Greta Thunberg in saintly icon style on protest poster
The Greta Thunberg yacht crossing across the Atlantic sparked global debate about environmental activism and carbon footprints.
Greta Thunberg is an environmental activist who publicly refused to fly to New York to speak at the UN summit. The official reason given to the media is that aircraft leave a very large “carbon footprint”, making this mode of transport environmentally unfriendly as it damages the atmosphere, destroys the ozone layer, and promotes global warming. Greta does not fly on planes. Never.
The Atlantic Crossing on Malizia II
She traveled from Sweden to New York on the Malizia II yacht. At Greta’s request, the diesel engine was sealed during the crossing, though such engines are required for safety on every vessel of this type.
The Carbon Footprint Debate
The network has already debated the fact that the production of the carbon fiber yacht leaves no less, but even more “carbon footprint” than conventional vessels. However, this is not entirely accurate. The yacht is equipped with solar panels and underwater turbines to generate electricity (the engine remains silent), though critics argue this doesn’t fully offset the environmental cost.
Crew Flights and Hidden Emissions
And now, the most important point.
Greta and her father crossed the Atlantic on a 20-meter racing yacht with a sealed diesel engine, sailing for about 20 days. The crew required to sail the yacht (excluding passengers) consisted of 5 sailors.
After arriving in New York, Greta rested for a few days, then spoke at the UN summit. She spent additional time in New York before returning to Sweden the same way—by yacht.
Here’s the critical detail: the sailors who sailed the yacht with Greta and her father flew home from New York by plane. They were replaced by 5 other sailors who flew from Sweden to bring Greta back on the same yacht for another 20 days.
Conclusion: Symbolism vs. Reality
Bottom line: environmental activist Greta refused to fly across the ocean with her father to save the environment. In the process, ten (!) people crossed the same ocean on non-eco-friendly planes, leaving the same “carbon footprint” she sought to avoid.
What is this? Naivety or conscious populism?
This voyage remains a case study in modern environmental communication, raising questions about personal carbon accounting versus systemic change. The debate continues to influence global climate policy discussions.
