celeb news Tweet dragging Taylor for carbon emissions and ecoterrorism goes viral

[Rep2000]

5 hours ago, naval23 said:

Lol actually? Does she fly back to her residence for the day? Omg

Pray for brain, dear. Pray for brain.

[naval23]

14 minutes ago, Rep2000 said:

Pray for brain, dear. Pray for brain.

Pray for reading between the lines, dear. Pray for reading between the lines.

[lonnie]

7 hours ago, Rep2000 said:

You all are not serious people if you think a country could produce less emissions than Taylor Swift

 

Like, which country? Name some of them, quickly.

Taylor released over 8,000 tonnes of carbon via her jet. That's more than some small countries and islands do

Greenland, Faeroe Islands, Cook Islands etc

[superben]

On 8/19/2023 at 10:59 PM, EarthJang said:

 

I mean...

Not as much an obsession as a repost  

[Bussea]

8 hours ago, Elusive Chanteuse said:

I don't think it's a big deal. 

this. even if taylor wasn’t my fave, I literally do not care. like wtf do you want me to do with this information? shoot her plane down?

[Robert]

Drag her for her emissions but this dude is also praising Tucker Carson in other tweets and Taylor has never spoken about emissions or climate change. 

[Outlaws]

Drag her ass.

[popmusicisdead]

where are those German activists when you need them 

[If U Seek Amy]

Literally no one cares about this get a life and go out all this energy towards mega corps doing drastically worse 

[réveuse]

On 8/20/2023 at 7:15 AM, MoonGoodandHappy said:

 

The music industry  

 

And now The pollution industry 

 

LEGEND. 

Pollution: Taylor's Version

[Avenger]

I never would understand how fans are able to justify anything their fave does? Celebrity worship is really a disease, and anyone can fly business with proper security idk why people think that she can’t do that she can and she doesn’t want to as simple as that. 
 

And, government needs to put out some laws regarding this otherwise people would obviously misuse it. 

Edited August 21, 2023 by Avenger

[katykater]

12 hours ago, lonnie said:

Taylor released over 8,000 tonnes of carbon via her jet. That's more than some small countries and islands do

Greenland, Faeroe Islands, Cook Islands etc

Wait a minute:

 

Quote

Celebrities use private jets excessively. It’s a climate nightmare.

Updated August 2, 2022 at 8:22 p.m. EDT|Published August 2, 2022 at 3:12 p.m. EDT

 

Taylor Swift’s plane was identified by the report as the “biggest celebrity CO2e polluter this year so far,” racking up 170 flights since January [2022, till the research was published July 29, 2022] with emissions totaling more than 8,293 metric tons.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2022/08/02/taylor-swift-kylie-jenner-private-jet-emissions/

170 flights in 7 months can be extrapolated to a full year: 170 / 7 * 12 = 291 flights and 8293 / 7 * 12 = 14216 metric tons

 

 

$

 

https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country/

Edited August 21, 2023 by katykater

[Bosque]

I’ve never seen a thread about climate change reach 8 pages on ATRL unless Taylor’s name was in the title

[Bubble Tea]

Always knew she was evil.

[tshwark]

And why a rich celeb would care, we now they are selfish and they would use narratives to push their brand as hard as thy can. Just move on.

[scenekiller]

"she's never spoken about climate change" yall are seriously mentally ill  that is not the important takeaway even if the person who posted it is also trash

[EmailMySwift]

17 hours ago, Dephira said:

I’ve never seen a thread about climate change reach 8 pages on ATRL unless Taylor’s name was in the title

Suddenly they care about climate change 

[SchmoodRing]

On 8/21/2023 at 12:14 PM, Avenger said:

I never would understand how fans are able to justify anything their fave does? Celebrity worship is really a disease, and anyone can fly business with proper security idk why people think that she can’t do that she can and she doesn’t want to as simple as that. 
 

And, government needs to put out some laws regarding this otherwise people would obviously misuse it. 

we have artists getting assaulted at court and you think taylor swift with some mere security can get on a plane and nothing will go down? don't be naive

On 8/21/2023 at 11:47 PM, Tropical said:

Always knew she was evil.

with that avi your pot calling the kettle black, tread very carefully saweetie

On 8/22/2023 at 7:40 AM, tshwark said:

And why a rich celeb would care, we now they are selfish and they would use narratives to push their brand as hard as thy can. Just move on.

yeah why she specifically is being so targeted and held responsible for the climate of an entire planet is wild. if she wasn't a global superstar this wouldn't even be a thing lbr

[better than revenge]

People should just stop looking for excuses to hate on Taylor

[Raiden]

On 8/20/2023 at 1:30 AM, CroNich said:

Yeah her ‘never speaking a word about climate change’ was the wrong take sweetie.

