Forums > Social Discussion > flying and enviro-hippies

Posted: 16th May 2007
I wish I could find the report now, but there was a report in the paper about a week ago that made me think of this thread.

Basically, for every child you have, per year looking after each child, you expend as much energy as you would in your share taking that long-haul flight.

So for those of you who speak out against flying, i hope you don't plan on having kids

i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey

Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...

Posted: 16th May 2007
sym, that's hilarious - thanks for posting this

the best smiles are the ones you lead to

Posted: 16th May 2007
As I mentioned a while ago, at HoP we're working on different things to make the planet a better place. For several months I've been working on the problem of our freight impact and enquiring about sea freight options for our order shipments among other things. Would you believe that Sea freight as well as being slower is also now more expensive because the majority of the required customs, MAF etc infra-structure has shifted away from the ports to the airports??!!! Airfreight is just too simple and too much an accepted speed that "no-one" will want to wait the time sea postage takes. I have used all of HoP's bulk freight buying power leverage to get our shippers CEO to listen and to make proper enquiries to make it an option again as the environmental issues heat up more companies (especially in NZ) should become interested in using it again. Thankfully they are listening to me but whether they can move the other people they need to move or not is yet to be seen.

In the meantime I'm trying to buy trees in Europe and the States somewhere because while I had a good wee chuckle at Sym's video, at least it is doing something. I want to buy the trees so we can control them and know we have them instead of just some 'feel good numbers' that we gave someone else to do who knows what with, but do you think I can find anyone to sell me part of a forest??

I thought this was going to be relatively easy but ...

In the meantime we ARE recycling. (We're evan finding new sources of recycling materials that we've been told weren't able to be recycled!!). We ARE reducing our waste. We are reducing our electricity use with smarter practices and more efficient appliances. We are using recycled building materials etc in the alterations to the new and improved HoP Central. And I bike to/from work every day rain, hail, sun, sleet & snow (sometimes all in the same day!). And believe it or not, HoP has managed to conduct all it's business without travelling anywhere outside of Christchurch!

Of course the best thing we could do to minimise our impact is to stop sending everyone stuff around the world and to actively discourage the use of fire as every little burn contributes . . .
(Not so sure that's a good thing!!)

The next thing we can do is play our part in education. We'll be making an article(s) or web page(s) on the subject of sustainability and you can bet some of these threads will be linked in as they have some useful info in them.
As always, if anyone has other ideas that we can do to help in this area, let me know via PM, or mail.

Thanks Sym for bumping the thread and the vid. I like!

George

Written by: Doc Lightning talking about Marmite in Kichi's Intro thread

I have several large jars of the stuff. I actually like it... a little. And don't tell anyone I admitted to it.

Posted: 16th May 2007

 Written by: Flashpoint


People are going to fly. There's no stopping. Alot of jobs demand international travel which the only viable alternative is flight. Politicians, Doctors, Lawyers, Actors, Performers etc... I don't fly to much if i can help it and usually look for an alternative form of travel. Usually car pooling to reduce fuel cost and that. Sometimes though I do fly for convenience. It takes me 8 painful hours on a train to get to Sydney usually listening to a couple kids cry the whole way at a cost of about $80 Aussie. For $20 dollars more I can fly and be there in 45 minutes to 1 hour.

I understand the convenience. honestly, i do, and regret frequently that i don't fly. but i disagree that 'planes/people are just going to fly'. the flightpledge website has seen an enormous increase in people pledging not to fly. a lot of people haven't refused to fly, but have looked at reducing their travel needs, telecommuting etc. As taxes go up (and they are doing so in the UK, even with Ryanairs dirty tricks campaign) itr becomes more expensive to fly again, numbers will decrease. and in any case. the plane will only fly if there are people on it. its simple economics.

It is interesting that a LOT of the people who argue most srongly for flying are from Australia. You live in a country (that i have visited twice, and travelled in by both train and plane) that is so isolated and spread out that it is no wonder, really. I'd probably think differently if i had three kids and a trip to sydney to plan! but i don't, and i will always plan my transport, kids or not, to be slow, gentle and exciting rather than fast and soulless.

