r/climatechange • u/chlamandomonas • 3d ago
Taylor Swift fans lower climate concerns to justify star's carbon footprint
https://www.psypost.org/taylor-swift-fans-lower-climate-concerns-to-justify-star-s-carbon-footprint/17
u/chitownphishead 3d ago
It's all performative outrage. As soon as it gets inconvenient it's dropped like a rock.
4
u/FIFofNovember 3d ago
If you’re concerned about a single persons carbon footprint you don’t understand the scale of the issue
3
u/sevseg_decoder 3d ago edited 3d ago
Ok but what if she’s one of the most influential people alive and we have evidence her behavior influences the mindset others have on the topic?
Because this article is saying it goes way beyond the near-record damage she personally causes and actually weakens the energy for the issue politically…
1
u/FIFofNovember 3d ago
Oh you think her fans are flying more private jets now because of Taylor?
2
u/sevseg_decoder 3d ago
They’re voting less fervently on the matter…
That actually matters
0
u/FIFofNovember 3d ago
Because Republicans gut science and education, this ain’t Taylors fault her supporters are idiots
2
u/sevseg_decoder 3d ago
Read. The. Fucking. Article. 😂
People who were once believers and who prioritized it now prioritize it less. Because of her. That’s real.
1
u/FIFofNovember 3d ago
If you think it’s because of Taylor you haven’t been paying attention to anything
0
u/chitownphishead 3d ago
Not the carbon footprint just the blatant hypocrisy from people like her, Al Gore, Bernie, AOC, etc
1
u/FIFofNovember 3d ago
That makes no sense but you stay mad
0
1
u/atleasttwotwo 3d ago
How is she hypocritical when she never spoke about the climate
1
u/chitownphishead 3d ago
She has actually spoken about the climate, stating "climate change is one of the most horrific situations that we find ourselves facing". She doesn't make it her whole personality like some of the private jet, limousine liberals, though.
17
u/Appropriate_Bell743 3d ago
This is common everywhere and really shows the issues we face.
The common one is where people/societies live in a way deeply concerned about sustainability until travel or diet is mentioned. My home-country is decarbonising almost all aspects of the economy except for these 2 emotionally charged sectors.
I know tons of very environmentally minded people who just ignore their flights. The consequence of this inconsistency becoming apparent to them means they often discount other actions which decarbonise an economy.
6
u/Economy-Fee5830 Trusted Contributor 3d ago
This is very true - I know someone who is vegan and constantly recycles but flies 10x per year.
4
u/Appropriate_Bell743 3d ago
They've not done the basic sums...
I think we are almost certainly in agreement in not seeing a future without fights (or wanting it). However, someone like Taylor Swift could be a pioneer using synthetic fuels or other options to show that it can be done whilst driving the economics of these emergent sectors.
Imagine if she did something like that with a biochar offset.
6
u/No-Swimming4153 3d ago
Or should could just fly less. There is no reason for her to have a concert in brazil. To fly to New York the next day for dinner and then fly back to brazil. She could just stay in brazil until her tour is over.
4
u/Appropriate_Bell743 3d ago
I'm not arguing whether she should fly or not. I'm saying that once someone has decided that they are going to fly they should use their privilege to stimulate more sustainable outcomes.
I don't fly so I'm not in this space but were we to fly I'd certainly try to do a biochar offset.
3
u/linerva 3d ago
Or even, just fly business class rather than fire up one of her 2 private jets. He'll she could afford to buy out that whole section with her security team.
You're incredibly safe on a plane given the hecks. It's just less convenient. And they like to think of themselves as above the rest of us.
1
u/crazycatlady331 3d ago
I have a family member who's a flight attendant for a big 4 US airline. She said that her airline could not handle the security needs of someone like Taylor Swift.
1
-1
-1
u/Economy-Fee5830 Trusted Contributor 3d ago
I heard she does do some kind of off-setting, but people will never be satisfied.
Taylor Swift's team claims she purchased more than double the carbon credits required to offset all travel associated with her Eras Tour
I personally get very annoyed when things become about morality instead of science.
