Climate Researcher Loses Job At IfW Kiel After Refusing Flight Over Emissions

Gianluca Grimalda says he has been fired from his job after refusing to comply with his employer’s demand to fly at short notice back to Germany from Bougainville.

The climate researcher is still waiting in Bougainville, off the coast of Papua New Guinea, for a cargo ship to begin his return journey to Europe.

Grimalda, who has avoided flying for more than 10 years, had been investigating for six years the impacts of climate breakdown and globalisation on the island’s inhabitants.

“Absurd Request”, “Morally Unacceptable”

The climate expert says he had promised the people he met during his field trip he would minimise his carbon emissions on his return journey.

But two weeks ago, his bosses at the Kiel Institute for Worldwide Economy (IfW) brought him to a dilemma after giving him a deadline to return that meant he had to travel by air.

“Wasting 4.5 tonnes of CO2 to comply with the absurd request to be physically present in Kiel at such short notice is morally unacceptable,” he noted.

“IfW Actions Are Justified Legally”

While Grimalda revealed his intention to appeal against the IfW’s decision to sack him, he added: “In this case, the initial impression is that IfW actions are justified legally.”

A spokesperson for IfW said: “We are committed to do without air travel … as far as we can. When flights are unavoidable, we … offset flight emissions through climate protection projects.”

Nonetheless, the debate around flight emissions has been garnering greater prominence in recent years, with a recent poll offering interesting insight into the situation.

Is Flying Less The Solution?

A poll from Consumer Science and Analytics Institute (CSA) found a shocking number of French citizens would support banning people from flying more than four times in their lives.

The poll surveyed 1,010 French residents over the age of 18, with 41% of respondents revealing they would support such wide-ranging restrictions aimed at combating the climate emergency.

While a majority of respondents didn’t prefer supporting the four-flight lifetime maximum, 64% said they would want to restrict their air travel in the near or medium term.