It is also a misrepresentation to say that you will get there in 45 minutes. think of the time it takes to travel to the airport, check in (even though that has sped up recently with e-check ins) sit around, arrive, get your luggage, get out... I'd say its much closer to 4 hours in total. (it took me a total of 5h30 from brissy to sydney, but i'm assuming you know your transport system a little better than me ). so, what about not just using travel as a means to arrive somewhere but trying to make it an experience. to be honest, i could drive to scotland in 8 hours, but i'd much prefer to stop in nice places along the way, stay with friends i haven't seen for ages, learn something new about somewhere new, and arrive a day later but happy and relaxed. make the travel part of the trip, not a necessary evil.
(i've got a similar thing to say about shopping - i really, really love my weekly shop, because i go to markets and local shops, and have conversations with shopkeepers, and find out recipes i can try, andandand. rather than most of my friends who dread visiting tesco...)

 Written by:



I agree that planes are probly the least of our worries if we want to tackle environmental issues. You said planes fly much further and longer than cars bluecat but compare the number of planes flying at any one time to the number of cars driving around at any one time. I'm pretty sure the cars will win in overwhelming numbers as to damage to environment. If we want to do something as someone said earlier start small. More carpooling would be a much bigger help to the environment than a few people choosing not to fly. (As i stated earlier you choosing not to fly isn't going to stop the plane taking off). If you got EVERYONE to stop flying then yes it would but that's will never happen and anyone who thinks it will is a bit dillusional to the real world. Also the development of alternative powersource technology would do wonders. Solar, Wind, Hydro, Hybrid engines etc.

I agree completely that we should do much more in other fields, and not just aim at planes. i disagree with your main point about the planes flying anyway, so we'll just have to leave that one, i think... but as far as the sheer numbers go; Planes in the UK contribute approximately 20-25% of our carbon emissions (the official figure is 2-5%, but it doesn't include flights that go overseas, or above a certain height, as they are not 'in british airspace' ), homes and industry something like 50-65%, not leaving much space for the much maligned car. which i use sparingly anyway

 Written by:


You choosing not to fly is hurting yourself more than anyone else in my opinion. Your turning down high paying gigs around the world you say cause you choose not to fly. Well your turning down experiences that will teach you alot about the world you live in. International travel opens you up to a new understanding of cultures you just can't get any other way. And as i said a few times before. You choosing not to fly is not going to stop the plane or cause any less damage to environment.

well, i'm getting a bit bored of the repetition about planes just flying but i do believe that me choosing to fly makes a difference. many people on this website and in other aspects of my life have chosen not to fly, to drastically reduce their flying, or to reduce the air miles of the produce they buy since reading this thread/talking to me. my band (10+ members) no longer flies where possible, whereas before they would fly to dublin, london, paris, spain etc from edinburgh, they now take minibus and ferry... my local MP has petitioned for increased air fuel taxes (to bring them in line with other fuel taxes, not to make them prohibitive) as a result of my and many others letters to him. and i feel better about myself it is commonly accepted in this country that planes are harmful - this has increased home tourism, and furthermore, all the major supermarkets have started/are starting air miles reduction schemes to ensure local produce is used where possible. All of this is vastly improving the services, culture and prosperity of my country

I am not hurting myself. I have travelled the world (by air, train, boat and cycle) before making my decision not to fly. I fully intend to continue doing so by rail and sea and (shared!) motorised transport - and i beleive that you can do this if you choose your lifesyle appropriately (you may say 'thats unrealistic for normal people', but personally i don't like the rat-race, and am surprised that so many people just accept it as the only way to live, even among my friends). i am discovering my local area and enjoying it much more as a result of actively NOT thinking that exotic places MUST be better to visit. I have lost a little money, yes, but i value money a lot less than many others, and i prefer to be principled over rich (sorry if thats a bit preachy ) and i am not poor.

I enjoy my travelling a hundred times more now that i do it slowly. is there a 'Slow Travel' society like the Slow Food soc? seriously, i feel more relaxed, i see more of the places i travel through and to, and i get to experience many different and interesting transport locations during the actual travelling, rather than the macdonalds-style replication of souless and security dominated airports....

 Written by:



If we want to do something that actually will get results. Recycle more, Reuse anything you can, Reduce the amount of materials you use in your life. I'm sure anyone from the states knows the saying Recycle, Reduce, Reuse. Carpool to work or to gigs if possible. There's a million other things you could do that would give you more results than choosing not to fly. Just my 2 cents anyways.

well, again, i do all of those. as i've made clear elsewhere in this thread, and post, I am not solely blaming planes on our environmenal issues. that'd be really stupid.i would change your last sentence to 'there's a million and one things you can could do as well as not flying that will help'.

