 Good evening. Welcome to Skywatch. I am Jimmy Lease and I am Danika Katowicz. We are your co-hosts for today's episode of Skywatch. I'm the founder and a reporter for the Independent Online News Report, cancelf35.substack.com. And I am the national co-director of the women's-led peace group Code Pink. And I would like to warmly welcome our guest today, Dan Castragano. We will be discussing the growing movement to ground the climate-killing F-35s, private jets, and all the other unnecessary flights. On May 23rd, more than 30 activists gathered at Burlington International Airport to voice these demands. The action at the Burlington Airport was in solidarity with a demonstration on the same day in Geneva, Switzerland, protesting the largest private jet sales event in Europe. More than 100 activists were arrested, demanding an immediate ban on these private jets. So let's tell you all about our guest, Dan. He's an educator, a community organizer fighting for climate and social justice. And he's a campaigner with Safe Landing BTV. And BTV is the three-letter acronym for the Burlington International Airport. The organization Safe Landing BTV demands an immediate ban on private jets and a 50% reduction of aviation emissions at Patrick Leahy International Airport, which is the other name, the new name for Burlington International Airport. By 2030, we want those emissions cut in half. And you can find Safe Landing BTV at safelandingbtv.org and on social media at Safe Landing BTV. Dan also campaigns with Flight Free USA and Flight Free Vermont, where folks pledge to fly less, take a flight free year, or quit flying altogether because of the climate crisis. You can pledge to be flightfree at flightfree.org. So tell us about the event on May 23rd at the airport. Yeah, thanks for having me, Jimmy and Danica. And for the introduction, I don't have to say any of that stuff now. So yeah, the event at the airport was on Tuesday, May 23rd. And I am connected in Safe Landing BTV and Flight Free USA and Flight Free Vermont. We are members of the Stay Grounded Network. So that's a network of organizations, over 200 of them who are demanding an immediate just transition away from aviation. So an immediate degrowth in the aviation sector. So I'm connected to some of those campaigners in Europe and knew what was going to happen in Geneva on the 23rd. And with actually just nine days notice on a Tuesday at 3 p.m., there were more than 30 people who showed up in solidarity with the activists who, more than 100 who were arrested in Geneva, demanding an immediate ban on private jets. And it was great to be in solidarity with you, Jimmy and you, Danica, and the F-35 campaigners and the anti-war campaigners, knowing that there's ongoing resistance to endless expansion at the airport. There's resistance to the military industrial complex. There's resistance to militarism and wealth inequality and their climate campaigners. So it felt great. It was a great event, a lot of speakers. And looking forward to the next one. Can you give us some background related to the Burlington Airport, who owns it and what's the current plan with it? Certainly, yeah. So this, thanks, Danica. The city of Burlington owns and operates the airport, even though it's in South Burlington, but it's the city of Burlington owns and operates the airport and has full control over it. And so they can do what they want with the airport. And the Burlington International Airport was not written into the Burlington Net Zero Energy Roadmap, which they produced in 2019. And so essentially, there is no plan. There's plan for expansion at the airport. There are financial incentives to lure more carriers and to have more routes at the airport and to increase air traffic and climate pollution. And when Mayor Weinberger and the city council say things like, we're going to be net zero by 2030, that's great if you just don't count the airport. But that's not actually true. Safe Landing BTV came into existence coming out of a coalition that fought and won against an airport rezoning request, where they wanted to rezone 11 acres in the Chamberlain neighborhood in South Burlington. And we won. And so that was not, so the airport did not expand its footprint. And so Safe Landing BTV was created coming out of that victory. Well, that's an important thing to come out of a victory. And you know, when you look at the aviation emissions and the fact that they did not include it in the plan, I think there's really something about not including a huge source of emissions. How big a source is aviation emissions compared to transportation generally? It's a lot. And so I think what's important, and so a couple things. One, we did just get a report from Nick Longo and the director of aviation with their accounting of emissions at the airport, although we've looked at it and there are at least three things that they didn't put in or that they greenwashed. And so we have the number, I think it's the nearly 200,000 tons annually. Is that right? That's right. It's huge. It's huge. Yeah. So I think it's 190,000 plus. That's the number they gave us. And so again, the city of Burlington does not count that. What I think is most important, what drives a lot of my campaigning, is the wealth inequality factor of aviation. And so 1% of people are responsible for more than half of all aviation emissions. And 80% of people on the earth, which is 6.4 billion people, have never been and will never be on a plane because it's too expensive. And so it's really this intersection, private jets in particular, this intersection of wealth inequality and climate injustice. And essentially no plan at the airport from the city. Right. And when you add in the F-35, you get wealth inequality and climate injustice and a tremendous amount of emissions. And to do something destructive, it's like it's the worst on steroids. It's just like what could be worse than what they're doing with this airport, both for the planet and for peace and justice