Why Private Jets Are a Big Problem for Our Planet

/ activist360
A black private jet parked on a runway under a clear blue sky.
Private jets like this one may carry only a handful of passengers—but their environmental footprint is massive. A single private jet can emit as much carbon dioxide in a year as 177 cars.

When we think about pollution from flying, most of us picture big commercial planes taking off from crowded airports. But there’s a smaller, more exclusive kind of flying that’s creating a surprisingly big impact on our planet: private jets.

Private jets may seem like a luxury issue, but they’re a climate concern that affects everyone. While only a small group of people use them, their environmental impact is outsized. A recent study by the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) looked at just how much pollution private jets cause—and what we can do about it.

What is a private jet?

A private jet is a small airplane, usually owned or rented by individuals or companies, that flies with only a few passengers. Unlike commercial airplanes that carry hundreds of people at a time, private jets often fly nearly empty.

Because they carry fewer passengers, private jets release much more pollution per person than regular flights. And unlike buses or trains that are available to the general public, these flights are mainly used by the wealthy for convenience.

Why we’re talking about them

You might wonder—if there are so few private jets compared to commercial flights, why focus on them?

It turns out, these jets are some of the most polluting forms of transportation per passenger. And their use is growing fast. The study found that private jet emissions increased 25% over the last decade, and they now account for nearly 4% of all aviation pollution worldwide.

Even though they’re used by a tiny fraction of people, private jets are contributing a lot to climate change—and avoiding accountability in the process.

What the Study Found

Private jets pollute much more than commercial flights

  • On average, a single private jet emits 810 tons of greenhouse gases (GHGs) each year.
  • That’s equal to the yearly emissions of 177 passenger cars or 9 large trucks.
  • Private jet passengers cause 5 to 14 times more emissions per person than commercial airline passengers.

The U.S. leads the world in private jet pollution

  • In 2023, 64.6% of all private jet flights started from the U.S.
  • Florida and Texas alone had more private jet flights than the entire European Union.
  • The U.S. was responsible for over half of global private jet emissions.

Most private jet trips are short and avoidable

  • Half of private jet flights were under 900 kilometers (about 560 miles).
  • These are trips that could often be replaced by high-speed trains or more efficient planes called turboprops.
  • Many private flights are for convenience, not necessity.

The Bigger Problem

Health risks from air pollution

Private jets don’t just release carbon dioxide—they also emit air pollutants like nitrogen oxides (NOx) and fine particles called PM2.5.

These pollutants:

  • Harm air quality near airports
  • Increase the risk of asthma, heart disease, and early death
  • Disproportionately affect low-income communities who live near major airports

Climate change and who it affects most

Even though private jet travel benefits a wealthy few, the pollution they cause harms everyone—especially people in vulnerable regions. Rising temperatures, stronger storms, wildfires, and droughts are all linked to climate change fueled by greenhouse gas emissions.

What Can Be Done

We don’t have to accept this as the cost of modern travel. The study suggested a few realistic steps:

Taxing private jet fuel

  • A proposed fuel tax of $1.59 per gallon could raise up to $3 billion a year.
  • This money could fund climate solutions or support public transit.
  • Right now, many private jets pay little or no fuel tax, giving them an unfair advantage.

Switching to cleaner alternatives

  • Turboprop planes, which use less fuel, could replace jets on short routes.
  • High-speed trains can be even cleaner, especially in regions like Europe.
  • Avoiding unnecessary flights—or replacing them with remote meetings—also helps.

Why policies matter

Private jets often fly under the radar—literally and legally. Many are exempt from emissions trading programs, escape higher taxes, and aren’t required to improve efficiency. Stronger laws can help level the playing field.

What You Can Do

You don’t need to fly a private jet to make a difference.

Talk about it

  • Share what you’ve learned with friends and family.
  • Challenge the idea that private jets are just a personal choice—they have public consequences.

Support better climate laws

  • Vote for leaders who take climate and pollution seriously.
  • Support policies that make polluters pay their fair share.
  • Encourage investment in cleaner transportation options like rail and electric buses.

Summing Up

Private jets may seem like a small part of a big problem—but they’re a high-impact example of climate inequality. A few people benefit, while the rest of the world shares the cost.

The good news is that we have clear data, real solutions, and growing public awareness. If we take smart action now—through policies, taxes, and cleaner options—we can reduce these emissions and build a future that works for everyone.

It’s not about stopping travel. It’s about making sure travel doesn’t cost us the planet.

Source: Sitompul, D., & Rutherford, D. (2025). Air and greenhouse gas pollution from private jets, 2023. International Council on Clean Transportation. Retrieved from

Why Dry Places Are Getting Even Drier

/ activist360
Evapotranspiration rises off the forest in the mountains of Ren'ai Township, Taiwan. Credit: Erica Gies
Evapotranspiration rises off the forest in the mountains of Ren’ai Township, Taiwan. Credit: Erica Gies

And What Nature Is Trying to Tell Us

Not long ago, wildfires tore through Los Angeles in the middle of winter. That caught a lot of people off guard. Winter fires used to be rare. But meteorologists weren’t surprised. They had already seen signs: unusually dry air, low humidity, and the perfect conditions for flames to spread.

