Menu
Menu
One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
It is very concerning that United States<\/a> airlines are actively opposing the efforts of those who monitor the environmental damage due to aeroplane pollution. Recently it was explored that the meeting between US officials was a meeting with the European Commission<\/a>. The conversation between them was secretly hidden. There is no official record of this meeting. So this move raises serious concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
The government needs to carefully consider the bigger picture to prevent worsening regional conflicts and to find lasting solutions for national security.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the debate over the United state and French military bases in Niger","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-debate-over-the-united-state-and-french-military-bases-in-niger","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7151","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7146,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_date_gmt":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_content":"\n It is very concerning that United States<\/a> airlines are actively opposing the efforts of those who monitor the environmental damage due to aeroplane pollution. Recently it was explored that the meeting between US officials was a meeting with the European Commission<\/a>. The conversation between them was secretly hidden. There is no official record of this meeting. So this move raises serious concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
It is also crucial for Niger to consider long-term peace and stability. Don\u2019t pay attention to the quick gains. The main purpose of the deal is to create lasting stability rather than immediate benefits. With this deal, Niger can develop a more peaceful environment and secure future.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The government needs to carefully consider the bigger picture to prevent worsening regional conflicts and to find lasting solutions for national security.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the debate over the United state and French military bases in Niger","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-debate-over-the-united-state-and-french-military-bases-in-niger","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7151","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7146,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_date_gmt":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_content":"\n It is very concerning that United States<\/a> airlines are actively opposing the efforts of those who monitor the environmental damage due to aeroplane pollution. Recently it was explored that the meeting between US officials was a meeting with the European Commission<\/a>. The conversation between them was secretly hidden. There is no official record of this meeting. So this move raises serious concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
So, setting up foreign military bases in Niger could only increase tensions, especially in nearby French-speaking countries. The Pentagon\u2019s data also pointed out that the Western military strategies to deal with terrorism in the Sahel region have not been working well or are outdated. No meaningful results are achieved with these methods. Also the problems remain the same on ground level.\u00a0 Leaders requested the Niger government to pay full attention to the potential long-term results of such deals.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is also crucial for Niger to consider long-term peace and stability. Don\u2019t pay attention to the quick gains. The main purpose of the deal is to create lasting stability rather than immediate benefits. With this deal, Niger can develop a more peaceful environment and secure future.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The government needs to carefully consider the bigger picture to prevent worsening regional conflicts and to find lasting solutions for national security.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the debate over the United state and French military bases in Niger","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-debate-over-the-united-state-and-french-military-bases-in-niger","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7151","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7146,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_date_gmt":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_content":"\n It is very concerning that United States<\/a> airlines are actively opposing the efforts of those who monitor the environmental damage due to aeroplane pollution. Recently it was explored that the meeting between US officials was a meeting with the European Commission<\/a>. The conversation between them was secretly hidden. There is no official record of this meeting. So this move raises serious concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Additionally, the base operations might contaminate local water sources, affecting both drinking water and agriculture. These environmental issues can be harmful to farming communities and indigenous people who rely on the land for their livelihood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, setting up foreign military bases in Niger could only increase tensions, especially in nearby French-speaking countries. The Pentagon\u2019s data also pointed out that the Western military strategies to deal with terrorism in the Sahel region have not been working well or are outdated. No meaningful results are achieved with these methods. Also the problems remain the same on ground level.\u00a0 Leaders requested the Niger government to pay full attention to the potential long-term results of such deals.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is also crucial for Niger to consider long-term peace and stability. Don\u2019t pay attention to the quick gains. The main purpose of the deal is to create lasting stability rather than immediate benefits. With this deal, Niger can develop a more peaceful environment and secure future.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The government needs to carefully consider the bigger picture to prevent worsening regional conflicts and to find lasting solutions for national security.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the debate over the United state and French military bases in Niger","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-debate-over-the-united-state-and-french-military-bases-in-niger","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7151","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7146,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_date_gmt":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_content":"\n It is very concerning that United States<\/a> airlines are actively opposing the efforts of those who monitor the environmental damage due to aeroplane pollution. Recently it was explored that the meeting between US officials was a meeting with the European Commission<\/a>. The conversation between them was secretly hidden. There is no official record of this meeting. So this move raises serious concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Hosting foreign troops effectively impacts the income of lower-income residents. This is due to the significant rise in local prices and living costs. Also many environmental problems came to light when military bases were built and operated. For example the complexity of deforestation due to the construction process. It simply means that many trees are cut down. This also led to soil erosion in which the upper layer of the soil washed away. It also greatly impacts on the plant's growth.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Additionally, the base operations might contaminate local water sources, affecting both drinking water and agriculture. These environmental issues can be harmful to farming communities and indigenous people who rely on the land for their livelihood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, setting up foreign military bases in Niger could only increase tensions, especially in nearby French-speaking countries. The Pentagon\u2019s data also pointed out that the Western military strategies to deal with terrorism in the Sahel region have not been working well or are outdated. No meaningful results are achieved with these methods. Also the problems remain the same on ground level.\u00a0 Leaders requested the Niger government to pay full attention to the potential long-term results of such deals.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is also crucial for Niger to consider long-term peace and stability. Don\u2019t pay attention to the quick gains. The main purpose of the deal is to create lasting stability rather than immediate benefits. With this deal, Niger can develop a more peaceful environment and secure future.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The government needs to carefully consider the bigger picture to prevent worsening regional conflicts and to find lasting solutions for national security.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the debate over the United state and French military bases in Niger","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-debate-over-the-united-state-and-french-military-bases-in-niger","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7151","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7146,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_date_gmt":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_content":"\n It is very concerning that United States<\/a> airlines are actively opposing the efforts of those who monitor the environmental damage due to aeroplane pollution. Recently it was explored that the meeting between US officials was a meeting with the European Commission<\/a>. The conversation between them was secretly hidden. There is no official record of this meeting. So this move raises serious concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
\u201cEconomically, the presence of these bases could potentially divert government funds and resources away from critical areas such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure development toward maintaining and securing these military installations. This redirection of resources could stunt economic growth and exacerbate poverty in a country where much of the population already lives under challenging conditions.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Hosting foreign troops effectively impacts the income of lower-income residents. This is due to the significant rise in local prices and living costs. Also many environmental problems came to light when military bases were built and operated. For example the complexity of deforestation due to the construction process. It simply means that many trees are cut down. This also led to soil erosion in which the upper layer of the soil washed away. It also greatly impacts on the plant's growth.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Additionally, the base operations might contaminate local water sources, affecting both drinking water and agriculture. These environmental issues can be harmful to farming communities and indigenous people who rely on the land for their livelihood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, setting up foreign military bases in Niger could only increase tensions, especially in nearby French-speaking countries. The Pentagon\u2019s data also pointed out that the Western military strategies to deal with terrorism in the Sahel region have not been working well or are outdated. No meaningful results are achieved with these methods. Also the problems remain the same on ground level.\u00a0 Leaders requested the Niger government to pay full attention to the potential long-term results of such deals.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is also crucial for Niger to consider long-term peace and stability. Don\u2019t pay attention to the quick gains. The main purpose of the deal is to create lasting stability rather than immediate benefits. With this deal, Niger can develop a more peaceful environment and secure future.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The government needs to carefully consider the bigger picture to prevent worsening regional conflicts and to find lasting solutions for national security.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the debate over the United state and French military bases in Niger","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-debate-over-the-united-state-and-french-military-bases-in-niger","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7151","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7146,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_date_gmt":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_content":"\n It is very concerning that United States<\/a> airlines are actively opposing the efforts of those who monitor the environmental damage due to aeroplane pollution. Recently it was explored that the meeting between US officials was a meeting with the European Commission<\/a>. The conversation between them was secretly hidden. There is no official record of this meeting. So this move raises serious concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
