316

cross-posted from: https://infosec.pub/post/48796725

An EU court has said the manufacture of private jets can’t be excluded from a list of activities deemed to be environmentally sustainable, fuelling concerns about the greenwashing of the emissions of the super-rich.

The list, intended to provide an ⁠overview of green investments, previously excluded aircraft for private or commercial business aviation due to their high emissions compared with other forms of transport following a 2023 decision by the European Commission.

The court argued that the 2023 ruling was made with a number of errors, including that other modes of transport couldn’t necessarily be seen as low-carbon alternatives as they “lack the flexibility and speed” of private jets.

all 39 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] quick_snail@feddit.nl 4 points 1 hour ago

As far as I can tell, this ruling is about the manufacturer of jets, not using them.

So, uhh, it's a green investment to buy one and let it sit unused. I guess I can't disagree with that.

Nowhere does this ruling say that flying is green.

[-] Fedizen@lemmy.world 5 points 1 hour ago

Courts have a long, proud tradition of not seeing the forest through the trees.

[-] popekingjoe@lemmy.world 1 points 31 minutes ago

Or the trees themselves, for that matter.

[-] quick_snail@feddit.nl 2 points 1 hour ago

Didn't the EU also pass laws making green washing illegal?

[-] VexLogic@feddit.online 115 points 10 hours ago

Ya know, when I first subscribed to NotTheOnion I thought the title was a bit confusing. But over time I've realized the beauty of it. Looking at these headlines and thinking to myself, "man this has got to be a joke right?" then I look up and see this is NotTheOnion, and my heart sinks 😅 We're really in the worst timeline huh guys

[-] huppakee@lemmy.world 31 points 8 hours ago

Worst timeline... so far

[-] a4ng3l@lemmy.world 27 points 8 hours ago

« * The court noted that the Commission had failed to take into account that ⁠private ​jets could be flown ​on sustainable fuel.

  • The Commission can appeal the ruling within two ​months. »

Not all is lost… it’s a technicality especially if sustainable fuel has a stringent definition which is exactly what I would do if I was to address this decision.

[-] quick_snail@feddit.nl 3 points 1 hour ago

There is no such thing as sustainable jet fuel.

[-] huppakee@lemmy.world 10 points 8 hours ago

If money is involved the owners of that money already thought of that. If it was blackmail, the individual(s) involved probably made a plan for that hurdle. But here's to hoping the Commission will do the right thing.

[-] a4ng3l@lemmy.world 5 points 7 hours ago

It’s a rather complex system here but I reckon our checks and balances are still somewhat functional. I have some trust.

[-] TIEPilot@lemmy.world 51 points 10 hours ago

And they want me to give up driving and my gas stove...

"Rules for thee, not for me"

[-] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 21 points 9 hours ago

Getting rid of the gas stove is for your own respiratory health.

[-] TIEPilot@lemmy.world 3 points 9 hours ago

Not my setup, no pilot and I have a hood that vents outside when its in use...

[-] victorz@lemmy.world 13 points 9 hours ago

Do you have a moment to talk about our Lord and savior, the induction hob?

[-] TIEPilot@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago

I have one for my wok to get the super high temps.

[-] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 2 points 9 hours ago

Good, then fuck 'em

[-] homes@piefed.world 21 points 10 hours ago

You’ve been driving your gas stove?

[-] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago

Of all the people to drive a gas stove I would have thought it'd be you, homes.

[-] WhoIzDisIz@lemmy.today 7 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

It gets them all hot & bothered.

[-] br3d@lemmy.world 20 points 10 hours ago

Yes. We need to do those things as well, and this travesty doesn't remove the need for all of us to decarbonise

[-] Jerb322@lemmy.world 19 points 9 hours ago

How many of them, that decided this, have a private jet?

[-] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago

Give it a week or two before counting

[-] cabillaud@lemmy.world 3 points 6 hours ago

Maybe none, but they like little presents, from time to time.

[-] Exusia@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago
[-] Almacca@aussie.zone 9 points 8 hours ago

Or are looking to buy one in the near future?

[-] Zorque@lemmy.world 3 points 6 hours ago

Or be gifted one.

[-] Noite_Etion@lemmy.world 37 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

transport couldn’t necessarily be seen as low-carbon alternatives as they “lack the flexibility and speed” of private jets.

Despite going through hundreds of litres of jet fuel an hour... All for one person in some cases.

Sorry trains, you aren't flexible enough... Whatever the fuck that means

The court clarified that the climate impact metric used by the Commission is about aircraft operation, while this taxonomy decision was about the manufacturing of the aircraft itself.

Oh so they agree that private jets are horrendously inefficient and ruin the environment, but they are "green" to build them so that is okay...

WTF

[-] homes@piefed.world 16 points 10 hours ago

Trains literally bend. WTF

[-] MyTurtleSwimsUpsideDown@fedia.io 14 points 9 hours ago

Technically trains hinge.

Planes do bend

[-] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 19 points 10 hours ago

What in the fuck have these people been smoking...

I can't think of a less green form of transportation besides perhaps rockets.

[-] Naich@piefed.world 8 points 9 hours ago

How about a traction engine with flame throwers on the sides to burn down forests as it trundles along?

[-] GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world 3 points 7 hours ago

you forgot the methane gas exhaust system

[-] Rhaedas@fedia.io 5 points 10 hours ago

A rocket might be better than a private jet overall. May depend on the payload and its purpose.

[-] MyTurtleSwimsUpsideDown@fedia.io 1 points 9 hours ago

And it’s fuel.

[-] victorz@lemmy.world 0 points 9 hours ago

Happy cake day!

[-] uhmbah@lemmy.ca 5 points 9 hours ago

Green is a type of table with 6 or more legs

Rock is a type of pen

Solidarity is another word for quicksand

Poor is defined as a human citizen

If thee can change the definition of anything they want, then so can me

[-] officermike@lemmy.world 2 points 10 hours ago

Ran across this relevant YouTube short yesterday:

https://youtube.com/shorts/Xmka1awC1b4?is=cZCx07wrTSWth3OV

this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2026
316 points (100.0% liked)

Not The Onion

21860 readers
2151 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS