Can we get PAID to soar? Carbon Offsets

[Dave Newill]

Posted in humor -but with some actual possibly that it might work! Now
the EU is going to start charging corporate aircraft for their Carbon
Footprint. So if I "sell" my flight time in a sailplane to some
corporate aircraft operator - could that not "offset" some of his
fleets carbon footprint? Stranger things have been done in the name of
Carbon offsets! Over to the rest of you to see what comes of this one!
Imagine Soaring being so useful that we could all get paid for our
sport!

[Dan Silent[_2_]]

At 02:32 13 February 2009, Dave Newill wrote:
>Posted in humor -but with some actual possibly that it might work! Now
>the EU is going to start charging corporate aircraft for their Carbon
>Footprint. So if I "sell" my flight time in a sailplane to some
>corporate aircraft operator - could that not "offset" some of his
>fleets carbon footprint? Stranger things have been done in the name of
>Carbon offsets! Over to the rest of you to see what comes of this one!
>Imagine Soaring being so useful that we could all get paid for our
>sport!
>

Certainly part of pilot training could be done engine off,
or no engine to claim credits!!!
........or simulator to claim more credits!!!
and what about electric gliders? more credits again.........

[Nyal Williams[_2_]]

We'll need some kind of formula, mathematicians. Charge for the footprint
of the tow plane, calculate the number of minutes of free flight without
lift (min. sink rate), remainder of flight time for sale -- unless there
is a landout and a trailer comes for retrieval -- subtract that.

Makes one want to hand around the airport just a thermal away.
Nah!

At 03:30 13 February 2009, Dan Silent wrote:
>At 02:32 13 February 2009, Dave Newill wrote:
>>Posted in humor -but with some actual possibly that it might work! Now
>>the EU is going to start charging corporate aircraft for their Carbon
>>Footprint. So if I "sell" my flight time in a sailplane to some
>>corporate aircraft operator - could that not "offset" some of his
>>fleets carbon footprint? Stranger things have been done in the name of
>>Carbon offsets! Over to the rest of you to see what comes of this one!
>>Imagine Soaring being so useful that we could all get paid for our
>>sport!
>>
>
>Certainly part of pilot training could be done engine off,
>or no engine to claim credits!!!
>........or simulator to claim more credits!!!
>and what about electric gliders? more credits again.........
>
>

[Nyal Williams[_2_]]

We'll need some kind of formula, mathematicians. Charge for the footprint
of the tow plane, calculate the number of minutes of free flight without
lift (min. sink rate), remainder of flight time for sale -- unless there
is a landout and a trailer comes for retrieval -- subtract that.

Makes one want to hand around the airport just a thermal away.
Nah!

At 03:30 13 February 2009, Dan Silent wrote:
>At 02:32 13 February 2009, Dave Newill wrote:
>>Posted in humor -but with some actual possibly that it might work! Now
>>the EU is going to start charging corporate aircraft for their Carbon
>>Footprint. So if I "sell" my flight time in a sailplane to some
>>corporate aircraft operator - could that not "offset" some of his
>>fleets carbon footprint? Stranger things have been done in the name of
>>Carbon offsets! Over to the rest of you to see what comes of this one!
>>Imagine Soaring being so useful that we could all get paid for our
>>sport!
>>
>
>Certainly part of pilot training could be done engine off,
>or no engine to claim credits!!!
>........or simulator to claim more credits!!!
>and what about electric gliders? more credits again.........
>
>

[Tom Gardner]

On Feb 13, 5:15*am, Nyal Williams > wrote:
> We'll need some kind of formula, mathematicians. *Charge for the footprint
> of the tow plane, calculate the number of minutes of free flight without
> lift (min. sink rate), remainder of flight time for sale -- unless there
> is a landout and a trailer comes for retrieval -- subtract that.
>
> Makes one want to hand around the airport just a thermal away.
> Nah!

That's all far too complicated.

Airlines want "permission to continue polluting", at a low
incremental
cost on top of their current operations costs.

We want lots of money relative to our current costs.

Both interests are served by simply equating the airframes, and
transferring a nominal amount of money, say £5000 per year.

Does this have much to do with reducing carbon footprints? No,
of course not; but how effective is the rest of the carbon trading
business at that?

[Nyal Williams[_2_]]

But, Tom!