According to them, <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEconomically, the presence of these bases could potentially divert government funds and resources away from critical areas such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure development toward maintaining and securing these military installations. This redirection of resources could stunt economic growth and exacerbate poverty in a country where much of the population already lives under challenging conditions.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Hosting foreign troops effectively impacts the income of lower-income residents. This is due to the significant rise in local prices and living costs. Also many environmental problems came to light when military bases were built and operated. For example the complexity of deforestation due to the construction process. It simply means that many trees are cut down. This also led to soil erosion in which the upper layer of the soil washed away. It also greatly impacts on the plant's growth.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Additionally, the base operations might contaminate local water sources, affecting both drinking water and agriculture. These environmental issues can be harmful to farming communities and indigenous people who rely on the land for their livelihood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, setting up foreign military bases in Niger could only increase tensions, especially in nearby French-speaking countries. The Pentagon\u2019s data also pointed out that the Western military strategies to deal with terrorism in the Sahel region have not been working well or are outdated. No meaningful results are achieved with these methods. Also the problems remain the same on ground level.\u00a0 Leaders requested the Niger government to pay full attention to the potential long-term results of such deals.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is also crucial for Niger to consider long-term peace and stability. Don\u2019t pay attention to the quick gains. The main purpose of the deal is to create lasting stability rather than immediate benefits. With this deal, Niger can develop a more peaceful environment and secure future.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The government needs to carefully consider the bigger picture to prevent worsening regional conflicts and to find lasting solutions for national security.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the debate over the United state and French military bases in Niger","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-debate-over-the-united-state-and-french-military-bases-in-niger","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7151","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7146,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_date_gmt":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_content":"\n It is very concerning that United States<\/a> airlines are actively opposing the efforts of those who monitor the environmental damage due to aeroplane pollution. Recently it was explored that the meeting between US officials was a meeting with the European Commission<\/a>. The conversation between them was secretly hidden. There is no official record of this meeting. So this move raises serious concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
The northern leaders are advocating for a thorough assessment of these potential impacts before making any decisions. Their goal is to ensure that the local community\u2019s interests are fully protected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to them, <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEconomically, the presence of these bases could potentially divert government funds and resources away from critical areas such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure development toward maintaining and securing these military installations. This redirection of resources could stunt economic growth and exacerbate poverty in a country where much of the population already lives under challenging conditions.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Hosting foreign troops effectively impacts the income of lower-income residents. This is due to the significant rise in local prices and living costs. Also many environmental problems came to light when military bases were built and operated. For example the complexity of deforestation due to the construction process. It simply means that many trees are cut down. This also led to soil erosion in which the upper layer of the soil washed away. It also greatly impacts on the plant's growth.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Additionally, the base operations might contaminate local water sources, affecting both drinking water and agriculture. These environmental issues can be harmful to farming communities and indigenous people who rely on the land for their livelihood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, setting up foreign military bases in Niger could only increase tensions, especially in nearby French-speaking countries. The Pentagon\u2019s data also pointed out that the Western military strategies to deal with terrorism in the Sahel region have not been working well or are outdated. No meaningful results are achieved with these methods. Also the problems remain the same on ground level.\u00a0 Leaders requested the Niger government to pay full attention to the potential long-term results of such deals.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is also crucial for Niger to consider long-term peace and stability. Don\u2019t pay attention to the quick gains. The main purpose of the deal is to create lasting stability rather than immediate benefits. With this deal, Niger can develop a more peaceful environment and secure future.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The government needs to carefully consider the bigger picture to prevent worsening regional conflicts and to find lasting solutions for national security.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the debate over the United state and French military bases in Niger","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-debate-over-the-united-state-and-french-military-bases-in-niger","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7151","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7146,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_date_gmt":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_content":"\n It is very concerning that United States<\/a> airlines are actively opposing the efforts of those who monitor the environmental damage due to aeroplane pollution. Recently it was explored that the meeting between US officials was a meeting with the European Commission<\/a>. The conversation between them was secretly hidden. There is no official record of this meeting. So this move raises serious concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
They worry that the economic costs might involve paying for the upkeep of the bases and possible disruptions to local businesses. They are also concerned about the environmental damage. Issues like pollution or any other changes might affect the local wildlife. Also the foreign troops could cause more complexities. So, it is important to think about all of these factors before signing any new agreement. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The northern leaders are advocating for a thorough assessment of these potential impacts before making any decisions. Their goal is to ensure that the local community\u2019s interests are fully protected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to them, <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEconomically, the presence of these bases could potentially divert government funds and resources away from critical areas such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure development toward maintaining and securing these military installations. This redirection of resources could stunt economic growth and exacerbate poverty in a country where much of the population already lives under challenging conditions.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Hosting foreign troops effectively impacts the income of lower-income residents. This is due to the significant rise in local prices and living costs. Also many environmental problems came to light when military bases were built and operated. For example the complexity of deforestation due to the construction process. It simply means that many trees are cut down. This also led to soil erosion in which the upper layer of the soil washed away. It also greatly impacts on the plant's growth.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Additionally, the base operations might contaminate local water sources, affecting both drinking water and agriculture. These environmental issues can be harmful to farming communities and indigenous people who rely on the land for their livelihood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, setting up foreign military bases in Niger could only increase tensions, especially in nearby French-speaking countries. The Pentagon\u2019s data also pointed out that the Western military strategies to deal with terrorism in the Sahel region have not been working well or are outdated. No meaningful results are achieved with these methods. Also the problems remain the same on ground level.\u00a0 Leaders requested the Niger government to pay full attention to the potential long-term results of such deals.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is also crucial for Niger to consider long-term peace and stability. Don\u2019t pay attention to the quick gains. The main purpose of the deal is to create lasting stability rather than immediate benefits. With this deal, Niger can develop a more peaceful environment and secure future.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The government needs to carefully consider the bigger picture to prevent worsening regional conflicts and to find lasting solutions for national security.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the debate over the United state and French military bases in Niger","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-debate-over-the-united-state-and-french-military-bases-in-niger","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7151","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7146,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_date_gmt":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_content":"\n It is very concerning that United States<\/a> airlines are actively opposing the efforts of those who monitor the environmental damage due to aeroplane pollution. Recently it was explored that the meeting between US officials was a meeting with the European Commission<\/a>. The conversation between them was secretly hidden. There is no official record of this meeting. So this move raises serious concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Nigeria receives continuous pressure from the French and US government<\/a> to sign a new defence agreement. Once they signed these deals they got all the US troops that were previously removed from the region. Leaders from northern Nigeria have raised significant concerns about this situation. They are worried about the potential economic and environmental impacts of hosting foreign military bases in their area.