 

Im conflicted though because I don’t see somehow of her stature would be able to fly commercial at this point. I just hope that she is financially offsetting at least some of the carbon generated from these trips.

Exactly.

 

Swift is wrong to be silent.

 

She should speak up about climate change... AND continue to fly.

 

and then educate any right-wing idiot yelling hypocrite (or left wing dupe on a guilt trip) that the blame lies with producers of energy, not individual consumers.

 

 

Edited August 24, 2023 by Raiden

[Watson!]

3 minutes ago, Raiden said:

Exactly.

 

Swift is wrong to be silent.

 

She should speak up about climate change... AND continue to fly.

 

and then remind any right-wing idiot yelling hypocrite (or left wing dupe on a guilt trip) that the blame lies with producers of energy, not consumers.

that's the stupidest thing I have heard in a while. technologies for fuel alternatives are expensive and sometimes very limited.

unless there is a kind of tax, nobody will prefer to use another way of energy, because fuel is cheaper.

will taylor and the rest advocate a fuel tax? obviously not

[Raiden]

3 hours ago, Watson! said:

that's the stupidest thing I have heard in a while. technologies for fuel alternatives are expensive and sometimes very limited.

unless there is a kind of tax, nobody will prefer to use another way of energy, because fuel is cheaper.

will taylor and the rest advocate a fuel tax? obviously not

Your neoliberal drivel is the stupidest thing since it was invented in the 80s.

 

I'm not proposing a simple tax on producers — obviously in that scenario they will simply pass on their tax to the consumer by increasing the sales price.

 

What I am suggesting is outright regulation of producers. Forcing them to produce less and less fossil fuel year after year, decade after decade. Shut down oil wells... ban the most inefficient ones, one by one. Then you tighten the noose. Bleed oil companies at the production end, not at the sales end. Similar to nuclear power quotas or fishing quotas etc etc, fishing bans (whales) that countries negotiated and that led to total bans. They didn't ban the eating, they banned the fishing and selling of wales.

 

Consumers job is to consume whatever is in the market, it's regulators job to dictate what should be allowed to be sold on the market.

Edited August 24, 2023 by Raiden

[Raiden]

The "market" for asbestos and DDT now is nearly zero.

 

That was not achieved by anything other than informed government regulation, forced reduction and finally an outright ban

 

And not because the DDT and asbest producers said "guys don't buy this toxic crap from us — we have come to this benevolent conclusion and decision all by ourselves out of the goodness of our hearts"

[Watson!]

43 minutes ago, Raiden said:

Your neoliberal drivel is the stupidest thing since it was invented in the 80s.

 

I'm not proposing a simple tax on producers — obviously in that scenario they will simply pass on their tax to the consumer by increasing the sales price.

 

What I am suggesting is outright regulation of producers. Forcing them to produce less and less fossil fuel year after year, decade after decade. Shut down oil wells... ban the most inefficient ones, one by one. Then you tighten the noose. Bleed oil companies at the production end, not at the sales end. Similar to nuclear power quotas or fishing quotas etc etc, fishing bans (whales) that countries negotiated and that led to total bans. They didn't ban the eating, they banned the fishing and selling of wales.

 

Consumers job is to consume whatever is in the market, it's regulators job to dictate what should be allowed to be sold on the market.

and when production is reduced, you will have to compete with Taylor for some gas for your car.  and how are are you going to force countries in foreign countries to stop the production?

[Raiden]

25 minutes ago, Watson! said:

and when production is reduced, you will have to compete with Taylor for some gas for your car.  and how are are you going to force countries in foreign countries to stop the production?

No when actual production is reduced — producers do what they have always done: look for alternatives.

 

When new companies like Tesla started the initial production and sale of EV cars, the likes of Mercedes and BMW couldn't be arsed to sweat and bother about what batteries to produce and all that jazz. Only when Tesla stocks skyrocketed that they felt compelled to jump into the EV market for real. And Tesla exists in the first place and above all thanks to Obama, i.e. regulation.

 

Producers will do the right thing in their own time.

 

Leadership and regulation has to come first, not last.

Edited August 24, 2023 by Raiden