BootsnAll Travel Community

More and more I am aware of how much I contribute to pollution of the environment with my travel. Its become more acute since I moved to Indonesia, because its such a big country, I am here for limited time, want to make to most of weekends and short holidays to see as much as possible, and I have to work during the week.....hence I fly places to get there in two hours rather than sit on a bus for 12.

Obviously long-term overland travel brings less bad CO2 karma than many short flights, but I imagine all of us on this website have worse than average records.

I know there are CO2 offsetter things where you can pay to make up for it, but I have read somewhere that these are kind of pointless.

This is a huge, and rapidly growing issue in Europe. I was just wondering whether any of you have any thoughts on this - is it something that concerns you?

Hi

Yes, I was just thinking about it the other day. It has been a nice travel year for me with trips to Malaysia, Paris, Rome, Bolivia/Peru and now I'm going back to Malaysia...but the problem is of course that it is not good for the environment that I travel for fun. And I think in the future we will not be able to travel as much as we do now unless they come up with more environmental friendly transportation methods. But what can I say...the temptation to travel has so far won the battle over my guilty conscience

My own opinion is that given all the other ways we waste fuel and resources, flying in an airliner is way down the list of things to feel guilty about.

Plus, I think when choosing an eco-action we need to weigh the pros and cons, and also the impact of our choices. In Europe, it makes sense to choose a train instead of an airplane when you can. Consumer choices *can* have a positive impact on the future development of transport systems.

But if the choice is between flying and staying home, I say, the value of travel is so profound and positive, that staying put is just not the right choice. Besides, if you choose not to fly, that airliner is going anyway. It's a form of mass transit!

You can read more about this issue and carbon offsets at the Eco-TravelLogue. Hope to see you there!

http://www.ecotravellogue.com/planning-a-trip/carbon-credits-my-opinion.html

Regards
Mary

quote:

Originally posted by providence:
But if the choice is between flying and staying home, I say, the value of travel is so profound and positive, that staying put is just not the right choice.

Excellent, fantastic! well said!

quote:

Besides, if you choose not to fly, that airliner is going anyway. It's a form of mass transit!

Err, not so much. Stick with the first justification.

hm. I have a feeling this is going to become a really big issue within a few years, with the whole climate change paradigm etc - watch this space.

I do of course agree - as would we all, probably, on bna - that getting as much out of travelling as I do, it doesnt seem much of an option not to go if thats the choice. But I feel that just because other things pollute too, doesnt mean its not a consideration.....air travel is pretty major.

Incidentally, I did deliberately NOT post this in the eco-travel forum precisely because I wanted to gauge what those people who perhaps dont look here would say. But fair enough.

Does airplane/flight pollution concern me?? Not in and of itself. I think it's part of a much bigger issue, and an overall mentality. Basically, it's so integrated in how our civilization is now set up, that I don't see that there are many other feasible travel options. I guess I've never fixated on it alone, or felt guilty specifically because I fly every now and then.
-------------------------------
RANT - don't read if you don't want to read it ;-)

Look, like pretty much anything else, it'll have to reach crisis mode before anything gets done about it, and before the majority actually registers that there's a problem, rather than pushing it indefinitely into the future until there aren't any more options left EXCEPT for direct action. Or maybe I don't have enough faith in humanity. ;-) With global warming, it's still at the level where for most people, it's just a theoretical problem that doesn't directly affect anyone or anything, not a 'real' problem that's, say, giving someone a horrible cough or causing them to vomit. And an impact isn't really going to be made unless it's done on a national/global scale, and enforced..a cultural level, not just on the individual level.

As for traveling being profound and positive, I couldn't agree more..on an individual, maybe selfish, level. It's quite positive, healing, and gives one more of a world view. Obviously we all love it!! :-) But most people travel because, simply put, it makes them happy. I guess I don't feel that my personal desires/growth can be weighed against something like the environment, so I don't really buy that argument. ;-)

I know I'm contributing to the destruction of the environment every day, and I think it's because I destroy the environment in some way or another while I'm here, just like I do when I travel, that the act of traveling doesn't make me feel worse. But yes, I get sad sometimes if I think about it. Not just air travel, but my car, this computer I'm typing on, all of the groceries I buy and the wrapping I throw out, all of the stupid paper I need to print out at work, because of all of the new versions of documents that come out every other week (but I do double-side print ;-)....basically, for me to not be a total hypocrite, I would have to be a hermit, using candlelight, eating the food I grew in my backyard, and riding a bicycle (ok, I could sail around the world if I knew how to sail, and start horseback riding cross country to see stuff in my country, but I'm sure there's some sort of law that wouldn't allow me to horseback ride cross country ;-). There are definitely little things I do in my attempt to minimize my impact, but I'm still definitely part of the whole problem. As an individual, I'm pretty much along for the ride, and most of us don't really have a choice/impact in how all of these things play out -- on the scale of the world. Also, I don't think most people really care about the environment or other life, *unless* it impacts their health or life in some way. And I wonder if that is because we can now survive apart from the environment, and don't exactly need it for our sustenance anymore. And this goes beyond the air pollution thing, but environmental destruction in general is going to continue I think, because human life and survival, and human demands, will always trump everything else, regardless of consequences to other lifeforms or the environment.