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n They worry that the economic costs might involve paying for the upkeep of the bases and possible disruptions to local businesses. They are also concerned about the environmental damage. Issues like pollution or any other changes might affect the local wildlife. Also the foreign troops could cause more complexities. So, it is important to think about all of these factors before signing any new agreement. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The northern leaders are advocating for a thorough assessment of these potential impacts before making any decisions. Their goal is to ensure that the local community\u2019s interests are fully protected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to them, <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEconomically, the presence of these bases could potentially divert government funds and resources away from critical areas such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure development toward maintaining and securing these military installations. This redirection of resources could stunt economic growth and exacerbate poverty in a country where much of the population already lives under challenging conditions.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Hosting foreign troops effectively impacts the income of lower-income residents. This is due to the significant rise in local prices and living costs. Also many environmental problems came to light when military bases were built and operated. For example the complexity of deforestation due to the construction process. It simply means that many trees are cut down. This also led to soil erosion in which the upper layer of the soil washed away. It also greatly impacts on the plant's growth.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Additionally, the base operations might contaminate local water sources, affecting both drinking water and agriculture. These environmental issues can be harmful to farming communities and indigenous people who rely on the land for their livelihood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, setting up foreign military bases in Niger could only increase tensions, especially in nearby French-speaking countries. The Pentagon\u2019s data also pointed out that the Western military strategies to deal with terrorism in the Sahel region have not been working well or are outdated. No meaningful results are achieved with these methods. Also the problems remain the same on ground level.\u00a0 Leaders requested the Niger government to pay full attention to the potential long-term results of such deals.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is also crucial for Niger to consider long-term peace and stability. Don\u2019t pay attention to the quick gains. The main purpose of the deal is to create lasting stability rather than immediate benefits. With this deal, Niger can develop a more peaceful environment and secure future.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The government needs to carefully consider the bigger picture to prevent worsening regional conflicts and to find lasting solutions for national security.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the debate over the United state and French military bases in Niger","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-debate-over-the-united-state-and-french-military-bases-in-niger","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7151","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7146,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_date_gmt":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_content":"\n It is very concerning that United States<\/a> airlines are actively opposing the efforts of those who monitor the environmental damage due to aeroplane pollution. Recently it was explored that the meeting between US officials was a meeting with the European Commission<\/a>. The conversation between them was secretly hidden. There is no official record of this meeting. So this move raises serious concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
When this information came into the knowledge of the local leaders, they became worried. They are anxious that it might result in increased foreign influence or unnecessary military activities in the region. They also called the Niger government and told them to carefully consider these changes. Also don't make any hasty decisions under pressure from outside forces.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nigeria receives continuous pressure from the French and US government<\/a> to sign a new defence agreement. Once they signed these deals they got all the US troops that were previously removed from the region. Leaders from northern Nigeria have raised significant concerns about this situation. They are worried about the potential economic and environmental impacts of hosting foreign military bases in their area.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n They worry that the economic costs might involve paying for the upkeep of the bases and possible disruptions to local businesses. They are also concerned about the environmental damage. Issues like pollution or any other changes might affect the local wildlife. Also the foreign troops could cause more complexities. So, it is important to think about all of these factors before signing any new agreement. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The northern leaders are advocating for a thorough assessment of these potential impacts before making any decisions. Their goal is to ensure that the local community\u2019s interests are fully protected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to them, <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEconomically, the presence of these bases could potentially divert government funds and resources away from critical areas such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure development toward maintaining and securing these military installations. This redirection of resources could stunt economic growth and exacerbate poverty in a country where much of the population already lives under challenging conditions.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Hosting foreign troops effectively impacts the income of lower-income residents. This is due to the significant rise in local prices and living costs. Also many environmental problems came to light when military bases were built and operated. For example the complexity of deforestation due to the construction process. It simply means that many trees are cut down. This also led to soil erosion in which the upper layer of the soil washed away. It also greatly impacts on the plant's growth.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Additionally, the base operations might contaminate local water sources, affecting both drinking water and agriculture. These environmental issues can be harmful to farming communities and indigenous people who rely on the land for their livelihood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, setting up foreign military bases in Niger could only increase tensions, especially in nearby French-speaking countries. The Pentagon\u2019s data also pointed out that the Western military strategies to deal with terrorism in the Sahel region have not been working well or are outdated. No meaningful results are achieved with these methods. Also the problems remain the same on ground level.\u00a0 Leaders requested the Niger government to pay full attention to the potential long-term results of such deals.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is also crucial for Niger to consider long-term peace and stability. Don\u2019t pay attention to the quick gains. The main purpose of the deal is to create lasting stability rather than immediate benefits. With this deal, Niger can develop a more peaceful environment and secure future.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The government needs to carefully consider the bigger picture to prevent worsening regional conflicts and to find lasting solutions for national security.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the debate over the United state and French military bases in Niger","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-debate-over-the-united-state-and-french-military-bases-in-niger","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7151","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7146,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_date_gmt":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_content":"\n It is very concerning that United States<\/a> airlines are actively opposing the efforts of those who monitor the environmental damage due to aeroplane pollution. Recently it was explored that the meeting between US officials was a meeting with the European Commission<\/a>. The conversation between them was secretly hidden. There is no official record of this meeting. So this move raises serious concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
The presence of the United States military forces is becoming less. This nation withdrew its troops from Chad. American soldiers also decided to leave Niger last month. This is because they got orders of departure from the new leader of the country known as the junta. In Niger the Russian military instructors have arrived instead of the United state troops. This change is also part of a new deal between the junta and Russia.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n When this information came into the knowledge of the local leaders, they became worried. They are anxious that it might result in increased foreign influence or unnecessary military activities in the region. They also called the Niger government and told them to carefully consider these changes. Also don't make any hasty decisions under pressure from outside forces.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nigeria receives continuous pressure from the French and US government<\/a> to sign a new defence agreement. Once they signed these deals they got all the US troops that were previously removed from the region. Leaders from northern Nigeria have raised significant concerns about this situation. They are worried about the potential economic and environmental impacts of hosting foreign military bases in their area.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n They worry that the economic costs might involve paying for the upkeep of the bases and possible disruptions to local businesses. They are also concerned about the environmental damage. Issues like pollution or any other changes might affect the local wildlife. Also the foreign troops could cause more complexities. So, it is important to think about all of these factors before signing any new agreement. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The northern leaders are advocating for a thorough assessment of these potential impacts before making any decisions. Their goal is to ensure that the local community\u2019s interests are fully protected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to them, <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEconomically, the presence of these bases could potentially divert government funds and resources away from critical areas such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure development toward maintaining and securing these military installations. This redirection of resources could stunt economic growth and exacerbate poverty in a country where much of the population already lives under challenging conditions.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Hosting foreign troops effectively impacts the income of lower-income residents. This is due to the significant rise in local prices and living costs. Also many environmental problems came to light when military bases were built and operated. For example the complexity of deforestation due to the construction process. It simply means that many trees are cut down. This also led to soil erosion in which the upper layer of the soil washed away. It also greatly impacts on the plant's growth.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Additionally, the base operations might contaminate local water sources, affecting both drinking water and agriculture. These environmental issues can be harmful to farming communities and indigenous people who rely on the land for their livelihood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, setting up foreign military bases in Niger could only increase tensions, especially in nearby French-speaking countries. The Pentagon\u2019s data also pointed out that the Western military strategies to deal with terrorism in the Sahel region have not been working well or are outdated. No meaningful results are achieved with these methods. Also the problems remain the same on ground level.\u00a0 Leaders requested the Niger government to pay full attention to the potential long-term results of such deals.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is also crucial for Niger to consider long-term peace and stability. Don\u2019t pay attention to the quick gains. The main purpose of the deal is to create lasting stability rather than immediate benefits. With this deal, Niger can develop a more peaceful environment and secure future.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The government needs to carefully consider the bigger picture to prevent worsening regional conflicts and to find lasting solutions for national security.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the debate over the United state and French military bases in Niger","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-debate-over-the-united-state-and-french-military-bases-in-niger","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7151","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7146,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_date_gmt":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_content":"\n It is very concerning that United States<\/a> airlines are actively opposing the efforts of those who monitor the environmental damage due to aeroplane pollution. Recently it was explored that the meeting between US officials was a meeting with the European Commission<\/a>. The conversation between them was secretly hidden. There is no official record of this meeting. So this move raises serious concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Recently, the discussions about the United States<\/a> and French <\/a>military bases were explored. They want to move their military bases from the Sahel region to Nigeria. This idea has sparked worry in different parts of the world. Leaders from northern Nigeria have expressed their concerns. They write an open letter to President Bola Tinubu and the National Assembly. In that letter, they forced the federal government not to give in to military pressure from the US and France.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The presence of the United States military forces is becoming less. This nation withdrew its troops from Chad. American soldiers also decided to leave Niger last month. This is because they got orders of departure from the new leader of the country known as the junta. In Niger the Russian military instructors have arrived instead of the United state troops. This change is also part of a new deal between the junta and Russia.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n When this information came into the knowledge of the local leaders, they became worried. They are anxious that it might result in increased foreign influence or unnecessary military activities in the region. They also called the Niger government and told them to carefully consider these changes. Also don't make any hasty decisions under pressure from outside forces.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nigeria receives continuous pressure from the French and US government<\/a> to sign a new defence agreement. Once they signed these deals they got all the US troops that were previously removed from the region. Leaders from northern Nigeria have raised significant concerns about this situation. They are worried about the potential economic and environmental impacts of hosting foreign military bases in their area.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n They worry that the economic costs might involve paying for the upkeep of the bases and possible disruptions to local businesses. They are also concerned about the environmental damage. Issues like pollution or any other changes might affect the local wildlife. Also the foreign troops could cause more complexities. So, it is important to think about all of these factors before signing any new agreement. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The northern leaders are advocating for a thorough assessment of these potential impacts before making any decisions. Their goal is to ensure that the local community\u2019s interests are fully protected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to them, <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEconomically, the presence of these bases could potentially divert government funds and resources away from critical areas such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure development toward maintaining and securing these military installations. This redirection of resources could stunt economic growth and exacerbate poverty in a country where much of the population already lives under challenging conditions.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Hosting foreign troops effectively impacts the income of lower-income residents. This is due to the significant rise in local prices and living costs. Also many environmental problems came to light when military bases were built and operated. For example the complexity of deforestation due to the construction process. It simply means that many trees are cut down. This also led to soil erosion in which the upper layer of the soil washed away. It also greatly impacts on the plant's growth.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Additionally, the base operations might contaminate local water sources, affecting both drinking water and agriculture. These environmental issues can be harmful to farming communities and indigenous people who rely on the land for their livelihood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, setting up foreign military bases in Niger could only increase tensions, especially in nearby French-speaking countries. The Pentagon\u2019s data also pointed out that the Western military strategies to deal with terrorism in the Sahel region have not been working well or are outdated. No meaningful results are achieved with these methods. Also the problems remain the same on ground level.\u00a0 Leaders requested the Niger government to pay full attention to the potential long-term results of such deals.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is also crucial for Niger to consider long-term peace and stability. Don\u2019t pay attention to the quick gains. The main purpose of the deal is to create lasting stability rather than immediate benefits. With this deal, Niger can develop a more peaceful environment and secure future.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The government needs to carefully consider the bigger picture to prevent worsening regional conflicts and to find lasting solutions for national security.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the debate over the United state and French military bases in Niger","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-debate-over-the-united-state-and-french-military-bases-in-niger","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7151","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7146,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_date_gmt":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_content":"\n It is very concerning that United States<\/a> airlines are actively opposing the efforts of those who monitor the environmental damage due to aeroplane pollution. Recently it was explored that the meeting between US officials was a meeting with the European Commission<\/a>. The conversation between them was secretly hidden. There is no official record of this meeting. So this move raises serious concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Krisztina Toth from Transport & Environment says that for the last 25 years, non-CO2 emissions have been the main climate problem. According to her, this new rule is the first step to better understand aviation's full climate impact. However, she opposed some traditional airlines that were trying to refuse this proposal. Their useless efforts could stop the EU from fully understanding the situation and finding a solution.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Airline Lobbying Efforts: EasyJet, Ryanair, and Wizz Air refuse it","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"airline-lobbying-efforts-easyjet-ryanair-and-wizz-air-refuse-it","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7156","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7151,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-09-03 18:14:39","post_date_gmt":"2024-09-03 18:14:39","post_content":"\n Recently, the discussions about the United States<\/a> and French <\/a>military bases were explored. They want to move their military bases from the Sahel region to Nigeria. This idea has sparked worry in different parts of the world. Leaders from northern Nigeria have expressed their concerns. They write an open letter to President Bola Tinubu and the National Assembly. In that letter, they forced the federal government not to give in to military pressure from the US and France.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The presence of the United States military forces is becoming less. This nation withdrew its troops from Chad. American soldiers also decided to leave Niger last month. This is because they got orders of departure from the new leader of the country known as the junta. In Niger the Russian military instructors have arrived instead of the United state troops. This change is also part of a new deal between the junta and Russia.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n When this information came into the knowledge of the local leaders, they became worried. They are anxious that it might result in increased foreign influence or unnecessary military activities in the region. They also called the Niger government and told them to carefully consider these changes. Also don't make any hasty decisions under pressure from outside forces.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nigeria receives continuous pressure from the French and US government<\/a> to sign a new defence agreement. Once they signed these deals they got all the US troops that were previously removed from the region. Leaders from northern Nigeria have raised significant concerns about this situation. They are worried about the potential economic and environmental impacts of hosting foreign military bases in their area.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n They worry that the economic costs might involve paying for the upkeep of the bases and possible disruptions to local businesses. They are also concerned about the environmental damage. Issues like pollution or any other changes might affect the local wildlife. Also the foreign troops could cause more complexities. So, it is important to think about all of these factors before signing any new agreement. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The northern leaders are advocating for a thorough assessment of these potential impacts before making any decisions. Their goal is to ensure that the local community\u2019s interests are fully protected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to them, <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEconomically, the presence of these bases could potentially divert government funds and resources away from critical areas such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure development toward maintaining and securing these military installations. This redirection of resources could stunt economic growth and exacerbate poverty in a country where much of the population already lives under challenging conditions.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Hosting foreign troops effectively impacts the income of lower-income residents. This is due to the significant rise in local prices and living costs. Also many environmental problems came to light when military bases were built and operated. For example the complexity of deforestation due to the construction process. It simply means that many trees are cut down. This also led to soil erosion in which the upper layer of the soil washed away. It also greatly impacts on the plant's growth.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Additionally, the base operations might contaminate local water sources, affecting both drinking water and agriculture. These environmental issues can be harmful to farming communities and indigenous people who rely on the land for their livelihood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, setting up foreign military bases in Niger could only increase tensions, especially in nearby French-speaking countries. The Pentagon\u2019s data also pointed out that the Western military strategies to deal with terrorism in the Sahel region have not been working well or are outdated. No meaningful results are achieved with these methods. Also the problems remain the same on ground level.\u00a0 Leaders requested the Niger government to pay full attention to the potential long-term results of such deals.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is also crucial for Niger to consider long-term peace and stability. Don\u2019t pay attention to the quick gains. The main purpose of the deal is to create lasting stability rather than immediate benefits. With this deal, Niger can develop a more peaceful environment and secure future.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The government needs to carefully consider the bigger picture to prevent worsening regional conflicts and to find lasting solutions for national security.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the debate over the United state and French military bases in Niger","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-debate-over-the-united-state-and-french-military-bases-in-niger","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7151","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7146,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_date_gmt":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_content":"\n It is very concerning that United States<\/a> airlines are actively opposing the efforts of those who monitor the environmental damage due to aeroplane pollution. Recently it was explored that the meeting between US officials was a meeting with the European Commission<\/a>. The conversation between them was secretly hidden. There is no official record of this meeting. So this move raises serious concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
With all of this, contrails are also becoming a major concern. They are made from humid air and contribute to about 35% of aviation emissions worldwide. According to recent studies, up to 10% of the skies above the North Atlantic could be covered by contrail clouds, mostly from long-haul flights. So, it is important to focus on every point to find the major culprit that increases the climate crisis. The only possible solution for it is to revise the climate policies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Krisztina Toth from Transport & Environment says that for the last 25 years, non-CO2 emissions have been the main climate problem. According to her, this new rule is the first step to better understand aviation's full climate impact. However, she opposed some traditional airlines that were trying to refuse this proposal. Their useless efforts could stop the EU from fully understanding the situation and finding a solution.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Airline Lobbying Efforts: EasyJet, Ryanair, and Wizz Air refuse it","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"airline-lobbying-efforts-easyjet-ryanair-and-wizz-air-refuse-it","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7156","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7151,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-09-03 18:14:39","post_date_gmt":"2024-09-03 18:14:39","post_content":"\n Recently, the discussions about the United States<\/a> and French <\/a>military bases were explored. They want to move their military bases from the Sahel region to Nigeria. This idea has sparked worry in different parts of the world. Leaders from northern Nigeria have expressed their concerns. They write an open letter to President Bola Tinubu and the National Assembly. In that letter, they forced the federal government not to give in to military pressure from the US and France.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The presence of the United States military forces is becoming less. This nation withdrew its troops from Chad. American soldiers also decided to leave Niger last month. This is because they got orders of departure from the new leader of the country known as the junta. In Niger the Russian military instructors have arrived instead of the United state troops. This change is also part of a new deal between the junta and Russia.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n When this information came into the knowledge of the local leaders, they became worried. They are anxious that it might result in increased foreign influence or unnecessary military activities in the region. They also called the Niger government and told them to carefully consider these changes. Also don't make any hasty decisions under pressure from outside forces.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nigeria receives continuous pressure from the French and US government<\/a> to sign a new defence agreement. Once they signed these deals they got all the US troops that were previously removed from the region. Leaders from northern Nigeria have raised significant concerns about this situation. They are worried about the potential economic and environmental impacts of hosting foreign military bases in their area.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n They worry that the economic costs might involve paying for the upkeep of the bases and possible disruptions to local businesses. They are also concerned about the environmental damage. Issues like pollution or any other changes might affect the local wildlife. Also the foreign troops could cause more complexities. So, it is important to think about all of these factors before signing any new agreement. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The northern leaders are advocating for a thorough assessment of these potential impacts before making any decisions. Their goal is to ensure that the local community\u2019s interests are fully protected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to them, <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEconomically, the presence of these bases could potentially divert government funds and resources away from critical areas such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure development toward maintaining and securing these military installations. This redirection of resources could stunt economic growth and exacerbate poverty in a country where much of the population already lives under challenging conditions.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Hosting foreign troops effectively impacts the income of lower-income residents. This is due to the significant rise in local prices and living costs. Also many environmental problems came to light when military bases were built and operated. For example the complexity of deforestation due to the construction process. It simply means that many trees are cut down. This also led to soil erosion in which the upper layer of the soil washed away. It also greatly impacts on the plant's growth.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Additionally, the base operations might contaminate local water sources, affecting both drinking water and agriculture. These environmental issues can be harmful to farming communities and indigenous people who rely on the land for their livelihood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, setting up foreign military bases in Niger could only increase tensions, especially in nearby French-speaking countries. The Pentagon\u2019s data also pointed out that the Western military strategies to deal with terrorism in the Sahel region have not been working well or are outdated. No meaningful results are achieved with these methods. Also the problems remain the same on ground level.\u00a0 Leaders requested the Niger government to pay full attention to the potential long-term results of such deals.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is also crucial for Niger to consider long-term peace and stability. Don\u2019t pay attention to the quick gains. The main purpose of the deal is to create lasting stability rather than immediate benefits. With this deal, Niger can develop a more peaceful environment and secure future.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The government needs to carefully consider the bigger picture to prevent worsening regional conflicts and to find lasting solutions for national security.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the debate over the United state and French military bases in Niger","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-debate-over-the-united-state-and-french-military-bases-in-niger","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7151","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7146,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_date_gmt":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_content":"\n It is very concerning that United States<\/a> airlines are actively opposing the efforts of those who monitor the environmental damage due to aeroplane pollution. Recently it was explored that the meeting between US officials was a meeting with the European Commission<\/a>. The conversation between them was secretly hidden. There is no official record of this meeting. So this move raises serious concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Especially their non-CO2 effects, which could be even greater due to when and where the flights occur. The airline industry argues that it is the responsibility of the European Union to address this gap. <\/p>\n\n\n\n With all of this, contrails are also becoming a major concern. They are made from humid air and contribute to about 35% of aviation emissions worldwide. According to recent studies, up to 10% of the skies above the North Atlantic could be covered by contrail clouds, mostly from long-haul flights. So, it is important to focus on every point to find the major culprit that increases the climate crisis. The only possible solution for it is to revise the climate policies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Krisztina Toth from Transport & Environment says that for the last 25 years, non-CO2 emissions have been the main climate problem. According to her, this new rule is the first step to better understand aviation's full climate impact. However, she opposed some traditional airlines that were trying to refuse this proposal. Their useless efforts could stop the EU from fully understanding the situation and finding a solution.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Airline Lobbying Efforts: EasyJet, Ryanair, and Wizz Air refuse it","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"airline-lobbying-efforts-easyjet-ryanair-and-wizz-air-refuse-it","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7156","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7151,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-09-03 18:14:39","post_date_gmt":"2024-09-03 18:14:39","post_content":"\n Recently, the discussions about the United States<\/a> and French <\/a>military bases were explored. They want to move their military bases from the Sahel region to Nigeria. This idea has sparked worry in different parts of the world. Leaders from northern Nigeria have expressed their concerns. They write an open letter to President Bola Tinubu and the National Assembly. In that letter, they forced the federal government not to give in to military pressure from the US and France.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The presence of the United States military forces is becoming less. This nation withdrew its troops from Chad. American soldiers also decided to leave Niger last month. This is because they got orders of departure from the new leader of the country known as the junta. In Niger the Russian military instructors have arrived instead of the United state troops. This change is also part of a new deal between the junta and Russia.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n When this information came into the knowledge of the local leaders, they became worried. They are anxious that it might result in increased foreign influence or unnecessary military activities in the region. They also called the Niger government and told them to carefully consider these changes. Also don't make any hasty decisions under pressure from outside forces.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nigeria receives continuous pressure from the French and US government<\/a> to sign a new defence agreement. Once they signed these deals they got all the US troops that were previously removed from the region. Leaders from northern Nigeria have raised significant concerns about this situation. They are worried about the potential economic and environmental impacts of hosting foreign military bases in their area.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n They worry that the economic costs might involve paying for the upkeep of the bases and possible disruptions to local businesses. They are also concerned about the environmental damage. Issues like pollution or any other changes might affect the local wildlife. Also the foreign troops could cause more complexities. So, it is important to think about all of these factors before signing any new agreement. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The northern leaders are advocating for a thorough assessment of these potential impacts before making any decisions. Their goal is to ensure that the local community\u2019s interests are fully protected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to them, <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEconomically, the presence of these bases could potentially divert government funds and resources away from critical areas such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure development toward maintaining and securing these military installations. This redirection of resources could stunt economic growth and exacerbate poverty in a country where much of the population already lives under challenging conditions.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Hosting foreign troops effectively impacts the income of lower-income residents. This is due to the significant rise in local prices and living costs. Also many environmental problems came to light when military bases were built and operated. For example the complexity of deforestation due to the construction process. It simply means that many trees are cut down. This also led to soil erosion in which the upper layer of the soil washed away. It also greatly impacts on the plant's growth.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Additionally, the base operations might contaminate local water sources, affecting both drinking water and agriculture. These environmental issues can be harmful to farming communities and indigenous people who rely on the land for their livelihood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, setting up foreign military bases in Niger could only increase tensions, especially in nearby French-speaking countries. The Pentagon\u2019s data also pointed out that the Western military strategies to deal with terrorism in the Sahel region have not been working well or are outdated. No meaningful results are achieved with these methods. Also the problems remain the same on ground level.\u00a0 Leaders requested the Niger government to pay full attention to the potential long-term results of such deals.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is also crucial for Niger to consider long-term peace and stability. Don\u2019t pay attention to the quick gains. The main purpose of the deal is to create lasting stability rather than immediate benefits. With this deal, Niger can develop a more peaceful environment and secure future.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The government needs to carefully consider the bigger picture to prevent worsening regional conflicts and to find lasting solutions for national security.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the debate over the United state and French military bases in Niger","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-debate-over-the-united-state-and-french-military-bases-in-niger","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7151","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7146,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_date_gmt":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_content":"\n It is very concerning that United States<\/a> airlines are actively opposing the efforts of those who monitor the environmental damage due to aeroplane pollution. Recently it was explored that the meeting between US officials was a meeting with the European Commission<\/a>. The conversation between them was secretly hidden. There is no official record of this meeting. So this move raises serious concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Intercontinental flights that makeup 6% of all flights from Europe are responsible for 52% of the carbon emissions from aviation. This is the main problem because EU policies don\u2019t yet figure out the full environmental impact of these flights. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Especially their non-CO2 effects, which could be even greater due to when and where the flights occur. The airline industry argues that it is the responsibility of the European Union to address this gap. <\/p>\n\n\n\n With all of this, contrails are also becoming a major concern. They are made from humid air and contribute to about 35% of aviation emissions worldwide. According to recent studies, up to 10% of the skies above the North Atlantic could be covered by contrail clouds, mostly from long-haul flights. So, it is important to focus on every point to find the major culprit that increases the climate crisis. The only possible solution for it is to revise the climate policies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Krisztina Toth from Transport & Environment says that for the last 25 years, non-CO2 emissions have been the main climate problem. According to her, this new rule is the first step to better understand aviation's full climate impact. However, she opposed some traditional airlines that were trying to refuse this proposal. Their useless efforts could stop the EU from fully understanding the situation and finding a solution.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Airline Lobbying Efforts: EasyJet, Ryanair, and Wizz Air refuse it","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"airline-lobbying-efforts-easyjet-ryanair-and-wizz-air-refuse-it","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7156","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7151,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-09-03 18:14:39","post_date_gmt":"2024-09-03 18:14:39","post_content":"\n Recently, the discussions about the United States<\/a> and French <\/a>military bases were explored. They want to move their military bases from the Sahel region to Nigeria. This idea has sparked worry in different parts of the world. Leaders from northern Nigeria have expressed their concerns. They write an open letter to President Bola Tinubu and the National Assembly. In that letter, they forced the federal government not to give in to military pressure from the US and France.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The presence of the United States military forces is becoming less. This nation withdrew its troops from Chad. American soldiers also decided to leave Niger last month. This is because they got orders of departure from the new leader of the country known as the junta. In Niger the Russian military instructors have arrived instead of the United state troops. This change is also part of a new deal between the junta and Russia.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n When this information came into the knowledge of the local leaders, they became worried. They are anxious that it might result in increased foreign influence or unnecessary military activities in the region. They also called the Niger government and told them to carefully consider these changes. Also don't make any hasty decisions under pressure from outside forces.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nigeria receives continuous pressure from the French and US government<\/a> to sign a new defence agreement. Once they signed these deals they got all the US troops that were previously removed from the region. Leaders from northern Nigeria have raised significant concerns about this situation. They are worried about the potential economic and environmental impacts of hosting foreign military bases in their area.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n They worry that the economic costs might involve paying for the upkeep of the bases and possible disruptions to local businesses. They are also concerned about the environmental damage. Issues like pollution or any other changes might affect the local wildlife. Also the foreign troops could cause more complexities. So, it is important to think about all of these factors before signing any new agreement. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The northern leaders are advocating for a thorough assessment of these potential impacts before making any decisions. Their goal is to ensure that the local community\u2019s interests are fully protected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to them, <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEconomically, the presence of these bases could potentially divert government funds and resources away from critical areas such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure development toward maintaining and securing these military installations. This redirection of resources could stunt economic growth and exacerbate poverty in a country where much of the population already lives under challenging conditions.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Hosting foreign troops effectively impacts the income of lower-income residents. This is due to the significant rise in local prices and living costs. Also many environmental problems came to light when military bases were built and operated. For example the complexity of deforestation due to the construction process. It simply means that many trees are cut down. This also led to soil erosion in which the upper layer of the soil washed away. It also greatly impacts on the plant's growth.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Additionally, the base operations might contaminate local water sources, affecting both drinking water and agriculture. These environmental issues can be harmful to farming communities and indigenous people who rely on the land for their livelihood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, setting up foreign military bases in Niger could only increase tensions, especially in nearby French-speaking countries. The Pentagon\u2019s data also pointed out that the Western military strategies to deal with terrorism in the Sahel region have not been working well or are outdated. No meaningful results are achieved with these methods. Also the problems remain the same on ground level.\u00a0 Leaders requested the Niger government to pay full attention to the potential long-term results of such deals.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is also crucial for Niger to consider long-term peace and stability. Don\u2019t pay attention to the quick gains. The main purpose of the deal is to create lasting stability rather than immediate benefits. With this deal, Niger can develop a more peaceful environment and secure future.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The government needs to carefully consider the bigger picture to prevent worsening regional conflicts and to find lasting solutions for national security.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the debate over the United state and French military bases in Niger","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-debate-over-the-united-state-and-french-military-bases-in-niger","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7151","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7146,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_date_gmt":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_content":"\n It is very concerning that United States<\/a> airlines are actively opposing the efforts of those who monitor the environmental damage due to aeroplane pollution. Recently it was explored that the meeting between US officials was a meeting with the European Commission<\/a>. The conversation between them was secretly hidden. There is no official record of this meeting. So this move raises serious concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
To better address the environmental impact, it\u2019s important to include data from a wider range of flights, not just those within the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Intercontinental flights that makeup 6% of all flights from Europe are responsible for 52% of the carbon emissions from aviation. This is the main problem because EU policies don\u2019t yet figure out the full environmental impact of these flights. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Especially their non-CO2 effects, which could be even greater due to when and where the flights occur. The airline industry argues that it is the responsibility of the European Union to address this gap. <\/p>\n\n\n\n With all of this, contrails are also becoming a major concern. They are made from humid air and contribute to about 35% of aviation emissions worldwide. According to recent studies, up to 10% of the skies above the North Atlantic could be covered by contrail clouds, mostly from long-haul flights. So, it is important to focus on every point to find the major culprit that increases the climate crisis. The only possible solution for it is to revise the climate policies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Krisztina Toth from Transport & Environment says that for the last 25 years, non-CO2 emissions have been the main climate problem. According to her, this new rule is the first step to better understand aviation's full climate impact. However, she opposed some traditional airlines that were trying to refuse this proposal. Their useless efforts could stop the EU from fully understanding the situation and finding a solution.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Airline Lobbying Efforts: EasyJet, Ryanair, and Wizz Air refuse it","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"airline-lobbying-efforts-easyjet-ryanair-and-wizz-air-refuse-it","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7156","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7151,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-09-03 18:14:39","post_date_gmt":"2024-09-03 18:14:39","post_content":"\n Recently, the discussions about the United States<\/a> and French <\/a>military bases were explored. They want to move their military bases from the Sahel region to Nigeria. This idea has sparked worry in different parts of the world. Leaders from northern Nigeria have expressed their concerns. They write an open letter to President Bola Tinubu and the National Assembly. In that letter, they forced the federal government not to give in to military pressure from the US and France.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The presence of the United States military forces is becoming less. This nation withdrew its troops from Chad. American soldiers also decided to leave Niger last month. This is because they got orders of departure from the new leader of the country known as the junta. In Niger the Russian military instructors have arrived instead of the United state troops. This change is also part of a new deal between the junta and Russia.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n When this information came into the knowledge of the local leaders, they became worried. They are anxious that it might result in increased foreign influence or unnecessary military activities in the region. They also called the Niger government and told them to carefully consider these changes. Also don't make any hasty decisions under pressure from outside forces.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nigeria receives continuous pressure from the French and US government<\/a> to sign a new defence agreement. Once they signed these deals they got all the US troops that were previously removed from the region. Leaders from northern Nigeria have raised significant concerns about this situation. They are worried about the potential economic and environmental impacts of hosting foreign military bases in their area.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n They worry that the economic costs might involve paying for the upkeep of the bases and possible disruptions to local businesses. They are also concerned about the environmental damage. Issues like pollution or any other changes might affect the local wildlife. Also the foreign troops could cause more complexities. So, it is important to think about all of these factors before signing any new agreement. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The northern leaders are advocating for a thorough assessment of these potential impacts before making any decisions. Their goal is to ensure that the local community\u2019s interests are fully protected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to them, <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEconomically, the presence of these bases could potentially divert government funds and resources away from critical areas such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure development toward maintaining and securing these military installations. This redirection of resources could stunt economic growth and exacerbate poverty in a country where much of the population already lives under challenging conditions.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Hosting foreign troops effectively impacts the income of lower-income residents. This is due to the significant rise in local prices and living costs. Also many environmental problems came to light when military bases were built and operated. For example the complexity of deforestation due to the construction process. It simply means that many trees are cut down. This also led to soil erosion in which the upper layer of the soil washed away. It also greatly impacts on the plant's growth.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Additionally, the base operations might contaminate local water sources, affecting both drinking water and agriculture. These environmental issues can be harmful to farming communities and indigenous people who rely on the land for their livelihood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, setting up foreign military bases in Niger could only increase tensions, especially in nearby French-speaking countries. The Pentagon\u2019s data also pointed out that the Western military strategies to deal with terrorism in the Sahel region have not been working well or are outdated. No meaningful results are achieved with these methods. Also the problems remain the same on ground level.\u00a0 Leaders requested the Niger government to pay full attention to the potential long-term results of such deals.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is also crucial for Niger to consider long-term peace and stability. Don\u2019t pay attention to the quick gains. The main purpose of the deal is to create lasting stability rather than immediate benefits. With this deal, Niger can develop a more peaceful environment and secure future.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The government needs to carefully consider the bigger picture to prevent worsening regional conflicts and to find lasting solutions for national security.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the debate over the United state and French military bases in Niger","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-debate-over-the-united-state-and-french-military-bases-in-niger","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7151","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7146,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_date_gmt":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_content":"\n It is very concerning that United States<\/a> airlines are actively opposing the efforts of those who monitor the environmental damage due to aeroplane pollution. Recently it was explored that the meeting between US officials was a meeting with the European Commission<\/a>. The conversation between them was secretly hidden. There is no official record of this meeting. So this move raises serious concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Despite stricter rules on carbon emissions for the aviation industry,there is no any data about the effects of things like contrails, nitrogen oxide, and sulfur. The letter says that the MRV scheme could be better given the scientific reason for the problems and also assist in making good policies that control the situation. If the scheme is only applicable in Europe then it might be possible to miss the important information that helps to find the root cause for the problem. <\/p>\n\n\n\n To better address the environmental impact, it\u2019s important to include data from a wider range of flights, not just those within the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Intercontinental flights that makeup 6% of all flights from Europe are responsible for 52% of the carbon emissions from aviation. This is the main problem because EU policies don\u2019t yet figure out the full environmental impact of these flights. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Especially their non-CO2 effects, which could be even greater due to when and where the flights occur. The airline industry argues that it is the responsibility of the European Union to address this gap. <\/p>\n\n\n\n With all of this, contrails are also becoming a major concern. They are made from humid air and contribute to about 35% of aviation emissions worldwide. According to recent studies, up to 10% of the skies above the North Atlantic could be covered by contrail clouds, mostly from long-haul flights. So, it is important to focus on every point to find the major culprit that increases the climate crisis. The only possible solution for it is to revise the climate policies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Krisztina Toth from Transport & Environment says that for the last 25 years, non-CO2 emissions have been the main climate problem. According to her, this new rule is the first step to better understand aviation's full climate impact. However, she opposed some traditional airlines that were trying to refuse this proposal. Their useless efforts could stop the EU from fully understanding the situation and finding a solution.