With climate change, this “fire weather” is happening more often — not just in California, but in places like Canada, southern Europe, and the U.S. Southeast. Here’s the mystery: even though the world is getting warmer, some dry places aren’t getting more humid — they’re getting drier. So where is all the moisture going?

The Science Behind Moisture and Warming

Scientists know that warmer air can hold more water. It’s a basic rule called the Clausius–Clapeyron relationship, which says that for every 1°C (1.8°F) of warming, the atmosphere can hold about 7% more moisture.

Climate models — the computer programs scientists use to predict the future — say we should see more moisture in the air everywhere as the world warms. And that’s exactly what’s been happening in some places. For example, intense floods in Pakistan, Germany, and New York City were made worse by extra moisture in the air.

But over drylands — places like the U.S. Southwest, parts of Africa, and Australia — the models seem to be wrong. Instead of more moisture, the air is staying just as dry… or getting drier.

Missing Moisture: What’s Going Wrong?

Atmospheric physicist Isla Simpson and her team noticed this odd pattern by studying 40 years of weather data. In places that were already dry, humidity wasn’t going up. In some cases, like the American Southwest, it was going down.

The big question is: Why?

One possible answer is that plants and soil aren’t giving off as much water vapor as the models expect. Normally, plants “sweat” through tiny pores in their leaves, releasing moisture into the air — a process called transpiration. Soil also releases water. But under stress — like heat, drought, or damage — this natural system seems to slow down.

And here’s the twist: most climate models don’t fully account for the biology of plants and soil. They focus more on oceans, ice, and the atmosphere, and less on the living systems that also affect the climate.

Why Plants and Soil Matter

It turns out that plants and soil do much more than just sit there. They help regulate temperature and rain patterns. When plants release moisture, the moister:

  • Cools the air (like sweat on skin)
  • Helps clouds form
  • Helps spread rain farther inland

Healthy soil also plays a major role:

  • It holds water like a sponge
  • It supports fungi and bacteria that help form rain clouds
  • It slows down water runoff, keeping landscapes cooler and wetter

But when ecosystems are damaged, this water-holding system breaks down. The land dries out, gets hotter, and becomes more prone to droughts and fires.

Living ecosystems help cool and moisten the Earth. Damaged ecosystems make it hotter and drier.

How Humans Made It Worse

You might wonder: how did this happen on such a large scale?

The answer lies in how much we’ve changed the land:

  • 75% of the Earth’s land has been severely altered by human activity (IPBES, 2019)
  • Grasslands and savannas are overgrazed
  • Wetlands are drained
  • Forests are logged and replaced with tree farms
  • Industrial farming strips soil of life and nutrients

Even when we replant trees, they’re often monocultures (just one species), which don’t support the same soil health or moisture processes as natural forests. These changes might look green from space, but they don’t function the same way.

What We Can Do About It

When it comes to tackling climate change, we often hear about personal habits such driving less, eating differently, using less energy. While these actions matter, the biggest changes come from policies and systems. That’s why the most important thing we can do is use our voices and our votes.

Elect Leaders Who Protect Nature

  • Support candidates who prioritize ecosystem protection, climate resilience, and land stewardship
  • Ask hard questions: Will you protect native forests? Will you fund soil and water restoration?
  • Vote in local, state, and national elections. These decisions directly impact land use and climate outcomes

Hold Politicians Accountable

  • Follow up after elections by tracking what your representatives are doing for the environment
  • Attend town halls, write to your lawmakers, and support environmental advocacy groups
  • Push for science-based policies that restore biodiversity, water systems, and climate stability

When leaders understand that voters care about land and water — not just carbon — they’re more likely to act. Restoring ecosystems isn’t just good science, it’s good politics.

Restore Natural Ecosystems

  • Let native forests regrow instead of planting single-species trees
  • Support healthy grasslands with better grazing practices
  • Protect wetlands and water sources

Care for the Soil

  • Reduce tilling and chemical use
  • Encourage farming methods that boost soil life
  • Plant cover crops that help the land retain moisture

Think Local and Global

  • Support community land stewards and Indigenous practices
  • Include land care in climate solutions, alongside reducing carbon emissions

Restoring ecosystems brings powerful benefits: it can increase local rainfall, cool surrounding areas, reduce the risk of fires and droughts, and support healthier biodiversity. These natural systems do more than sustain wildlife — they help protect our communities too.

Summing Up

Climate change isn’t just about carbon dioxide — it’s also about water, life, and how we care for the land. When dry places get even drier, it’s a sign that something’s out of balance.

By listening to nature and recognizing the role of plants, soil, and ecosystems, we can develop better climate models, smarter solutions, and a safer future. As the science shows, protecting living systems doesn’t just help animals and plants. It helps us too.

Let’s care for the land as part of how we care for the climate.