I'm glad to see so much interest in this topic! It's true, this issue hasn't yet registered too much here in the US but it is already a big deal in the UK and Europe. In fact, just last week some protesters closed down an airline office where they were protesting the inefficiency of short-haul airline flights.

I was interested to see Eowyn's discussion of how hard it is not to be a "hypocrite" without living in a cave, because this is a pet peeve of mine! This "hypocrite" argument has been around for way too many years and gets tossed at everyone who makes any effort to reduce their impact on the environment. It's just a distortion and a distraction, and none of us should feel guilty about working for positive change, whether in our own lives or in the bigger picture.

It can be hard to feel our choices matter in the big picture, but if we can at least make choices that make sense to each of us, that's a start.

I'm not sure why Skimax nixed my "mass transit" argument. It's not like the airliner isn't going to go, if you stay home, was my point.

Finally, I'd add this bit of information...
Boeing's 787 Dreamliner, a fuel-efficient airliner due for delivery in 2008, is expected to achieve 100 passenger-miles per gallon on a typical flight.

Great to hear from you all.

Interesting stuff.

I think based on this, and on general impressions from elsewhere, its definitely safe to say that the US is a bit behind Europe on this one - which is not surprising - a much bigger producer of consumer goods, there is obviously less interest in disseminating the kind of information that will make people consume less. Seriously, the amount of press coverage, TV time, general public debate time etc etc that you see in Europe on these issues is massively increasing all the time - I get the distinct impression a large number of people in the US still feel that global warming is totally madeup.

I am pretty certain that within the next decade, there will be a massive paradigm shift on a level unprecedented in the last hundred years. I am pretty sure people will come to radically rethink the way they live. Just my little prediction

I dont think this has anything to do with having to be a hermit and not using electricity. Quite small actions by (many) individuals, accompanied by larger actions by companies and the business sector, can make all the difference. The airliner argument I dont really agree with - its all demand and supply, and the air liner will in fact have to reduce its number of departures if there is reduced demand, right?

And I agree, its too easy to say ' I wont even try because until I go all the way I am a hypocrite anyway'.

In any case, super interesting to hear what you all think.

PS like I said, I am bothered a lot by my own contributions to air pollution here in jakarta, where its really hard to get around it because the options (eg for publuic transportation) are so limited. So dont interpret anything I say as trying to lecture anyone!!! I am just interested in hearing people's feelings on the topic.

Lost and Providence - I enjoyed your responses/posts. Just wanted to clarify in that I do think individual actions are important and they do add up. I do still believe though that if it doesn't go up a notch to the cultural level, where these behaviors are widespread and diverging from them is unacceptable, then not much headway will be made.

I'm not advocating doing nothing - that's dumb. I do small things and contribute in ways I can think of, and I do feel good about that, and I think everyone should feel empowered that way; but I guess the background for my original post is that a part of me wonders if me and everyone is just slowing down the inevitable. My 'hypocrite' example was more about the fact that my being alive goes against the environment, at least how everything is set up right now. That does NOT mean things can't be reversed...but keeping this real, that's a tall order for the U.S., and most of the people I come in contact with. But whatever, I obviously tend to go doom and gloom on this topic, and there are obviously other ways everything could turn out! I just need to get reminded of that. :-) It's really great to hear that this topic is gaining a lot of momentum in Europe. Yep, my country...well..I won't start talking about THAT. :-)

It's definitely true, there are certain actions that make sense on the level of the individual choices you can make, and others where systemic change is needed. It can be tricky sometimes to sort out which is which!

A good example is recycling. It's nice to take your own stuff to a recycling center, but much better to have municipal recycling at the curb, like we have here in R.I. It's nice to cut down on your own driving, but it would be even better to have clean, efficient mass transit.

Consumer choices can make a big difference on the local level. If you buy from a farmers market, and talk about it to your friends, and they go, and talk about it to their friends, you can see positive change happening before you know it!

Systemic change can be slow, but you can make a choice about your own behaviour and implement it today. And a lot of people doing that, can help the system to change, too.

I've wondered too, like Lost76 says, if we're getting close to a real "tipping point" where all of this accumulating awareness will suddenly kick in and sustainable thinking will go mainstream. I agree that it could happen...!

quote:

Originally posted by providence:
I'm not sure why Skimax nixed my "mass transit" argument. It's not like the airliner isn't going to go, if you stay home, was my point.

The airlines only fly the planes if they sell the tix. If a plane is half full, they WILL cancel or consolidate the flight to make it profitable for them.

By purchasing tix, you are creating the market. You are encouraging them to fly larger planes, you are adding extra weight to the plane, you are using paper for tix, etc, etc, etc.

The "I am only one person" argument simply doesn't hold up here or anywhere else.

But, as I said before, your first argument is the best one!

quote:

Originally posted by providence:
But if the choice is between flying and staying home, I say, the value of travel is so profound and positive, that staying put is just not the right choice.

