Originally Posted by
Beagle
Have to agree to disagree on this one janner. Whilst you make a valid point about the modest number of people visiting Antarctica consider that of the millions of people that visit N.Z. perhaps something like one million visit Fiordland or at least well over one million could easily access it from their trip to Queenstown.
This number could be expanded considerably, (i.e. there is a valid present and real reason to promote Fiordland) and as such this represents a commercial promotion not just a lot of environmental greenwashing and they're not stepping on thousands of people's toes doing it.
Riding snowmobiles for fun and burning hydrocarbons in Antarctica isn't a good look in that video, sort of scoring an own goal on the environmental message in my opinion.
Chris Luxon needs a serious reality check. Fact AIR's estimated fuel consumption off their latest fuel hedge disclosure for 1H FY19 is 4,800,000 barrels of fuel. If that continues to 2H FY19 they will burn 1,526,400,000 liters of jet fuel in FY19. (No that figure is not a typo, over 1.5 billion liters of jet fuel !).
No amount of greenwashing can disguise the fact that all airlines are HUGE polluters.
AIR should stick to messaging that they have a young relatively fuel efficient fleet, that makes FAR more difference than anything else they can or will do.
As for resuming flights over Antarctica...you must be kidding surely ! I don't think the N.Z. public would ever have the stomach for that.
P.S. The number of people that died climbing Everest or who died on the roads that year is completely irrelevant.
Just let sleeping wolves lie otherwise AIR will get bitten.