Lufthansa CEO: “Flight Shaming” Is “Fake News”

To me, Lufthansa CEO Carsten Spohr is one of the least likable people in the airline industry. That brings us to the comments that he made during the IATA Wings of Change conference, which took place in Berlin last week.

Lufthansa CEO Calls Flight Shaming “Fake News”

As reported by Simple Flying, during a presentation last week, Spohr referred to those who are “flight shaming” as peddling “fake news.” Here’s the argument he made about how the airline industry is working towards reducing emissions, and how the industry on the whole is vilified too much:

“Airlines should not have to be seen as a symbol of climate change. That’s just fake news.

Our industry contributes 2.8% of global CO2 emissions. As I’ve asked before, how about the other 97.2%? Are they contributing to global society with as much good as we do? Are they reducing emissions as much as we do?

Don’t get me wrong. This does not release us from the responsibility to act to drive down emissions, as we have done over the past 10 years. Now, there is just a little more rational discussion required of being healthy, for all of us around the world to deal with this important topic.”

My Take On Spohr’s Comments

The substance of what Spohr is saying isn’t wrong, in my opinion. That’s to say that the airline industry is becoming more efficient, yet it’s often treated as an industry that makes no effort to improve their environmental impact, and that’s not the case.

The reality is that the airline industry is becoming better environmentally, not necessarily because they actually care, but because fuel efficient planes save them money. That’s a good thing. That’s something Spohr went on to say, quite candidly:

“We do not need to be ‘woken up’ to saving fuel. Fuel is 20 to 25% of our costs. We’ve been trying to drive costs down for years!”

That being said:

  • It seems like poor judgment to use the term “fake news” for anything related to the discussion of climate change, unless you’re looking to annoy a lot of people
  • 2.8% ultimately is a significant percentage of global emissions; he seems to use that number in a way that suggests that’s not a big percentage, but to me it sure seems like it is

The reality is that the airline industry is doing much better than the energy industry on the whole when it comes to reducing emissions. So while the airline industry isn’t the biggest polluter, it’s an easy target, given that it’s one that people frequently interact with directly, and also given that it’s viewed as being largely unnecessary.

The Irony Of Spohr’s Comments

It’s interesting to compare Spohr’s comments above to his comments from a few months ago. Over the summer, Spohr conveniently called the cheap flights offered by ultra low cost carriers ecologically irresponsible.

As he explained, airlines selling flights for less than 10EUR (~11USD) is “economically, ecologically, and politically irresponsible.” He said that “flights for less than 10EUR shouldn’t exist.”

Of course these comments were incredibly self-serving — they were made as EasyJet and Ryanair are increasing flights to Lufthansa’s home markets.

It also comes as Lufthansa’s own ultra low cost carrier, Eurowings, struggles to compete.

You’ve gotta wonder what the real “fake news” is here.

Bottom Line

I do think the airline industry is disproportionately attacked when it comes to their emissions, because they’re an easy target. That’s not to say that the people attacking them are wrong, as there are definitely things the airline industry can and should do to improve.

In many ways I think the pressure on airlines is good, as it will hopefully lead to expedited change.

That being said, there’s a real irony to Spohr first calling ultra low cost carriers “ecologically irresponsible,” and then suggesting that those targeting the airline industry for climate change are peddling “fake news.”

What do you make of Spohr’s comments?

Conversations (46)
The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.
Comment as a member

Membership is free and takes no more information than commenting as a guest. Earn status points for good contributions, and see fewer ads as your status grows.

Type your response here.

If you'd like to participate in the discussion, please adhere to our commenting guidelines. Anyone can comment, and your email address will not be published. Register to save your unique username and earn special OMAAT reputation perks!

  1. Loading comments…
Recent Comments
The latest from the OMAAT community.

The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.

Ksa63 Guest

”The reality is that the airline industry is becoming better environmentally, not necessarily because they actually care, but because fuel efficient planes save them money. “ The same situation applies to all industries. They claim to be going green because they care but it’s really because it saves them money.

0
‼ 0
snic Diamond

@James S: "Lucky, why do so many of your vocal readers apparently rely exclusively on Fox News to shape their views?" So many? I suspect it's just one or two, posting under different names.

0
‼ 0
deepeepdx Member

I chose not to breed to offset the environmental damage that I do with travel. One human consuming over a lifetime in the First-World does incalculable damage. Don't get me started on the overpopulation in Africa and Asia and what that's doing to the planet...

0
‼ 0
Karl Dilkington Guest

The key word there is 'shame'. It's a symptom of a society that's abandoned traditional religions and started evolving its own proxies for good and evil, saintly and corrupt. It's based more in jealousy, virtue signalling, attention-seeking and moral grandstanding than it is on any genuine concern for, and understanding of, the planet. While reducing your carbon footprint is helpful, if every business class passenger quite flying today, the overall impact on CO2 emissions would be barely measurable, unlike the cost to economic systems around the world, which certainly would be measurable. That's before we get to the fact that CO2 emissions are actually only a small part of the damage we're doing to the earth - with chemical pollution, meat consumption and deforestation being far more critical. I would suggest people stop eating mammals, stop buying goods from producers who violate the environment and invest more in low carbon technologies, rather than just trying to shame others into following your own quasi-religious guilt structures.

0
‼ 0
Johnson Rogers Guest

He is right. Only a very small handful of people voice those opinions. Unfortunately the mainstream media has editorial interests to push a certain narrative and disproportionately covers that POV yet fail to mention the overwhelming majority counterpoint to it. It is magnified by social media where people post about it. Normal people aren’t going to mention it in the first place so there is a false impression many support those opinions. Stupidly, company management tends to give in despite being heavily opposed by the majority of people. It’s the same thing when companies and institutions kowtow to the idea of forced racial diversity and forced LGBT everything to the point that it is a crime in their eyes to do anything white, straight or Christian. Then kids are fed this bias in schools from an early age 7 hours a day 5 days a week for 12 years and another 4-7.

0
‼ 0

Save posts to read later

Saving posts is a member feature. Become an OMAAT member to build a reading list you can come back to from any device.

Become a member
Meet Ben Schlappig, OMAAT Founder
5,883,136 Miles Traveled

43,914,800 Words Written

47,187 Posts Published