From Taylor Swift to Bernard Arnault: Celebrities forced to ditch private jets due to climate

From American singer Taylor Swift to French businessman Bernard Arnault, there is growing pressure on celebrities, politicians and big businessmen to limit their travel to private jets, which are responsible for a significant carbon footprint.

In mid-July, after posting a photo of his plane and his partner on Instagram, the reality TV star Kylie Jenner netizens called him a “climate criminal”.

“Polluter and criminal,” another tweeted about the director. Steven Spielbergaccused of committing a 28-minute flight.

Countless humorous memes, photos and videos poking fun at Taylor Swift have gone viral following Friday’s release of an analysis by marketing agency Yard that ranked her as the “most polluting celebrity of the year” with 170 flights since the start of the year.

Yard relied on account details Twitter “Celebrity Jetswhich tracks celebrity flights through public online data.

This account was created by Jack Sweeney, a 19 year old student. It started in June 2020 following a private jet Elon Musk and now has 30 accounts tracking sports stars, Meta boss Mark Zuckerberg, and even Russian oligarchs.

It inspired other netizens such as Sebastian*, a 35-year-old aeronautical engineer who created the “I Fly Bernard” account in April, to reveal French billionaires’ flight routes to put pressure on them about their carbon footprint.

“What I’m trying to condemn is the use of private jets as taxis,” he explains to AFP, pointing to the numerous domestic or European flights.

“In Europe, three-quarters of these flights could be made by train,” says William Todts, chief executive of Transport & Environment, which brings together European NGOs in the sector.

– 5 to 14 times more pollutants than in classical flight –

The aviation sector accounts for between 2% and 3% of global CO2 emissions, but according to a Transport & Environment report released in May, flights are 5 to 14 times more carbon dioxide emissions per passenger than commercial flights and 50 times more than commercial flights. above the train.

On the other hand, private aviation is booming in the wake of the pandemic as its customers want to avoid flight suspensions and promiscuity in the face of covid-19.

Some stars have responded to the pressure on social media. Representative last week Taylor Swift told the press that she “regularly lends her plane to other people.”

“Attributing most or all of these flights to him is absolutely wrong,” he clarifies.

Rapper Drake, assigned for a 14-minute flight between Toronto and Hamilton, responded on Instagram that the plane had been moved to park elsewhere, “there was no one on board,” he said.

“It’s even worse if it flies empty,” says Beatrice Jarridge, project manager for the Shift Project.

In France, a spokesman for the Bouygues group claims that the plane followed by “I fly Bernard”, presented as Martin Bouygues’ plane, belongs to the group and is “used by several employees”.

This indicates that the aircraft’s CO2 emissions are being offset by reforestation projects, a decision that has been criticized as it does not result in significant emission reductions.

Other French billionaires such as Bernard ArnaultJean-Charles Decaux and Vincent Bolloret, also affected by the Twitter account, declined to comment.

Jarridge hopes this social media movement will turn into a political action.

“This is not about completely banning flights, but it is necessary that the richest try to sober up,” he says, advocating investment in the railroad.

At a minimum, aircraft owners should require that they run on biofuels instead of kerosene, Todts said, as this would encourage aircraft manufacturers to develop these technologies.

In September 2021, the business aviation sector identified these sustainable fuels as “key” to meeting the 2050 carbon neutrality goal. (AFP)

*Name has been changed as the person wishes to remain anonymous.

Criminal defense lawyer Carlos Caro emphasized that the criteria of Attorney General Patricia Benavidez prevailed, who said that the President did not have the privilege of choosing the place of the trial due to his condition under investigation. A similar opinion was expressed by a lawyer specializing in the field of constitutional and criminal procedure law Wilber Medina.