Featured Image Credit: Michael Owens/Getty Images/Twitter/@SwiftJetNextDay
Topics: Celebrity, Environment, Music, Sex and Relationships, Taylor Swift, US News
Poppy Bilderbeck
Topics: Celebrity, Environment, Music, Sex and Relationships, Taylor Swift, US News
An expert has revealed their take on Taylor Swift's plane fuel emissions.
The 'Blank Space' singer has come under fire for her jet use, flying to and from her performances to go and support boyfriend Kansas City Chief's player Travis Kelce.
However, should Swift simply Shake It Off, or should she be turning around to the haters to tell them You Need To Calm Down?
Well, an expert in carbon footprint measurement has addressed the controversy.
Advert
Swift's CO2 emissions first came under scrutiny towards the end of last year, Instagram account 'Taylor Swifts Jets' taking to its platform to claim the singer-songwriter produced 138 tons of CO2 in three months, jetting around the globe between stops on her Eras Tour, as well as dropping by to catch Kelce's NFL games.
The journeys were reported as having used 12,622 gallons of jet fuel, calculated to be worth a whopping $70,779.
A representative of Swift told UNILAD at the time: "Before the tour kicked off in March of 2023, Taylor purchased more than double the carbon credits needed to offset all tour travel.
"The excess credits means Taylor could have accounted for more than enough to cover her latest romance springing up in the middle of her sell-out tour, with her trips to support Kelce upping her carbon emissions alongside her planned tour travels."
However, since Swift jetted the equivalent of a 28-minute drive and also managed to get from her Eras Tour concert in Tokyo, Japan to catch Kelce in the 2024 Super Bowl, it would appear the estimates of her emissions have gone up - despite her getting rid of one of her planes amid the backlash.
CEO of The Change Climate Project - a non-profit organization working to eliminate carbon emissions - Austin Whitman has revealed his take on Swift's emissions.
He told Vice the 'most recent estimates' have seen Swift's predicted CO2 emissions rise to 'somewhere on the order of 8,000-10,000 tonnes (of CO2 per year)'.
The carbon footprint measurement expert reflects on the estimate as 'eye-popping,' particularly if you compare it to 'those of us in wealthy countries' who are 'on the order of 20-30 tonnes'.
Whitman believes Swift's use of her private jet is 'colossally bad,' however he understands why it might not be safe for celebrities like her to fly on commercial planes.
But what could Swift be doing better?
Well, the expert advises Swift should not only be buying carbon offsets but also be aware of her 'climate shadow' - how she influences the rest of the world when it comes to climate and not being a 'negative influence'.
Whitman resolves: "If I were Taylor Swift, what would I do? Yes, I'd buy carbon credits; I’d buy the highest quality carbon credits I could find, I'm a billionaire.
"Would I travel private? Probably, because I think it would be a nuisance to have to worry about my security on regular airplanes.
"Would I influence my millions of fans and followers by talking about climate change? Absolutely.
"What she could do as an influencer is way more powerful than the negative impact of her carbon emissions. Literally, she could send one Instagram post and change enough behaviour to well outweigh 8,000 tonnes of carbon emissions – that’s the real power that she has."
UNILAD has contacted Taylor Swift's representatives for comment.