and for social justice and inequality. As you were saying with the private jets, which are most of the aircraft taking off and landing at this airport, it's an activity that is reserved for a fraction of the 1%. And they're contributing mightily to the aviation emissions here at Burlington and in many other airports around the country. And it's not doing anything that couldn't be done with civilian passenger airlines. So with some exceptions, we do have certain kinds of aviation, small aircraft aviation, like moving organs for transplants, things that are medical or there are exceptions. But there's a lot of aviation emissions that could be canceled. Definitely, yeah. Go ahead, Danica. And then I'll respond, I guess. Yeah, your point about how the airport was excluded from the net zero emissions plan was really interesting to me, because a lot of the time, when we talk about even national climate justice or climate change relating to the military industrial complexes excluded from that, Pentagon is also. And actually, I think it was Lockheed Martin just last month had their shareholder meeting or two months ago, where they were asked to pass greenhouse gas emissions report. And they explicitly had said in their argument against the resolution that the defense industry cannot be expected to adhere to any net zero emissions because of the items that they produce and for the purpose they produce them. Yeah, exactly. I mean, it's really similar to domestic aviation, where most airports just don't have a number, or it's not counted, or the state doesn't count it, or the city doesn't count it, or whoever owns it doesn't count it. And it's the same thing with international aviation and international shipping, where if you go to Climate Action Tracker, it says insufficient. It's basically the plan for international shipping and international aviation is four degrees Celsius or greater, because there is no plan and you can't trick physics. And so if you don't, if it's not in a spreadsheet anywhere, the molecules of carbon dioxide are still frying the planet. So that's a great point. I mean, if you don't count it, it's still there. Right. And military, well, the Air Force, the U.S. Air Force is the largest contributor to greenhouse gases among the military services by far. And it's off the charts as far as the amount of emissions from military jets. And the F-35 is one of the worst. It burns 22 gallons of fuel every minute of flight. And that's in straight and level flight, not counting takeoff and hygiene maneuvers. So this is something that is like destruction of climate. It's like, how could you be doing this? And they're constantly training, hundreds of training flights a month just from this airport. Yeah. I actually didn't know the Air Force part that was the branch that's the most polluting, but it makes sense. And so I see the F-35s and then private jets and these other luxury emissions kind of all in the same basket. And so I look at where we stand halfway through 2023 in the climate and ecological emergency, and they need to shift into emergency mode. And I see all of the things happening at the airport that are unnecessary. So they're luxury emissions. We don't need them as a species. The emissions we produce should be for survival emissions, things like housing, growing food and healthcare and education. So the airport that includes the F-35s, that includes private jets owned by specific individuals. It includes private jets that you can charter, right? It includes private planes, propeller aircraft. It includes flying clubs. So there was an airplane that recently came to Burlington and left from Westchester County, New York. It was the Westchester flying club. So some rich person flew it here and then flew it home. It includes short haul flights to Plattsburg or to Rutland that are unnecessary. And it includes recreational flights, right? So people flying around, you can take a discovery flight through Vermont Flight Academy and just see the sunset. So all of those are not necessary for survival of the human species and should be banned immediately. And they're destructive for the planet. And they're destructive. Total unnecessary waste of carbon emissions. Yeah. Yeah, it's wasteful. Yeah. We don't need it. We don't need it. Yeah. I was going to ask how the F-35s are connected to private jets and you really hit on that just now. So I'm just wondering what was the response from people on the ground that your action in May? Is it like how the F-35s sort of and militarism sort of folded into that event? Yeah. I mean, Jim, you can speak to this too, but I, you know, it was billed as the airport resistance rally, right? So it's here, all these people who are engaged and want to see action at the airport for a lot of different reasons from climate to peace and justice to housing and noise pollution and the impact on children's cognition. And we wanted to bring all those people together. And happy to hear what you thought about that, Jimmy, too. Yeah. I think it's really important to keep having actions. And Dan has been- You're Mike, Jimmy. Oh, no. Here we are. Okay. So Dan has been fantastic at organizing and providing leadership to get people active, actively involved. In fact, this was the third demonstration this year that he organized since January 1st. So we're- And I think that this is really a positive thing. To get the people aware, to reach out to the public, the demonstration was covered by two of the TV stations here in Chittenden County. And I think we're getting the word out that the campaign against the F-35 and against abusive private jets is ongoing. It's not going anywhere. We're going to be persistent. We're not giving up ever. And one of the things that I've learned just from being involved in various campaigns and movements over the years is that persistence really matters. If people stay involved and persist, you eventually win, whether it was partied in South Africa or ending the nuclear power plant in southern Vermont or ending the war, going back to the war in Vietnam or for civil rights or ending discrimination against gay people and all kinds of things, whether it was women's rights or so many different things that persistence and campaigning and keeping at it is what makes the difference. Eventually, the other side can't handle it anymore. And I think that's one of the things that we're going to be seeing with this aviation emissions, particularly the military jets, because it's so wrong, it's so wrong to be doing it in a city. And I think increasingly people are becoming aware we can't have wars like this war in that's going on now in Ukraine and in several other countries around the world, Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan. We've had this whole series of terrible wars. We can't keep doing that. Yeah, go ahead. No, sorry, go ahead, Dan. I was just going to say the F-35 basing in the city, and there are a lot of ways to convince people or to try to persuade people of your campaign and to make change. And I know data works for some people and I know storytelling is far more effective, but just this Saturday, so it's the first weekend of the month. And so they were training on Saturday. And I was with my son who's almost two and two other toddlers and there are three other toddlers who were all outside and they just came ripping overhead and covered his ears. And it's just miserable. And I know that it damages his hearing. And there were a bunch of people just hanging outside with these three toddlers. And it's an assault on the senses. And so I just wanted to share that with the audience too. Yeah, Dan, I was wondering if there's a conversation among parents and if that's sort of an avenue to form some more resistance to not just the F-35s, but the airport as a whole is the effect on children if that's been a useful organizing tool at all. Yeah, I mean, I think so. Any campaigning takes time and energy and outreach, but I was so inspired when Dr. Peter Bingham was on the show last time. I'm a teacher, so I was in the classroom for 11 years. And I think there are parents and caregivers in Winooski and Williston and Burlington and everywhere else that if you can share the message of basically endless growth at the airport, not only the F-35s, commercial airliners and all the buzzy propeller aircraft that are flying around all the time, how that's harmful for learning. There's data and then both anecdotally, in my experience, a really loud airplane roars overhead in a classroom and things stop and that's just kind of how it works and how human beings are. Right, so yeah, I used to be a teacher too. Yeah, that's right. And when you get interrupted in class, it's really hard to get things started again. It takes time to wait for the interruption and then to resume and get back to where you were. And that happening over and over again as the jets go by, you lose a lot of time over the day, over the week and over the semester in the year. So this is something that just that, even if it didn't hurt the development, the cognitive development of the child by doing something to the nervous system, to the brains themselves, even if it was just the interruption, it would be enough not to do it in a city. And you know what, nobody knows this better than the military itself. They have rules and regulations that prohibit it and they're being violated on a daily basis. And so I think we have not just what's right and wrong here, but we have the law on our side as well. Yeah. You know, it's awesome to be talking to educators about this because, you know, when Jimmy and I push back on the F-35, I think a big response we get is, you know, whether it's in Vermont or wherever we're having anti-F-35 actions is, it's for our national security. And I personally don't believe training F-35s in Vermont is helping our national security all. But you know, what does it say when we're, when that's the framework we view national security in rather than, you know, investing in our children's development? Yeah, definitely. I mean, you know, I'm next to like Flynn Elementary School and like Hunt Middle School in the New North End in Burlington. And I mean, every time those go over on a weekday, and I taught mostly middle school and other grades and subjects and stuff. But I think of specifically language development and, you know, first and second grade and kids learning how to read. And just like, it's just so damaging. That's pretty much all I think about when I hear them. Yeah. So. Right. Right. Language development. The Air Force itself put out an environmental impact statement. And in volume two of that statement, it's thousand pages or more. But in volume two, they go into what happens to children under the intense noise of military aircraft. And they present the data showing reading, language comprehension, mathematical skills, and memory, and attention. And the one that really struck me was attention. Being an attentive student is so important in every class you take if you want to be successful in school. If you're mind, if you're not paying attention and you're not an active participant, you're not getting as much out of that class. And if the F-35 is hurting that for our children, how is that good for national security? Isn't that national insecurity? Why are they doing that to children here in Vermont? And if you look at the number of children involved, just in the oval-shaped noise zone identified by the Air Force and by the airport itself, there are 6,600 people over almost 3,000 families. And with about 20 percent of the population of Vermont being children, that means there are 1,300 children in that noise zone. Now, if you live outside the noise zone, a couple of miles from the airport to the side of the runway, okay, it's annoying. It isn't going to physically hurt you. But if you're in that noise danger zone that was identified by the Air Force, this is not good for children. And when you have 1,300 children there, this