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Airline Lobbying Efforts: EasyJet, Ryanair, and Wizz Air refuse it","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"airline-lobbying-efforts-easyjet-ryanair-and-wizz-air-refuse-it","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7156","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7151,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-09-03 18:14:39","post_date_gmt":"2024-09-03 18:14:39","post_content":"\n Recently, the discussions about the United States<\/a> and French <\/a>military bases were explored. They want to move their military bases from the Sahel region to Nigeria. This idea has sparked worry in different parts of the world. Leaders from northern Nigeria have expressed their concerns. They write an open letter to President Bola Tinubu and the National Assembly. In that letter, they forced the federal government not to give in to military pressure from the US and France.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The presence of the United States military forces is becoming less. This nation withdrew its troops from Chad. American soldiers also decided to leave Niger last month. This is because they got orders of departure from the new leader of the country known as the junta. In Niger the Russian military instructors have arrived instead of the United state troops. This change is also part of a new deal between the junta and Russia.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n When this information came into the knowledge of the local leaders, they became worried. They are anxious that it might result in increased foreign influence or unnecessary military activities in the region. They also called the Niger government and told them to carefully consider these changes. Also don't make any hasty decisions under pressure from outside forces.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nigeria receives continuous pressure from the French and US government<\/a> to sign a new defence agreement. Once they signed these deals they got all the US troops that were previously removed from the region. Leaders from northern Nigeria have raised significant concerns about this situation. They are worried about the potential economic and environmental impacts of hosting foreign military bases in their area.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n They worry that the economic costs might involve paying for the upkeep of the bases and possible disruptions to local businesses. They are also concerned about the environmental damage. Issues like pollution or any other changes might affect the local wildlife. Also the foreign troops could cause more complexities. So, it is important to think about all of these factors before signing any new agreement. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The northern leaders are advocating for a thorough assessment of these potential impacts before making any decisions. Their goal is to ensure that the local community\u2019s interests are fully protected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to them, <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEconomically, the presence of these bases could potentially divert government funds and resources away from critical areas such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure development toward maintaining and securing these military installations. This redirection of resources could stunt economic growth and exacerbate poverty in a country where much of the population already lives under challenging conditions.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Hosting foreign troops effectively impacts the income of lower-income residents. This is due to the significant rise in local prices and living costs. Also many environmental problems came to light when military bases were built and operated. For example the complexity of deforestation due to the construction process. It simply means that many trees are cut down. This also led to soil erosion in which the upper layer of the soil washed away. It also greatly impacts on the plant's growth.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Additionally, the base operations might contaminate local water sources, affecting both drinking water and agriculture. These environmental issues can be harmful to farming communities and indigenous people who rely on the land for their livelihood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, setting up foreign military bases in Niger could only increase tensions, especially in nearby French-speaking countries. The Pentagon\u2019s data also pointed out that the Western military strategies to deal with terrorism in the Sahel region have not been working well or are outdated. No meaningful results are achieved with these methods. Also the problems remain the same on ground level.\u00a0 Leaders requested the Niger government to pay full attention to the potential long-term results of such deals.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is also crucial for Niger to consider long-term peace and stability. Don\u2019t pay attention to the quick gains. The main purpose of the deal is to create lasting stability rather than immediate benefits. With this deal, Niger can develop a more peaceful environment and secure future.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The government needs to carefully consider the bigger picture to prevent worsening regional conflicts and to find lasting solutions for national security.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the debate over the United state and French military bases in Niger","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-debate-over-the-united-state-and-french-military-bases-in-niger","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7151","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7146,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_date_gmt":"2024-08-31 20:11:07","post_content":"\n It is very concerning that United States<\/a> airlines are actively opposing the efforts of those who monitor the environmental damage due to aeroplane pollution. Recently it was explored that the meeting between US officials was a meeting with the European Commission<\/a>. The conversation between them was secretly hidden. There is no official record of this meeting. So this move raises serious concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n During this meeting, Airlines for America <\/a>argued against including flights outside Europe <\/a>in new pollution reporting rules. They claimed there\u2019s still uncertainty about the science behind contrails, those white lines planes leave in the sky that can trap heat. They are also worried that due to this rule, the price of tickets getting higher will limit the number of travellers.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems that the main purpose of these airlines is to protect their profits rather than address the urgent complexities of climate change. It is important to find every possible solution to these climate problems instead of finding excuses to avoid responsibility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The long-haul flights are the basic reasons for climate damage and the US airlines are trying to avoid their responsibilities. Lucca Ewbank from InfluenceMap reported that non-CO2 emissions from planes could be responsible for up to two-thirds of the climate impact of flying. Despite this fact, airlines are lobbying against these measured figures in order to hide the damage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Different gasses are emitted by the aeroplane engines. It includes nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. These emitted gasses caused the planet to warm up even though scientists are still doing research on it to find the exact effects. The new rule of European Comiosns has plans to close the knowledge gap. This can be done by making an airline's track and emission report under these new rules. Climate scientists are clearly opposed to these new regulations and say that science is not ready to accept them. They also said that focusing on the issue and suggesting a solution is also the top priority for them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This proposal has split the aviation industry. US airlines oppose including international flights in these rules, while European budget airlines argue that excluding long-haul flights would be unfair and possibly illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The International Air Transport Association(IATA) also stands in favour of the United States' view. According to them, it is not good to expand the European rules including flight outside Europe. This can cause international issues and also create many doubts. Such as it is a great hurdle in the scientific process to track the non-CO2 emissions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, Ewbank noted that IATA and Airlines for America are strangely using scientific uncertainty to argue against a policy meant to reduce that uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However many from the aviation industry strongly disagree with it. There\u2019s a split between some international associations resisting change and European Union low-cost carriers that favours it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Current technology can not make aviation green. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Aviation is hard to make green with current technology. According to researchers, the best step is to reduce the flight demand. And raising tickets can greatly assist with it. Some other solutions are also implementing higher taxes on frequent flyers, and ending subsidies for the aviation sector. <\/p>\n\n\n\n By 2028, new rules might be proposed including non-CO2 emissions costs in the EU emissions trading scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the researchers from Lund University, Stefan Gossling also said that United state airlines has always become the hurdle in environmental rules, especially in places like the European Union<\/a>. According to him, this is due to the fact that their business model relies on a very minor profit margin and constant growth. They always refuse to accept more beneficial ways to handle air travel. The meeting of these notes also explored some parts of their talks. Airlines for America, Penta, and major US airlines like United, FedEx, and Delta were part of this conversation. It clearly represents that not every person in the industry wants to accept these new rules.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is no response to the requests for comment from Delta and Penta.\u00a0 United and FedEx pointed to Airlines for America, which said it regularly meets with EU counterparts and follows all rules. The European Commission<\/a> mentioned that in order to get various opinions, there are many meetings with different stakeholders. They also shed light on their decision and said it would be in favour of Europe. However, they got strong criticism from IATA, which was not present at the meeting. This opposition is due to moving forward too quickly on such an important issue without fully understanding all aspects.<\/p>\n","post_title":"US airlines prioritize profits over climate responsibility","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"us-airlines-prioritize-profits-over-climate-responsibility","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7146","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":55},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n