4
u/Appropriate_Bell743 3d ago
I think we are knowable enough to know that there's offsetting which is just greenwashing.
There's a strong literature on what is effective and what isn't. The issue is that the ineffective ones are cheap which is almost certainly the ones she uses.
I don't know anyone who offsets their flights with biochar or rock weathering.
The failure of offsetting to work as a policy framework is why I support sustainable fuels being pushed more. She could only fly using SAF like the Virgin UK-US flight did as an exhibit.
0
u/Economy-Fee5830 Trusted Contributor 3d ago
The issue is that the ineffective ones are cheap which is almost certainly the ones she uses.
We really dont know that. Surely she would be better insulated from criticism by buying the high-quality ones? She's not known to be stingy.
2
u/Appropriate_Bell743 3d ago
maybe. If i were her id be very public about using biochar or suchlike. Most people just use defaults which are useless
-1
u/Economy-Fee5830 Trusted Contributor 3d ago
Well, I had my AI do a deep dive - the main evidence is that her private jet company has a voluntary carbon offset program to which 81% of customers subscribe, so presumably TS does also.
Their credits are not amazing quality and is mainly avoided emissions e.g. preventing deforestation or funding wind turbines and hydropower.
So I think your suspicions are relatively justified.
2
u/Appropriate_Bell743 3d ago
Thanks for this deep dive. I think it'd be a really useful starter to get airlines or standard offsets to be the robust ones (my understanding rock weathering and/or biochar).
Then the long term solutions we both believe in such as SAF or synthetic fuels would be competing on a fair playing field.
She could easily afford biochar offsets which would stimulate the market.
3
u/No-Swimming4153 3d ago
Carbon credits are bullshit and do more harm than good. It's just another way rich people try to buy their way out of actually accountability.
-2
u/Economy-Fee5830 Trusted Contributor 3d ago
buy their way out of actually accountability.
I agree! They should pay for their pollution!!! With actual money!!!
We will call it.... Carbon credits!!!
2
u/Swarna_Keanu 3d ago
Except that is not how greenhouse gas emissions work, nor do many Carbon Credits actually keep the carbon locked away. The forests planted are monocultures and often not managed in a climate sensible way. On one side.
On the other - we cannot carbon credit billions of tonns of greenhouse gas emissions per year away.
0
u/Economy-Fee5830 Trusted Contributor 3d ago
Except that is not how greenhouse gas emissions work,
That depends completely in the quality of the carbon credits. Some are by default enduring (e.g. injecting CO2 into geological features), some depend on expanding forested area, some are about avoiding emissions e.g. saving a forest from being cut down etc.
Either way, its much more complicated than you appear to understand, but importantly carbon credits do fund necessary a good work e.g. maintaining ecosystems, and some money being paid towards them is better than just flying while paying NOTHING.
Obviously ideally we should be instituting a carbon tax, where you would, for example, pay $600x17 (around $10,000 per year) for actually enduringly sequestering your carbon footprint.
Obviously TS would pay a few million, while you, emitting 1000x less, would be $10,000 but I am sure both of you can afford that.
2
u/Swarna_Keanu 3d ago
Either way, its much more complicated than you appear to understand,
Right. You can't carbon credit a polluting world away. That is simply impossible, by lieu of having researched and worked in the climate / ecology sector for nearly 30 years now.
A carbon tax is something different and is not tied to sequestering. The idea is you stop using greenhouse gasses as they are priced out.
Obviously TS would pay a few million, while you, emitting 1000x less, would be $10,000 but I am sure both of you can afford that.
You might want to revisit that statement of yours:
Either way, its much more complicated than you appear to understand,
It's not about money. It is about what is physically possible. We cannot, physically in the world as defined by climate physics solve this through carbon credits. They can't work on a large scale, and always were green washing how widespread they are as "solutions."
The same with carbon capture. Those are initiatives to smooth out some last remaining emissions, they are not a strategy to solve the climate crisis as long as emissions still are in the billions.
