IRONY ALERT - We have standards; at least double most

Just had to pop this one in to Aunty and SKY:

Watching today's news.

Some entirely welcome, and valid coverage on Copenhagen, and the issues at stake.

Then a few more pieces, followed by a commercial for favoured son Richard Branson and his next moneymaking scheme taking the uber-rich into space for a quick Kodak moment.

But it's all ok it seems, as the design of the craft is, according to the [at least in the case of the BBC, astoundingly] reporter, 'fuel efficient'.

Dancing to the tune of PROs of your mates and issuing news by press release does the BBC little credit. Especially when it is contradictory.

You either think greenhouse gasses are a here and now issue, or you don't.

Stick Ed Miliband and Richard Branson up together on this and I think your brains would freeze as anything either comes out with gets shared with zero critical thinking attached.

To be fair (if conceding two wrongs makes an MSM consenus) SKY had the same double standards as well. Who gives a sod about the planet if you get invited [to the Mojave Desert] by a ratings-cert Celeb billionaire to play with his rocket?

News generation by PRO and reporting by press release. Unique.

Addendum:

Having taken the broadcast media to task (and found that what was troubling viewers more... at least as claimed by those who select the emails... was a ban on 'pink'. Go figger), it was interesting to move on to their print cousins:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/branson-unveils-his-spaceship-1836142.html

'The environmental impact would be minimal, Branson said.

"It's almost zero carbon output. We can put people into space for less carbon output than say, a flight from New York to L.A. and back, and that's for your particular seat on the flight from New York to L.A. and back," he said. "And I think in time, we will almost definitely be able to get to zero carbon output."

That is almost definitely a meaningless crock of... unsettling science.

Apt as the various debates around reducing GHG's swirl like contrails from a plane taking off from one of Gordon Brown and his government colleagues' (esp. Miliband. E) expanded airports.

But saying that would seem to make me a denier, or maybe saboteur? Too the too-cosy double-standard world some in the politico-media bubble live in, perhaps. Welcome to a Britain where the media is managed, and barely managing professionally it seems, other than via 'news' from press release by government or corporate PRO.

Meanwhile back at Copenhagen...

Telegraph - NEW - Virgin spaceman's flight of fancy

It's good to share

As does the author, so do I...

Around the world with Richard Branson in eight days: jetlagged in Sydney

I leave you, dear reader, to draw your own conclusions. Especially when the next dodgy eco-adventure is given lots of lovely PR by way of 'mitigation'.

I wonder who else was on board... in every sense of the word?

You could always ask Aunty...

... his tame PR arm.

Is Richard Branson a green hypocrite -- or just a bad businessman?

Space cadets

I have been advised BBC news are advising Richard Branson is to help 'survey' the ionosphere to monitor climate change.

I have looked around on the BBC site for confirmation and have only found this, which leads to this, which seems to suggest this is unlikely. Possibly the claim, rather the story, was in error.

However I will repeat my reply, just in case this is another PR turned news item.

Whatever one's views of him, his views do get a fair amount of top billing and hence do count.

But I'm most interested in what he is actually saying and/or doing, and the impacts these words or actions may have.

Without seeing it I couldn't comment, but I am guessing this is more support for 'Virgin Galactic", whereby billionaires and their mates (and pliant media remoras) get to have a Kodak moment atop a column of greenhouse gasses.

I am kind of losing count of the attempted eco-mitigations for this jolly on the part of the empire and its media fanbase, but there was the pushing planes to the takeoff and the bio-747 on the ground. Then there was using this toy to 'transport' vital goods to war-torn outposts in a hurry. Now is it possible that instead of a G&T the next dot com whizz kid or noted physicist will get handed a straw and asked to '...check the extent of 'climate change', by sampling gases in the ionosphere.' as it arcs through.

Please tell me that is not being given screen space!

I don't know, but can't balloons do this? Or if not, unmanned, smaller, cheaper and a lot less polluting rockets?