Source: Gies, E. (2025, June 20). Climate science and the case of the missing moisture. Nature Water, 3, 634–637. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44221-025-00455-2

Carbon Capture Isn’t a Free Pass: Why Cutting Emissions Still Matters

/ activist360
A 4-panel infographic titled 'How Carbon Dioxide Mixes Underground Over Time' showing the stages of CO₂ injection and mixing in a saline aquifer: initial diffusion, formation of fingers, active mixing with plumes, and eventual saturation. Includes a color legend for caprock, injected CO₂, and brine.

How CO₂ Mixes Underground Over Time — This visual shows the four main stages of carbon dioxide mixing after underground injection: from initial diffusion to active mixing and eventual stabilization. While carbon capture helps, the slow pace of mixing shows why cutting emissions remains essential.

We’re capturing carbon to fight climate change—but does that mean we can keep burning fossil fuels? A new study says: not so fast.

We all want to believe in solutions. With headlines about new technologies to capture carbon dioxide (CO₂) and store it deep underground, it’s easy to feel hopeful. And we should—these tools are an important part of the climate puzzle.

But a recent scientific study reminds us of something important: carbon capture is not a substitute for cutting emissions. It can help, but it can’t do the job alone.

Here’s what the study found—and why it matters for anyone concerned about climate change.

The Bottom Line

Scientists recently ran some of the most advanced computer simulations to better understand what happens after CO₂ is stored underground. What they found is simple, but powerful:

  • CO₂ mixes underground more slowly than we thought.

  • Even when conditions are ideal, it can take decades to fully trap the carbon.

  • Thankfully, the study offers a new model to help us predict and manage the process more accurately.

What does this mean in plain terms?

Carbon capture can help us buy time—but we still need to slash emissions at the source.

How CO₂ Storage Works (Simple Explainer)

Let’s break it down.

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a method of taking CO₂—usually from power plants or factories—and injecting it deep underground, into rock layers filled with salty water (called brine). Once underground, the CO₂ begins to mix with the brine. Over time, it becomes trapped and less likely to escape back into the air.

But here’s the key: this process doesn’t happen instantly.

  • At first, the CO₂ just sits there.

  • Then, it starts to mix with the brine slowly.

  • Eventually, if enough time passes, it becomes safely diluted and stored.

This is why we can’t rely on carbon capture alone. If we keep emitting at today’s pace, storage can’t keep up.

What the Study Found (Key Takeaways)

A team of international scientists ran 3D simulations to understand how CO₂ moves and mixes underground. Their findings give us a more realistic picture than older studies.

CO₂ Storage Happens in 3 Stages

  1. Diffusion Phase: The CO₂ sits near the top, barely moving, and starts to slowly dissolve.

  2. Mixing Phase: Fingers or “plumes” of CO₂-rich water begin to form and sink, helping the mixing process.

  3. Shutdown Phase: As the space fills up, mixing slows, and it becomes harder for new CO₂ to enter the system.

The 13.5% Surprise

Older research assumed that CO₂ mixes 25% better in 3D (real-world) environments than in simpler 2D models. But this new study found the actual difference is only 13.5%. This matters because it corrects an overestimate in how fast and how much carbon we can safely store.

A Better Model

The study also introduced a simple, accurate formula to predict how CO₂ behaves underground over time. This helps engineers and policymakers design storage projects that are safer and more reliable.

In short: better science means better planning—and fewer excuses to delay real climate action.

Why It Matters for the Real World

We need trust in climate solutions. That means knowing how long it takes for stored CO₂ to become safe and stable underground.

Let’s take a real example: the Sleipner site in the North Sea, one of the world’s longest-running carbon storage projects.

  • After 20 years, only about 50% of the injected CO₂ has fully mixed.

  • To reach 90%, it could take more than 100 years.

That’s valuable progress—but it’s slow. We can’t lean on carbon capture alone, especially if emissions continue at today’s rates.

What This Means for Climate Activists

For climate activists, concerned citizens, and policymakers, this study offers a powerful reminder: Carbon capture is not a free pass to keep polluting.

Instead, it should be used alongside deep emissions cuts to help us reach climate goals faster and safer. Use this research to ask more questions:

  • How long will it take for the CO₂ to safely mix underground?

  • What’s being done to monitor leakage risk over time?

  • Are we also cutting emissions at the source—or just relying on storage?

The answers to these questions matter—because our planet’s future depends on both honest science and decisive action.

The Big Picture

Climate change is a big problem—and we need many tools to solve it. Carbon capture is one of those tools. But we shouldn’t treat it like a silver bullet.

“Carbon capture isn’t a free pass—it buys us time, but only if we use that time to slash emissions.”

This study helps us see that clearly. It’s not about losing hope—it’s about staying realistic, smart, and focused on solutions that truly work.

Final Thought

If we’re serious about protecting our planet, we must keep reducing the amount of CO₂ we put into the air—even as we work to store what’s already there. Science, like this study, helps point us in the right direction. It’s up to all of us—activists, voters, leaders, and everyday people—to act on that knowledge.

Source: De Paoli, M., Zonta, F., Enzenberger, L., Coliban, E., & Pirozzoli, S. (2025). Simulation and modeling of convective mixing of carbon dioxide in geological formations. Geophysical Research Letters, 52, e2025GL114804.