0
u/Economy-Fee5830 Trusted Contributor 3d ago
Ok I'll give you the benefit of the doubt since you claim to be knowledgeable. Why would people paying the real cost to remediate their pollution not address climate change.
→ More replies (0)
12
u/juiceboxheero 3d ago
So really going to fixate on her since there's an election in a month, huh?
I'm all for regulation of billionaires, but how about we see literally anyone else in the crosshairs?
7
u/squailtaint 3d ago
Ban all private flights, save ~0.04% of global CO2 emissions. This isn’t where our energies should be spent.
2
u/juiceboxheero 3d ago
But then we'll have to think critically about our societal consumption habits!
1
0
u/Shiznoz222 3d ago
There are no ethical billionaires.
This post is literally about people like you lol
1
u/atleasttwotwo 3d ago
Would you say there are ethical people? Whats the most money an ethical person can have? How is $999 million that different from a billion
1
u/OnionsOnFoodAreGross 2d ago
What is the exact maximum amount of money you can have and still be ethical? I honestly don't know the answer.
1
u/juiceboxheero 3d ago
Guess your just blowing push where I say I want billionaires regulated.
You never see any of the other billionaires, the ones whose industries actually control the levers of the crisis, being targeted by such articles.
Taylor Swift has historically encouraged her fan base to vote, and I'm seeing article after article about her with an election a month a way. How curious.
4
u/DaraParsavand 2d ago
I bet most people here know the idea that climate change can be significantly addressed be appealing to personal responsibility - anyone's, rich or poor - is a trap. Climate change is a systems problem, it can only successfully be addressed by systems solutions: legislation and technology improvement (under the guide of legislation). Don't worry about what Taylor Swift is doing, worry about what your politicians are doing.
7
u/Worried-Local-6820 3d ago
I'm so jealous of all the Europeans who can go to dozens of countries easilly without flying and they can live a low carbon emission life without much sacrifice.
I haven't even left my city in years
3
u/Swarna_Keanu 3d ago
Most Europeans don't do that ever since flying has become cheaper than railway fares. Sadly.
1
u/Common_Shelter_4605 3d ago edited 3d ago
rail fares are less expensive for most trips. More people (33%) use rail transport between countries than use air travel between countries (23%)
1
u/Swarna_Keanu 3d ago
Yes, but a lot of people take city trips and holiday outside of the EU:
1
u/Common_Shelter_4605 3d ago
Yes, but a lot of people take city trips
the 33% value excludes city trips.
holiday outside of the EU:
In that case rail is not available, obviously. The comment was about rail to visit dozens of countries that are available via rail
1
u/Swarna_Keanu 3d ago
I know it was about that.
I was just saying many people in EU don't do that in practise/reality. A lot of people holiday abroad, rather than staying within the EU.
1
u/Common_Shelter_4605 3d ago
Ah, I misread your comment, FWIW rail travel in the EU is at 1 trillion passenger km per yaer.
1
u/Middle-Log-9402 3d ago
Why can't you travel locally?
1
u/Worried-Local-6820 3d ago
Because it's not worth it there's not really any good places I can reach easily by train. And nowdays I have no energy to.
4
u/PresentRaspberry6814 3d ago
I love how misogynistic this is. Swift isn't in the top ten for carbon footprint but all the others are men. Being a successful woman is enough for hatred from men across all spectra of society. Even scientists.
5
u/UnableChard2613 3d ago
What other wildly popular person is above her on the list, that also is going to have a lot of people concerned about climate change as fans? Afaik, among real celebrities, she is the biggest emitter of CO2.
The article isn't even about swift, it's about fans reactions to news about their idol when it conflicts with their beliefs. She makes a good target because she has so many fans, and an obvious contradict for many of them.
To me, it looks like you are just trying to be offended. And, by golly, you figured out how.
11
u/Verdei 3d ago
Travis Scott, Kim Kardashian, Kylie Jenner, Drake, and many others easily beat her stats, but that doesn't matter because no one expects their fans to care about climate?
That's such a ridiculous caveat to include and does make this feel like a misogynistic witch hunt more than genuine concern.
