The key line from the article is this one: "The extra weight meant the plane emitted more than 600kg of additional carbon dioxide - the same emissions one person is responsible for on a return flight to New York." This is not much, relatively speaking. Yes, it adds-up, but some planes are more efficient than others. If the fuel burn rate is that much higher with tankering extra fuel, then the airlines would have already trimmed the excess fuel load.

Is it really any different than flying with a plane that is not completely full? Perhaps BA should not fly its planes unless and until every passenger seat is filled?

Now what about refining costs and practices at the destination? Perhaps tankering-in fuel will help to keep the costs borne by airlines that cannot engage in the practice (eg domestic airlines in the foreign country) from having to pay more.

Perhaps there are lax refining standards at the destination country, and it is environmentally-prudent to limit purchases there.

I get the impression BA is over-thinking this problem.

What it all means at the end of the day is that you will be paying higher fares to fly in the future because this all gets passed down to the traveling public. All these measures will do nothing for climate change, but your wallet will be much lighter as a result.

Meanwhile, leaders will fly on private jets to remote sites (with 5 star resort accommodations) for their "Climat Summits".
And then tour their espective countries in those private jets to chastise the commoners for emitting too much carbon.

Meanwhile, leaders will fly on private jets to remote sites (with 5 star resort accommodations) for their "Climat Summits".
And then tour their espective countries in those private jets to castise the commoners for emitting too much carbon.

Ok
This could be a rookie mistake on my behalf, but aren’t international flights supposed to dump excess fuel directly into the atmosphere before landing if they are over weight, so they dont over shoot the end of the run way?
Pilots - please weigh in and educate me.

Burning down the house to save 40 English pounds ($51.33 on today's exchange rate)? That sure makes a hell of a lot of sense, NOT!!!

Greenpeace isn't 'running the airlines', it's trying to help make sure there is still a planet that the airlines can operate in.

"The extra weight meant the plane emitted more than 600kg (That's over 1,322 US POUNDS!) of additional carbon dioxide - the same emissions one person is responsible for on a return flight to New York.

The cost saving on that trip was less than £40 (Less than $51US!), but the documents Panorama has seen show that it can be even lower than that."

At that point, flying with that extra fuel is crazy, and stupid. Deliberately overloading planes to save 50 bucks also adds extra strain to them on take off and landing. When does that become a safety issue. This seems to be asking for a problem...

Great idea, lets let the idiots at Greenpeace run our companies. Recipe for disaster (not that Greenpeace would care of all industry shut down).

This Climate CRAP is getting out of hand. There has never been an explanation of HOW is it possible that we have a weekend in Texas, USA that can breach a 100 YEAR RECORD by as much as 2F DEGREES.. What caused the LAST RECORD 100+ YEARS AGO. There were NO JETS, NO DIESEL TRUCKS only HANDFULS of Any kind of Vehicle! I posted that on a FaceBook Blog and the only replies I received were NAME CALLING, STUPID Childish remarks and Cartoons of Donald Trump. NOT ONE PERSON explained what caused the LAST RECORD 100+ years ago?

The climate sky is falling crowd will keep finding ways to try and shame the public into a drastic life style change like NOT traveling. God gave us the wisdom to come up with reasonable climate solutions while still benefiting from advanced technology. I would not be surprised to hear that the Sanders AOC gang will want to go back to blood letting since making medications increases the C0 2 levels.

Thanks for the Stock Tip

Waaay too much. This "climate concerns" crap is getting out of control.