Face it, without air travel the world would be a very different place, and probably would not be able to function properly. People would not be able to visit and experience the vast number of cultures that exist, and most country economys would be severley effected, seeings as the number of visitors effects the, especially those countries that have to rely on tourists.
Yes, half of my relatives are on the other side of the world and without air travel I wouldn’t be able to see them. Even then, I have only seen them roughly 10 times in my lifetime due to the expense and time/hassle it takes to get there. If companies like Oasis are going to be offering low fares for long haul, it means people like myself would be able to see relatives living abroad a lot more often – which would be fantastic.
However, yes, it is plain to see that cheaper fares encourage more people to travel meaning more jets in the air. BUT (as I think I argued in a previous thread), jet engine manufacturers are pushing the limits of economics and are producing cleaner, more efficient engines for new aircraft all the time.
In the mean time however, the world’s populations is growing at a somewhat out of control rate and with this people are (generally) becoming lazier spurred on by advancements in technology. A result of this? One such example is the amount of people world-wide wanting to drive to make trips easier and faster. How many people do you know that take their car to the shops, only round the corner?
As I said, this is just an example and councils are trying to kerb this trend in many countries by encouraging park&rides, car sharing, cheap and readily available public transport. But if the environmentalists continue to harp on about “destructive air travel,” I hope they are also giving the automotive industry just as much grief – if not more. How often to car manufacturers introduce a next generation, ultra efficient engines to power the MILLIONS of cars they churn out?
Sign In