An interesting ra-ra contrast to the 'science' behind test on Polar Bear hearing problems caused by noise from Global Warming.

Branson bites back!

I missed this from Wednesday's Guardian CIF - a response from Richard Branson to the sniping comments made by Willie Walsh, CEO of British Airways.

Though he makes his points well, and they are actually DOING something (questionable as it may be), and I do agree with him that looking for viable (important key word) alternative fuels has to be done, there are some quite scathing posts in response.

In case you can't afford to go Galactic

Branson Helps You Hire a Private Jet - Virgin Charter

Maybe one engine flies on bio-fuel?

I am road-testing a new acronym: HI-AW (Pronounced 'Hee-aw', like a donkey braying).

It means 'Having It All Ways'.

Better than nothing?

Just watching Sir Richard Branson on Breakfast TV.

Not so keen on reporting what will be said (a new, and rather pointless trend) but one key point we will learn come the press conference later is how his Virgin Atlantic fleet will run a biofuel that will not affect the food chain. This was a major concern of mine.

The FoE has already labelled it a 'gimmick' (mot du jour in politics at the moment, too), but Sir. Richard may have had a pop at them talking on flying to international conferences all the time in 'conventional' planes.

It's a dilemma. On the one hand there is the undoubted contributed of air travel to PMWCC, but then there are the practicalities and realities of commercial air travel.

It will be interesting to see just how real this initiative might be as a mitigation.

I remain unclear as to the contribution made by Virgin Galactic, though.

First posted 24/02 - Addenda:

Telegraph - Algae are fuelling Branson's maiden flight - seems they know something the BBC doesn't.

Also just saw a twofer on the morning show again. The FoE guy did not impress; very dogmatic. There was a travel journalist who did; objective and thoughtful. I see this as an interesting one. All agreed it will make no difference to passnger decision, which is based on price. Plus such as this is a drop in the fuel tank compared with flights only one third full vs. full, 1st & Biz vs. cattle for fuel per passenger mile.

Telegraph - Branson: City to suffer without third runway

BBC - Airline in first biofuel flight

Indy - First biofuel flight dismissed as Virgin stunt - Possibly a new PR agency in the offing? But then, there is no such thing as bad publicity.

Guardian - Branson's coconut airways - but jet is on a flight to nowhere, say critics

Gaurdian - Forests cleared for takeoff? - I might have to change the title above. And nice to see Virgin Galactic getting a mention.

Had to be done

Richard Branson ‘has a lot of making up to do’

But he does give the media lots to gush.. er.. write about. Which is really all that matters.

How are all those nifty ideas going, actually?

There's also the small matter of that mighty column of something probably less than climatically benign that pops out of Virgin Galactic, to enable a few mega-rich punters have their Kodak moment before availing themselves of the wee bag in the seat back.

But then if we don't have stuff like this we can't explore new worlds, and boldy go and propagate and pollute where no ma... er.. person has before.

Beam me up, Scotty! (I believe his ashes are on the tour).

To boldly reprint a press release...

I know it's just business, but...

Virgin planning elite fleet with business-only flights to the US

Is Richard Branson still part of Virgin? That's the Richard Branson
who is doing all he can to address climate change, with his good mate
Al and others. The Richard Branson who is listed in the top ten of a
recent survey as an environmental champion?

I don't know too much about the fine details of aeronautical
engineering, so there may be some mitigation in the reduced weight,
but on a passenger miles/fuel basis, might this not suggest a pretty
darn retrograde step on the old emissions side of things? But I'm sure
we can plough over what's left of Brazil to compensate with magic
hydrogen plants.

If one concedes there is a problem, the only real solution is doing
less that causes exhaust fumes. But if we have to, I'd suggest cramming
the most folk in to one flight is better than having a crew, four
passengers and a mile high bowling alley.

Personally whoever thought up such a scheme should be given a
rocket. Oh... what am is saying... they have.