I actually value air travel much more highly than you might think. I just think that it should not be used frivolously. It is for necessary travel. It's just that my definition of necessary is so different to yours.



Rob

(oh, and george? well done )

Holistic Spinner (I hope)

Posted: 16th May 2007

 Written by: Rouge Dragon


I wish I could find the report now, but there was a report in the paper about a week ago that made me think of this thread.

Basically, for every child you have, per year looking after each child, you expend as much energy as you would in your share taking that long-haul flight.

So for those of you who speak out against flying, i hope you don't plan on having kids

i actually think you're making the opposite point, Rouge...:
there are a lot more long haul flights leaving the UK each year than there are under 18s. and certainly a lot more in and out of Australia. If its children you're thinking of, then don't fly! (and od all the other positive envoronmental action too )

Holistic Spinner (I hope)

Posted: 16th May 2007
hmm, i can see where your coming from bluecat especially if you live in the states. When i lived there driving 3 hours or more seemed like a massive journey in a car. Where as when i moved here driving 5 or more is pretty common to get between cities. People probly are flying more than they need to in countries like the U.S and UK etc... In Australia though its our most viable option alot of times. As you said australia is very sparse and spread out. And if we want to do international travel it leaves us few options as were on an island. Unless i want to spend weeks on a boat to go somewhere.

I don't totally disagree with you that planes are a pretty major factor in polluting the environment. I just don't think trying to get people to stop flying is the right way to go about it. In my opinion the problem will be most helped by the further develepmont of jet engines such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulse_detonation_engine If you notice it says the maximum energy efficiency for most jet engines is around 30%, theoretically though the PED jet engine can get around 50%. And as they further progress it i wouldnt be surprised if it went higher.

Man has been reaching for the sky since we first saw a bird fly over us. Now that were finally there after thousands of years of trying i don't see us grounding ourselves anytime soon, only reaching even further.

Point of Flash

Posted: 16th May 2007

 Written by: georgemc


As I mentioned a while ago, at HoP we're working on different things to make the planet a better place. For several months I've been working on the problem of our freight impact and enquiring about sea freight options for our order shipments among other things.

Sorry George, but sea freight is NOT environmentally friendly(er than airfreight)... As a matter of fact the fleet of container ships is one of the greater polluters of the planet...

the best smiles are the ones you lead to

Posted: 16th May 2007
I thought we had established a few pages back that per volume of freight moved, the impact from sea was less than air?? And while the jury was still out on exact numbers, it is reasonably accepted that the altitude effects of airplane engines creates an increased effect???

Written by: Doc Lightning talking about Marmite in Kichi's Intro thread

I have several large jars of the stuff. I actually like it... a little. And don't tell anyone I admitted to it.

Posted: 1st Dec 2008
So I've been ruminating on this recently, given the fact that I flew all the way to Oz.

In looking up the numbers, a Boeing 737-700 carrying 70% load factor (meaning 70% of available seats are full) burns less fuel per passenger mile than an average family car carrying two people. Given that most planes today are more than 70% full and most cars have only one occupant, that actually skews the numbers even MORE in favor of the plane vs. the car.

And larger planes burn less fuel per passenger mile than smaller ones. And the newer generation of planes to enter service in the next 5 years (the Airbus A380, the Boeing 787, the Airbus A350) are even MORE efficient, up to 15% more per passenger mile, than the last generation of planes.

So why is flying so horrible if it's so efficient? Sheer volume. Fact is the following: if you need to travel a long distance, you WILL burn a lot of carbon doing it. I know people who refuse to fly and insist on driving because it's more eco-friendly. It is NOT more eco-friendly. It's an environmental TRAVESTY to drive a distance that you could fly (unless you're packing at least 3 people in your fuel-efficient family car for the whole drive). It frustrates me to see enviro-hippies lambast flying and then jump in their gas-guzzling VW hippie vans and drive off.

The fact of the matter is that if you don't want to burn a lot of carbon, then DON'T TRAVEL. There is no carbon-low way to travel unless you were planning on sailing and using horse-drawn carriages to travel distances of thousands of kilometers.

The only way out of this mess is to switch to algae biofuels with a negative carbon balance and start scrubbing the atmosphere. Of course, that has its own danger; if we go too far, we could trigger an ice age and that would be a mess.

-Mike

Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella



A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura