While tourism and air transport are recovering from the impacts of the Covid pandemic, it seems timely to draw a synthetic view of future stakes combining the following topics: the greenhouse gas emissions scenarios for tourism, regarding which recent work has improved their understanding; the climatic impact of aviation, almost 60% of which is due to non-CO 2 emissions; alternative fuels (biofuels, E-fuels, hydrogen) and engine designs (fuel cells...) which are complex and controversial issues, and whose potentials should be assessed regarding their timing, environmental impacts, and their ability to meet long distance travel requirements. This paper analyses the extent to which the new options regarding fuels and engines can help decarbonize tourism and air transport. The answer is that they can partly contribute but do not render obsolete previous work on substitutions between types of tourism (short versus long distance...), between transport modes (ground transport versus air), length of stay, etc. Following this step, the paper deals with the position of aviation players and the type of arguments they use. We conclude on the necessity to make strategic choices among the options to avoid wasting investments.
MULTIFILE
LINK
This article addresses European energy policy through conventional and transformative sustainability approaches. The reader is guided towards an understanding of different renewable energy options that are available on the policy making table and how the policy choices have been shaped. In arguing that so far, European energy policy has been guided by conventional sustainability framework that focuses on eco-efficiency and ‘energy mix’, this article proposes greater reliance on circular economy (CE) and Cradle to Cradle (C2C) frameworks. Exploring the current European reliance on biofuels as a source of renewable energy, this article will provide recommendations for transition to transformative energy choices. http://dx.doi.org/10.13135/2384-8677/2331 https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
MULTIFILE
Hoewel de klimaat- en ecologische crisis de grootste bedreiging voor de volksgezondheid is, krijgt deze in geen van de Nederlandse zorginstellingen de hoogste prioriteit. Steeds meer zorgprofessionals doen vanuit hun beroepseed aan klimaatactivisme, ook als dit vreedzame burgerlijke ongehoorzaamheid omvat. Ze ondervinden vaak weerstand omdat dit als onprofessioneel wordt gezien. Dit betekent echter niet dat activistische zorgprofessionals onprofessioneel zijn, maar dat het idee van wat professionaliteit is moet worden aangepast aan het beroep dat wetenschap en wereld in tijden van klimaat- en ecologische crisis op de zorgprofessional doen. Zorginstellingen zouden klimaatactivisme daarom moeten faciliteren of zelfs toejuichen.
LINK
