Remember that time Obama flew Air Force One to make a global warming speech on Earth Day costing taxpayers $866,615.40 and it used 9,180 gallons of jet fuel?
According to the study, which researched the habits of activists, while environmentalists behave in a manner that is considered “marginally greener” than everyone else, the difference of their environmental impact is “modest.”
The research also finds that conservationists “often engage in environmentally harmful behavior” such as air travel and eating meat.
“Many conservationists undertake environmentally harmful activities… while calling for people as a whole to reduce such behaviors,” the study explains.
Although conservationists berate others for their carbon footprint, Scientists at Cambridge University found that they took an average of nine flights a year.
According to the research which was published in the journal Biological Conservation, these hypocrites failed to score any better on ‘green’ questions than non-activists.
The 734 participants of the study were divided into three groups: conservationists, economists, and doctors. Those three groups were then assessed on their lifestyle choices, such as the use of bottled water, meat consumption, family size and air travel.
The study found that while conservationists recycled more and ate less meat than the other two groups, they still ate meat or fish five times a week.
The personal carbon footprint of conservationists would be smaller than the other two groups they used air travel less, however, all groups had similar results when it came to their commute.
The results of the combined footprint score showed that conservationists were 16 percent greener than economists and seven percent greener than medics.
The four authors of the study were conservation scientists who admitted that between them had seven children, ate an average of two meals containing meat the week before submitting the study, and took 31 flights in 2016.
“I don’t think conservationists are hypocrites, I think that we are human – meaning that some decisions are rational, and others were rationalized,” said one co-author of the study, Brendan Fisher. “Our results show conservationists pick and choose from a buffet of pro-environmental behaviors the same as everyone else. We might eat less meat and compost more, but we fly more – and many of us still commute significant distances in gas cars.”
“We must do more to lead by example,” added another author Andrew Balmford.
Featured Image Via AJ+/Youtube