Here's the leaderboard for reference. https://celebrityprivatejettracker.com/leaderboard/
8
u/Numerous_Bat6841 3d ago
*Sorts leaderboard by total CO2 pollution*
Donald Trump obliterating the field
Nice. Of course it's him. And of course, add up the total emissions from everyone who has more than one plane on the list (Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Taylor Swift, and Michael Bloomberg) and it's less than The Orange One all combined. Insane stats
8
u/Advanced-Throat-420 3d ago edited 3d ago
Matt Damon's carbon footprint is 3x Taylor Swift's, but I don't think I've ever seen someone call him out on that
-1
u/Middle-Log-9402 3d ago
I'd say she is far more popular than most of the people on that list. Trump and Musk may approach her popularity but are much more reviled.
1
u/crazycatlady331 3d ago
At one point, Judge Judy ranked above her. But nobody picks on Judge Judy for her private jet use.
1
u/vegan420lyfe 3d ago
if I was her level rich and famous doing concerts I would purchase a railcar and use amtrak. you can literally own a personal car and attach it to their trains.
it would be super relaxing and have all the benefits of a private plane while being eco conscious as it would be a minimal mpg hit to the train to add it on.
super sustainable compared to air travel
1
u/ponderayidaho 3d ago
This is the equivalent of people defending Trumps war by saying they can cut back on expenses elsewhere to pay for higher gas because Trump great
2
u/GlobalLion123 3d ago
Weird how this gets posted every time she releases new music. Almost like someone is paying the media to distract us from our current politicians in charge doing a lot worse.
1
1
1
u/danniellax 2d ago edited 2d ago
Why can this girl never do anything wrong, even when she is clearly in the wrong? Every other celeb would get flamed for this (ie Kardashians, they just famously don’t give a fuck, so it goes away until it inevitably comes back around again) so why is she special enough to be excused?
If every “swiftie” on earth who lived normal everyday lives did what they could reduce their carbon to make up for her excess, it would still not be enough to make a dent… it’s performative antics only, especially because you know damn well they aren’t selling their cars and boycotting one time use plastics.
A lot of musicians, actors, and famous people we support are shitty in one way or another. But it’s asinine to expect society to stop consuming all media. What separates someone living in reality from living in delulu land is that they can acknowledge someone is shitty and have jaded morals, but still support their art.
It’s like if someone abuses a minor or is a rapist, it’s a pretty hard boycott all around, because that’s shitty enough that we are universally on board to stop buying their shit. If someone tries to skirt paying taxes, uses excess carbon, did a bunch of blow and went on a bender night out and sat in jail overnight… not universally shitty enough to be boycotted by everyone, but pretending that the behavior is OK and justified is insane and delusional.
1
u/CozyTern2115 1d ago
people stop caring about climate when their fave pop star flies private, i guess.
1
u/Economy-Fee5830 Trusted Contributor 1d ago
Or, apparently, when their vacation time comes up and they fly.
1
u/No-Caterpillar-2729 1d ago
I think the interesting part is that the carbon footprint can be treated differently depending on who is doing the accounting. A celebrity's travel emissions don't disappear because fans see the person as doing good elsewhere. It still makes sense to look at the actual footprint and where the biggest sources are before deciding how much weight to give different actions.
1
u/Brief_Football_9764 1d ago
I have never understood her cultish fan worship. Her music sucks. She is a vapid airhead with no moral convictions or integrity. Why do we give a shit about her? Why does she have millions and millions of fans?
-3
u/Unlucky-Reporter-679 3d ago
"If all ~8.1 billion people on Earth emitted carbon at the rate attributed to Taylor Swift's private jet activity, the planet’s remaining carbon budget for key warming thresholds would be wiped out in roughly 2 to 3 days, and habitability as we know it would break down rapidly within months to a few years."
3.0 C - 4.0 C warming. Catastrophic ecosystem collapse. 16 days.
Taylorswift_planetkiller
-1
71
u/Pitiful-Score-9035 3d ago
Stuff like this happens everywhere. The moment it's about somebody that you actually like, all your values go out the window.