The cost of flying cross country, say, is about 120 passenger miles per gallon.

The price of a trip by a honda compact car for two people: 120 passenger miles per gallon.

IN other words, its about as gas consuming as driving your car to the location.

I imagine buses and trains are more fuel economical, but try taking a bus across the ocean!!!

If you want to save on fuel, take a train when you go on a continent. If you go by bus, you may pollute up a storm if the bus has no pollution controls.

A vehicle with pollution controls that do not work pollutes ten times as much as one that has pollution controls.

I don't feel even a little bit guilty about my travelling contributing more pollution to the environment, why should I? i'm always recycling, always trying to save energy where possible so I'm deserved a break every now and then to jet set off to a far away exotic land for a time of luxury.

If you ask me, the problem lies with the corporations that design the causes of pollution, and the governments that could do a lot more.

I mean, why can't we have researched running engines on water or even bio-fuels a long time ago? It's been proven that it could (and as far as I've been told DOES) work. Then we wouldn't even have to have this discussion.

quote:

Originally posted by Tortuga_traveller:
The cost of flying cross country, say, is about 120 passenger miles per gallon.

The price of a trip by a honda compact car for two people: 120 passenger miles per gallon.

IN other words, its about as gas consuming as driving your car to the location.

Grist Magazine has a fantastic article detailing the environmental cost of flying vs driving.

Basically: always best to take the train. Airplane is good for long distance travel, carpooling is best for short distance travel.

I think this on topic-but if not, bear with me!
I was listening to public radio the other day, and the guest a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize-she is an environmentalist in the Parliment of Kenya.
She was talking about the terrible problem her country has-actually, all countries-but specifically hers-with plastic.

They apparently have billions of those plastic bottles from water.She was asking people to come up with alternatives.

She asked the plastic companies to make thicker plastic bottles,so they can be reused. She has asked the people of her country to go back to using natural baskets,etc. Her plea to us was to do our part when we travel to her country.

I recently bought a special water purifier, to take on my trip, that gets out all pathogens, etc. I was thinking maybe it was too heavy, too bulky-a pain to carry all over the place. After hearing her, I'm so glad I'm bring it and won't have to depwnd exclusively on bottled water. gigirtw
http://blogs.bootsnall.com/gigirtw

Yes, the plastic bottles contribute a lot to pollution.

It isn't necessarily the bottles themselves, but that people don't recycle them as they should.

I do feel a bit guilty flying. I do think we all need to be conscious of our entire carbon footprint...the fact that we recycle all the time, etc. doesn't negate the fact that we are then flying and contributing more. Hopefully some of the airline companies, along with the car companies, will start coming up with alternate fuel vehicles. In the meantime, I try to consolidate travel when possible.

There's an element of guilt in flying, but I get over it. Going places and seeing things is too important to give up. Also, I think that like most of us with environmental consciences, I do have a below-average carbon footprint. My occasional flight is more than offset by my low driving mileage, small car, downtown condo lifestyle.

The other thing is, unlike the car, and home heating, me being on the plane isn't actually causing pollution. With the first two, if I don't do it, there's fewer CO2 emmissions. With flying, and other forms of public transport, there has to be a large number of other people also not flying to make a difference...otherwise the plane is still going to fly, and still pollute just as much.

That's not to say that we should all go crazy because it doesn't matter what we do. If everyone does make a conscious effort to cut down on their flights, by consolodating travel, taking longer trips, etc., there will be a reduction in number of flights. Also, book flights with airlines that run one large plane on the route twice a day, instead of the one the runs a regional jet every hour.

quote:

Originally posted by 2wanderers:
The other thing is, unlike the car, and home heating, me being on the plane isn't actually causing pollution. With the first two, if I don't do it, there's fewer CO2 emmissions. With flying, and other forms of public transport, there has to be a large number of other people also not flying to make a difference...otherwise the plane is still going to fly, and still pollute just as much.

Sorry guys, feel free to do what makes you happy. But you gotta know that one person DOES make a difference.

quote:

Originally posted by Skimaxpower:
The airlines only fly the planes if they sell the tix. If a plane is half full, they WILL cancel or consolidate the flight to make it profitable for them.

By purchasing tix, you are creating the market. You are encouraging them to fly larger planes, you are adding extra weight to the plane, you are using paper for tix, etc, etc, etc.

The "I am only one person" argument simply doesn't hold up here or anywhere else.

the evolution of this planet is cyclical, this is just our cycle...Sure a million years ago there weren't planes, CO2 and massive pollution, but it would impossible for 6 billion people to live pollution free...this is just our era...who knows maybe in 1000 years life will be back to the way it was a million years ago, a frozen tundra with no life...

In my naive world, I don't think traveling contributes to the pollution. I think there are much worse contributors i.e. toxic dumps in to drinking water, unnecessary coal burning factories, china, etc...With all the bad that flying has probably done to the environment it has helped humans evolve in a way that was needed as technology and the evolution of humans continues...I mean without cars, and gas powered forms of transportation how would this world be?

It's too bad the internet can't be blamed for pollution cause there is plenty of garbage that is dumped on it