the BBC to do this.
Do you think she's an actor and/or wrong for trying to make a stand and make people think about reducing carbon emissions?
Also, I think going straight to the 'oh, well clearly she thinks everyone needs to sail a yacht instead of flying now' route is a bit childish. All you need to do is think for a second and reduce where you can, which obviously the BBC didn't do here.
Clearly her scripted speeches, her constant berating to those in power is not only childish, but isn't going to change anyone's minds about cutting emissions. Everyone else is already developing practical/technological solutions to cutting down CO2 emissions like increasing the use of wind turbines, cycling, electric vehicles etc.
I favor those practical solutions that significantly challenge climate change. Her means of changing peoples minds about climate change are by having controlled photos of her on trains, deserts and crowded buses by her aides which gives me the impression of others puppeteering her message and sculpting it like a complete pantomime.
So yes, she is an 'actor' used by climate change extremists.
> Ms Sands said: "Greta is not actually judgmental towards individuals, accepting that other people will not all conform to her high standards and asking only for people to do what they can."
Note that 'CO2 treason' is a phrase you just invented, and not a quote from her. Nor does a DDG or Google search find preexisting uses of that phrase.
While the first relevant hits to "Queen Greta" on DDG link me to The Daily Stormer. Did you make up that term yourself, or are you really spreading American far-right neo-Nazi memes?
You also wrote "sailing for two weeks like Greta did" which is an obtuse interpretation at best.
It's a 2 hour flight from London to Stockholm. Adding travel time to/from the respective airports, plus security, call it no more than 7 hours.
Taking trains from London to Stockholm takes 27 hours. No sailing involved. You'll want to add 8 hours for a layover somewhere to sleep, so call it 35 hours.
(There doesn't appear to be a passenger ferry service from the UK to Sweden. A near daily freight ferry takes 26 hours from Immingham to Gothenburg, plus connection time on both sides.)