This year I have to been to France, Newfoundland and now just back from Finland and Iceland. Feeling a bit guilty realizing carbon footprint is too big.
Shite Iceland was an eye opener. Tourists frigging everywhere and they are down 15 percent from peak numbers last year. A country with 300,000 people hosts over 2 million tourists a year. They can do all sorts of climate mitigation stuff but compared to the influx of tourists and the carbon they generate like trying to spoon out the ocean in comparison.
Airports are just stuffed full of people most of this stuff is discretionary. Unless we have a major recession all I see is increase of people flying everywhere. And travel is just as sexy as being all for reducing carbon footprint. Do you see this changing?
But you still traveled, right? You and every other person out there who “feels guilty” about their carbon footprint 99% of the time except when they really really want to go on a trip. And then justify it because, hey, Al Gore and the global climate leaders fly all over creation in private jets and really my little old vacation isn’t that big of a deal.
It’s not going to change. Because people are selfish. I’m not saying that’s wrong, it just “is”.
Considering the fact that India, China, Indonesia, Brazil, and a host of other nations have not reduced their “carbon footprint”, plus the factors you have illuminated, the chances of humanity affecting the climate have not changed one bit. Whether we are causing it or not, it will go on until nature decides to change it herself.
Consider, when Yellowstone goes, humanity will pray for global warming for decades. Of course a significant portion of humanity will not survive the event when it wipes out most of the agriculture globally.
There are a number of lesser events that can have a significant impact as well. It does not take a supervolcano to result in years of below average temps. If either (or both) the Canary Islands or Hawaiian Islands send a serious portion of their lands into the ocean as they have done in the past, most of the coastal areas in the Pacific and Atlantic are toast. The last Canary Islands collapse sent waves OVER Florida and miles inland. The last Hawaiian Island collapse sent waves several hundred feet up the mountain sides in Washington and would have covered all of Los Angeles.
We humans are pretty short sighted. We are sitting around worrying about marbles, when nature is capable (and appears imminent) of rolling a few bowling balls into our pins.
I’m a flight attendant so, no I haven’t curtailed travel! Airplanes are stuffed with people, airports are heaving. And more routes are being added. More people are traveling. I don’t see it being curtailed or people suddenly deciding not to take that trip. The world is more connected than ever before and everybody wants that instagramable photo op.
On a side note, we were in Iceland in 2011, it was on the cusp of everybody and their brother visiting. We just got back from the Faroe Islands. It is already on the same trajectory as Iceland. We LOVED it! I would go back, but I have a feeling it won’t be the same. Already locals are putting up signs and charging people to hike, rental cars are insanely expensive (and you have to book super early)
It says that the world has burned through approximately 1.3 trillion barrels of oil since the beginning of time. The global reserves are estimated at 1.5 trillion barrels of oil.
We are burning approximately 36.5 billion barrels per year, and that is expected to rise to 42 billion/yr by 2040.
At this rate there is about 37 years of oil reserve left.
We will likely find some more reserves in remote areas - i.e. under Antarctica, but we have poked holes in most places on the planet and the large reserves of easily lift-able oils have likely all been found by now.
I think its unlikely the world will be operating on oil in 50 years.
Considering the fact that India, China, Indonesia, Brazil, and a host of other nations have not reduced their “carbon footprint”, plus the factors you have illuminated, the chances of humanity affecting the climate have not changed one bit. Whether we are causing it or not, it will go on until nature decides to change it herself.
Consider, when Yellowstone goes, humanity will pray for global warming for decades. Of course a significant portion of humanity will not survive the event when it wipes out most of the agriculture globally.
There are a number of lesser events that can have a significant impact as well. It does not take a supervolcano to result in years of below average temps. If either (or both) the Canary Islands or Hawaiian Islands send a serious portion of their lands into the ocean as they have done in the past, most of the coastal areas in the Pacific and Atlantic are toast. The last Canary Islands collapse sent waves OVER Florida and miles inland. The last Hawaiian Island collapse sent waves several hundred feet up the mountain sides in Washington and would have covered all of Los Angeles.
We humans are pretty short sighted. We are sitting around worrying about marbles, when nature is capable (and appears imminent) of rolling a few bowling balls into our pins.
Spoken like a true climate-change skeptic.
There is no evidence of a supervolcano about to erupt that could significantly change our climate. Perhaps in the next few thousand years, but there is no evidence to suggest this is likely. Still, it serves as a handy excuse for humans not to bother trying to reduce our impact on the environment.
But you still traveled, right? You and every other person out there who “feels guilty” about their carbon footprint 99% of the time except when they really really want to go on a trip. And then justify it because, hey, Al Gore and the global climate leaders fly all over creation in private jets and really my little old vacation isn’t that big of a deal.
It’s not going to change. Because people are selfish. I’m not saying that’s wrong, it just “is”.
I hate to agree with you but you are correct. It relates directly to my belief that nothing ever gets done until we’ve reached an emergency situation. And I don’t think many people, including myself, are there yet.
It does not take a supervolcano to result in years of below average temps. If either (or both) the Canary Islands or Hawaiian Islands send a serious portion of their lands into the ocean as they have done in the past, most of the coastal areas in the Pacific and Atlantic are toast. The last Canary Islands collapse sent waves OVER Florida and miles inland. The last Hawaiian Island collapse sent waves several hundred feet up the mountain sides in Washington and would have covered all of Los Angeles.
We humans are pretty short sighted. We are sitting around worrying about marbles, when nature is capable (and appears imminent) of rolling a few bowling balls into our pins.
Excuse me for being blunt, but that is such a tired and stupid argument. It’s like saying “No use fixing the brakes on my car, because if a dump truck swerves into my lane head on, having fixed the brakes won’t save me either”.
To the OP: yes, I have reduced my air travel, and know several others who have done the same. No more short trips to Barcelona, Mallorca or Lisbon for a long weekend for the time being. I’m not saying I won’t travel by plane at all any more; I certainly will have to travel for work from time to time. I will have to look much closer into carbon offset systems of various sorts to decide if I think they’re legit.
Overall, it doesn’t seem that passenger numbers have gone down, though, the rise in popularity of Greta Thunbergs “Fridays for Future” movement across parts of Europe notwithstanding.
Is long distance travel making up a large percentage of most people’s carbon footprint?
I would think reducing everyday stuff would be more impactful?
Not to mention unless enough people are reducing travel the planes are still going to be flying. So all you’ve done potentially is miss out on a trip.
Whereas cycling to work, hanging clothes to dry, etc reduces carbon footprint regardless.
We humans are pretty short sighted. We are sitting around worrying about marbles, when nature is capable (and appears imminent) of rolling a few bowling balls into our pins.
So what you’re saying is the sensible long sighted thing to do is to wait for some exceedingly rare natural event to occur that dwarfs the rapid global warming we are causing?
We just need to institute a Carousel type ritual like in Logan’s Run and hold the population growth in check. Pretty sure we can get most countries on board.
Yeah, cancelled our trip-within-trip two weeks ago from Aviemore to Dunvegan (Isle of Skye) because it was an f-ing long drive in horrible weather. Of course there was a bonus in cancelling the trip, because I didn’t have to fill up an 8-passenger petrol-sipping diesel van. And, talk about climate change - it was bright and sunny the day before on our train ride from Inverness to Thurso - it was like…well, Scotland weather.
Airplanes represent about 2-3% of transportation emissions. Even if people stopped flying, it wouldn’t change much globally. Maybe a drop of a few tenths of a percent in total global emissions.
