The Carbon Footprint of the Super-Rich: Why Private Jets Are a Problem

Private jets: A symbol of wealth and a source of woe

Private jets are often seen as a symbol of wealth, power and prestige. They allow billionaires to travel in comfort, convenience and privacy, without the hassle of airport security, delays or crowds. They also enable them to access remote locations, conduct business meetings and attend events around the world.

However, private jets also have a dark side: They are one of the most environmentally damaging forms of transport, contributing to global warming and climate change. Private jets emit large amounts of greenhouse gases (GHG) that trap heat in the atmosphere and cause the Earth's temperature to rise. They also produce other pollutants that have additional warming effects at high altitudes.

According to a report by Oxfam: The world's richest 1% are responsible for more than twice as much carbon pollution as the poorest half of humanity combined. The report also found that the carbon emissions of the richest 10% were about 60 times higher than those of the poorest 10%. One of the main drivers of this inequality is the use of private jets by billionaires and other wealthy individuals.

Case Studies:

A study by researchers at Indiana University estimated the carbon footprints of 20 well-known billionaires based on their public records of houses, vehicles, aircraft and yachts. It found that, in 2018, they each generated an average of 8,914 tons of CO2, compared with 1.4 tons for an individual in the poorest one billion. The study also calculated that a superyacht with a permanent crew, helicopter pad, submarines and pools emits about 7,020 tons of CO2 a year, making it by far the worst asset to own from an environmental standpoint.

Another study by Shendure's ClimateJets project analyzed the flight data of over 2,000 private jets owned by billionaires and celebrities. It ranked them according to their carbon emissions from private flights during 2022. The top polluter was Thomas Siebel, the founder of Siebel Systems, who emitted 4,649 tons of CO2 from private flights in 2022. The second was David Geffen, the co-founder of DreamWorks, who emitted 4,445 tons of CO2. The third was Elon Musk, the founder of Tesla and SpaceX, who emitted 3,951 tons of CO2.

According to BBC News, private jets generally produce significantly more emissions per passenger than commercial flights. Some estimates say private jets produce 10 times the amount of carbon per passenger, although calculations clearly vary depending on the make and model of aircraft being compared, the length of journey and the number of passengers per flight

For example, a Bombardier Global 7500, the flagship model of the Global series, can carry up to 19 passengers and has a maximum range of 14,260 km. Assuming an average fuel consumption of 1,000 kg per hour, a flight from London to New York on this jet would consume about 7,000 kg of fuel and emit about 22 tonnes of CO2. This is equivalent to the annual emissions of about five cars in the US, or more than three times the average per capita emissions in the UK.

Moreover, these emissions are not only composed of CO2 but also include other pollutants such as water vapour, contrails and nitrogen oxides that are released by planes at high altitudes. These have additional warming effects that are not fully accounted for by the standard CO2 conversion factor. According to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS), to capture the maximum climate impact of flights, CO2 emissions figures should be multiplied by 1.9. This means that the London-New York flight on a Bombardier Global 7500 would have a climate impact equivalent to about 42 tonnes of CO2.

Therefore, it can be concluded that Bombardier Global private jets have a significant environmental impact that cannot be ignored or mitigated by technological improvements or alternative fuels alone. The only way to reduce their carbon footprint is to limit their use or replace them with more efficient and less polluting modes of transport. This would require a radical change in the behaviour and preferences of their customers, as well as a strong regulatory framework and incentives from governments and international organizations.

These figures are staggering when compared with the average emissions of ordinary people. For example, a flight from Rome to Glasgow on a private jet would produce about 5.9 tons of CO2, equivalent to the annual emissions of about five cars in the US, or more than three times the average per capita emissions in the UK. To capture the maximum climate impact of flights, CO2 emissions figures should be multiplied by 1.9 to reflect the effect of non-CO2 emissions released by planes at high altitudes, which increases the warming effect.

Therefore, it can be concluded that private jets symbolise wealth and a source of woe. They have a significant environmental impact that cannot be ignored or mitigated by technological improvements or alternative fuels alone. The only way to reduce their carbon footprint is to limit their use or replace them with more efficient and less polluting modes of transport. This would require a radical change in the behaviour and preferences of their customers, as well as a strong regulatory framework and incentives from governments and international organizations.