has got to stop. This should not be tolerated. Whether it's Winooski kids or Burlington kids or South Burlington or Williston children or Colchester, it was a piece of Colchester. In fact, the entire campus of St. Michael's is in the noise zone, as is the community college of Vermont in Winooski. And we're really doing harm to the future. We're doing harm that isn't necessary by having it in a city. You don't have to have it in a city. In fact, when you talk about the civilian flights as well, other cities have moved their airports out of town, like in Denver. Stapleton is closed as an airport. You can't travel there now. They have a new airport 10 or 15 miles from Denver now. And so the noise of, and that's just civilian aircraft. So I think we've got to make some change here. And we don't have a political leadership that's on board to protect the people. They've put their emphasis on what's right for the military industrial complex, what's right for future wars and present wars, what's right for the rich and super rich and for the one-tenth of one percent who get to fly in private jets. We need, we need what Bernie was calling for, political revolution. And he's part of who we need to make a revolution against because he's supporting it. Yeah. Yeah. And I just want to say, you know, in relation to the action, there are places we can point to where there has been action, specifically related to private jets and other actions. So Skiffle Airport, which is in Amsterdam, capped and reduced flights basically because of the climate emergency. They were sued by the fossil fuel industry and actually a court ruled with the fossil fuel industry. So that's now off the table, which is unfortunate. But one day before that ruling, they banned a lot of flights between midnight and five a.m. and they banned private jets. So Skiffle Airport banned private jets. So there's one place to look and then France recently just banned short-haul flights where if you can get there by train in two and a half hours or less, they basically canceled those routes. That's a lot more difficult than the states with train travel. But there is action and there is resistance and there are models for us to look at for actually degrowth of the aviation sector and acting like this is shifting into emergency mode as it actually is. Well, I feel like what you're bringing up is really new. It's really new for me. And I don't think, I think we've had a climate movement for quite a number of years now. But the idea that aviation is such a significant contributor to greenhouse gas emissions and is unnecessary. It's something that you can stop and it has been stopped in other places. It's really important. Danica? So, Dan, what do you think needs to be done in Burlington specifically? What do we need to put a stop to that 35 flights and also private aircraft? What do you think is next? Yeah, so and you could probably answer this too, but the city of Burlington owns and operates the airport. I think you have asked and I asked Nick Longo, the director of aviation at the airport almost a month ago and he hasn't responded yet saying basically, can you please confirm that the city can make a rule banning flights that are under a certain amount of passenger miles per gallon? And so that would include F-35s, that would include private jets and private planes and private flights and not include the United and Delta big airliners. Anyway. Right. Some of the big airliners get 100 passenger miles per gallon whereas the F-35 gets half a passenger mile per gallon and these private jets maybe get somewhere between 20 and 45 passenger miles per gallon. So, the bigger planes are efficient as far as climate goes. You can actually, if you're going to be driving versus taking a flight, it could be more efficient to take the flight compared to one person in a car in some situations, but that's not true for the private jets and it's certainly not true for the F-35. So, this is a situation where the city of Burlington has the authority under the rules because it's the airport proprietor and you have authority for things you own still in this country. So, they can pass a rule, they can make an ordinance in Burlington prohibiting any aircraft that gets, let's say, less than 50 passenger miles per gallon and the equivalent for cargo aircraft. Yeah, that's right. In tons per mile. Yeah, that's right. Thanks. Yeah, I'm drawn to aviation two minutes left. Yeah, thanks. Because it really is a matter of justice and who flies and who doesn't and it is minute for minute the most polluting thing that we can do. And aviation is set to triple by 2050, right? And so, as we, everybody's a climate activist and there's a lot of talk on EVs and renewable energy and biking and lots of other stuff, but when you talk about aviation, it's almost as if planes don't burn fossil fuels and people just like pretend that it doesn't exist. But since it's a matter of justice, since it's going to become a bigger percentage of our greenhouse gas emissions, we have to have, we have to go in the opposite direction because of, because our biosphere is collapsing, you know, kind of as we speak. And we have to act immediately. Danica, do you have some final words before we wrap up? Yeah, Dan, I'm just wondering, you know, for viewers who are tuned in and might be hearing about this all for the first time and your work for the first time, how can people get involved with your organization? Great, thanks for the plug at the end here. So go to safelandingbtv.org. You can read history, the background of the campaign. You can learn more about the greenwashing of the aviation industry. So go there, sign up for our mailing list or find us on social media at safelandingbtv. Or send me a note and happy to chat. Great, thank you. And Danica and I will be back on Skywatch for a July, early July program, first week in July, and we're looking forward to seeing everyone again then. Thanks very much for joining us. Thanks for having me on.