At this point in the climate crisis, we need everyone to start making planet-friendly choices. So, why have people started shaming celebrities for flying commercially rather than via private jet?
When Lil Nas X, a US rapper, shared a video from a plane to the social media platform X, he was bombarded with messages asking him if he was “broke.” Meanwhile, Jennifer Lopez was spotted on a commercial flight — in first class, naturally — to Paris from Naples, Italy. Tabloid news organization TMZ ran photos with the headline “JENNY FROM THE CABIN!!!” while social media users on Instagram accused her of “trying to look humble.”
These are some weird double standards. Celebrities such as Taylor Swift and Kylie Jenner have been widely criticized and ridiculed for their private jet use. It seems celebrities are damned if they do, damned if they do not — something not lost on Lil Nas X.
Illustration: Yusha
These incidents are part of the weird, transient world of social media in which talking points bubble up and then disappear. Most people are probably pleasantly surprised to see stars on their flights — though, it should be noted that only a small proportion of the global population flies. A study published in 2020 estimated that only 2 to 4 percent of humans flew internationally in 2018, while 1 percent caused half of the emissions from commercial aviation.
Private aviation takes that inequality, and turns it up to 11. Private planes account for 2 percent of total aviation emissions, but benefit just a handful of extremely wealthy people. Research from the think tank Institute for Policy Studies and campaign group Patriotic Millionaires found that the median net worth of a jet owner is US$190 million, while fractional owners — those who own a share in a jet — have a median net worth of US$140 million. These centimillionaires make up 0.0008 percent of the global population. Private jets are five-to-14 times more polluting per passenger than regular flights, and 50 times more polluting than trains, an analysis by research firm Transport and Environment (T&E) showed.
So we really ought to be encouraging more celebrities to travel with the rest of us. Indeed, it is not that unusual for famous people to hop on a standard flight: Leonardo DiCaprio, Tom Holland, former US president Bill Clinton and former US secretary of state Hillary Clinton, and even the Prince and Princess of Wales are known to take standard aircraft.
However, demand for private jets is booming, spurred by a growth in high net-worth individuals.
Ideally, people would simply fly far less often. However, given that direct commercial flights exist for 72 percent of private-aviation flights, getting wealthy frequent flyers to board regular planes would be an easy start.
The emissions saved by a small number of A-listers and billionaires switching to regular flights would be minute in comparison to the wider industry — and global emissions as a whole — but it could send a message. A couple of decades ago, Hollywood stars were being ridiculed for their embrace of the Toyota Prius, the first mass-produced hybrid vehicle. However, they stuck with it, created a trend for conspicuous eco-consumption and helped pave the way for broader electric vehicle acceptance.
Likewise, a poll by Mercury Insurance found that 39.4 percent of respondents said they would be “more likely to engage in sustainable travel practices if celebrities and public figures reduced their use of private jets.”
One key reason cited for the use of private jets is the desire for anonymity and privacy. That is already largely possible — many airports offer the option of private terminals, invitation-only airport lounges and services for elites to get whisked through security before being chauffeured straight onto the plane.
Of course, there are benefits impossible to replicate. Commercial flyers are still beholden to a fixed schedule and routes — no doubt seen as inconvenient for a busy executive or superstar. Efforts to make commercial flights feel more exclusive might simply spur growth in the luxury sector (normies, meanwhile, deal with extra fees for basics, delays and crowded airports) while doing a limited amount for decarbonization.
Ultimately, regulating private jets would be the most important and effective way to control the segment’s emissions. Done in the right way, they could even help spur the innovations needed to decarbonize the rest of the aviation sector.
Jets are taxed far less than their commercial counterparts. In the US, 17 percent of flights managed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) are private jet flights, yet they only contribute 2 percent of taxes that fund the FAA. In the EU, jets fall below the threshold for inclusion in the Emission Trading System while fuel is tax free. T&E suggests introducing a ticket-and-fuel tax on conventional private jets, scaled with flight distance and aircraft weight. By 2030, regulators should ban private jets that are not powered by electricity, green hydrogen or sustainable aviation fuel.
This would not put billionaires off their private jets, but the extra money raised by taxes would be welcome funding for the challenge of decarbonizing air travel. Perhaps the money could even be put to work improving and expanding high-speed rail.
Until governments decide to tackle private jet regulation, social pressure would be important. After all, celebrities are status-aware individuals — much of their power and income is drawn from their public status. I would hazard a guess that one reason Swift continues to be addicted to her jets is that the criticism has not impacted her album and ticket sales.
Criticism can backfire — as my colleague Chris Bryant pointed out in 2022, LVMH CEO Bernard Arnault retreated to renting jets to avoid scrutiny — but it at least puts the pressure on. In the meantime, celebrities opting for the more sustainable options — a commercial flight, perhaps, or even better, the Eurostar — deserve to be left in peace.
Lara Williams is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering climate change. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
US political scientist Francis Fukuyama, during an interview with the UK’s Times Radio, reacted to US President Donald Trump’s overturning of decades of US foreign policy by saying that “the chance for serious instability is very great.” That is something of an understatement. Fukuyama said that Trump’s apparent moves to expand US territory and that he “seems to be actively siding with” authoritarian states is concerning, not just for Europe, but also for Taiwan. He said that “if I were China I would see this as a golden opportunity” to annex Taiwan, and that every European country needs to think
For years, the use of insecure smart home appliances and other Internet-connected devices has resulted in personal data leaks. Many smart devices require users’ location, contact details or access to cameras and microphones to set up, which expose people’s personal information, but are unnecessary to use the product. As a result, data breaches and security incidents continue to emerge worldwide through smartphone apps, smart speakers, TVs, air fryers and robot vacuums. Last week, another major data breach was added to the list: Mars Hydro, a Chinese company that makes Internet of Things (IoT) devices such as LED grow lights and the
US President Donald Trump is an extremely stable genius. Within his first month of presidency, he proposed to annex Canada and take military action to control the Panama Canal, renamed the Gulf of Mexico, called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy a dictator and blamed him for the Russian invasion. He has managed to offend many leaders on the planet Earth at warp speed. Demanding that Europe step up its own defense, the Trump administration has threatened to pull US troops from the continent. Accusing Taiwan of stealing the US’ semiconductor business, it intends to impose heavy tariffs on integrated circuit chips
RSS