It's a complicated spo-o-ort! Let's have a little fun with it.


At 09:23 13 February 2009, Tom Gardner wrote:
>On Feb 13, 5:15=A0am, Nyal Williams wrote:
>> We'll need some kind of formula, mathematicians. =A0Charge for the
>footpr=
>int
>> of the tow plane, calculate the number of minutes of free flight
without
>> lift (min. sink rate), remainder of flight time for sale -- unless
there
>> is a landout and a trailer comes for retrieval -- subtract that.
>>
>> Makes one want to hand around the airport just a thermal away.
>> Nah!
>
>That's all far too complicated.
>
>Airlines want "permission to continue polluting", at a low
>incremental
>cost on top of their current operations costs.
>
>We want lots of money relative to our current costs.
>
>Both interests are served by simply equating the airframes, and
>transferring a nominal amount of money, say =A35000 per year.
>
>Does this have much to do with reducing carbon footprints? No,
>of course not; but how effective is the rest of the carbon trading
>business at that?
>

[JS]

Nyal > Let's have a little fun with it.

Right, then!
The carbon thing is too complicated.
Especially in aircraft made from the stuff and even more so if you
don't foot or bungee launch.
Wouldn't it be easier to declare your glider your temple, so soaring
would become a religious activity?
This means you'd pay no income tax, so you too could afford to buy
small businesses like radio and TV networks to support your habit.
Many of us have invoked religious icons in the cockpit before,
usually after hitting turbulence, so we're well on the way!
Heeheeeee.....
Jim

(from my house, great circle)
Airport 6 miles ----->
<----- Prison 4 miles

[Jim Logajan]

Dave Newill > wrote:
> Posted in humor -but with some actual possibly that it might work! Now
> the EU is going to start charging corporate aircraft for their Carbon
> Footprint. So if I "sell" my flight time in a sailplane to some
> corporate aircraft operator - could that not "offset" some of his
> fleets carbon footprint?

But gliders tend to require more footwork, so wouldn't that make the carbon
footprint larger? ;-)

(Except for silicon-based life forms, which have no carbon footprint.
They're just a bunch of heels anyway.)

[Nyal Williams[_2_]]

Maybe we can get paid not to carry carbonated water as ballast -- just
like the farmers get paid not to grow crops.

At 19:13 13 February 2009, Jim Logajan wrote:
>Dave Newill wrote:
>> Posted in humor -but with some actual possibly that it might work! Now
>> the EU is going to start charging corporate aircraft for their Carbon
>> Footprint. So if I "sell" my flight time in a sailplane to some
>> corporate aircraft operator - could that not "offset" some of his
>> fleets carbon footprint?
>
>But gliders tend to require more footwork, so wouldn't that make the
>carbon
>footprint larger? ;-)
>
>(Except for silicon-based life forms, which have no carbon footprint.
>They're just a bunch of heels anyway.)
>

[vontresc]

On Feb 13, 3:00*pm, Nyal Williams > wrote:
> Maybe we can get paid not to carry carbonated water as ballast -- just
> like the farmers get paid not to grow crops.
>
> At 19:13 13 February 2009, Jim Logajan wrote:
>
>
>
> >Dave Newill *wrote:
> >> Posted in humor -but with some actual possibly that it might work! Now
> >> the EU is going to start charging corporate aircraft for their Carbon
> >> Footprint. So if I "sell" my flight time in a sailplane to some
> >> corporate aircraft operator - could that not "offset" some of his
> >> fleets carbon footprint?
>
> >But gliders tend to require more footwork, so wouldn't that make the
> >carbon
> >footprint larger? ;-)
>
> >(Except for silicon-based life forms, which have no carbon footprint.
> >They're just a bunch of heels anyway.)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Also would flying a wooden glider like my Ka-6 be considered Carbon
Positive???? Jus think of all of the CO2 captured in the cellulose of
that beautiful plywood :-)

And if you don't want to burn dinosaurs to power the winch there's
always this...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86rOfjhsIIM
Just remember to figure in the horse fart offset :-)

Pete

[Tom Gardner]

On Feb 13, 9:00*pm, Nyal Williams > wrote:
> Maybe we can get paid not to carry carbonated water as ballast -- just
> like the farmers get paid not to grow crops.

I like it.

Perhaps we should be paid not to launch (in the winter months :)