Gransnet forums

Chat

Is it so wrong to fly?

(99 Posts)
infoman Sat 04-Jan-20 08:59:39

If any one decides to say take the train to Paris instead of the airplane.
Has any thing really changed?
No carbon dioxide has been increased or reduce,
it just might make us feel better.
We don't get any awards for reducing our carbon foot print.
If all those who my be travelling to New York (for example) decided not to fly the plane wouldstill have to fly to NY.
What annoys me is those persons who can afford to fly in private jets and helicopters.

BradfordLass72 Sun 05-Jan-20 07:12:43

I was talking to our local MP about this not long ago and someone suggested she could drive or take the train on her weekly commute from Auckland to Parliament House in Wellington, in order to reduce her c-footprint.

Her reasons were logical. It takes a fraction of the train or car time to fly.
Train takes 11+ hours
Driving, on a clear road 8+ hours
Flight time 1 hour.

She therefore has more time at work and can do more for the country.

She has a young family and at the end of a hard week, wants to be home quickly, not driving for 8 hours and would that be safe, when she's just finished a long day?

Her weekends are absolutelt choca-block supporting local functions (to which she taken her youngest (7) and listening to constituent problems at her 'clinics'.

This is just one example close to me but a bit of common sense is needed when we are weighing up what's best for the world and what's best for our families.

We can't save the world, we can only do our best.

Meanwhile: China is Leading Aviation Boom

"As the aviation industry continues to expand rapidly over the next two decades, growing demand for airline seats will outstrip the supply of qualified pilots. The biggest shortage will be in Asia where airlines have more new planes on order than anywhere else."

I'm sure they're not buying them just to look at.

NfkDumpling Sun 05-Jan-20 08:11:20

Pamela - I started reading it (Wilding), but then it got overtaken by Christmas books.

Fiachna50 Sun 05-Jan-20 08:15:50

If you have family abroad you need to fly. I hate flying, haven't been on a plane in years. Avoid it when I can. If you need to fly I wouldn't feel guilty about it. Some people also need to fly for work.

Shelmiss Sun 05-Jan-20 08:34:24

Someone said earlier that flying for business is a jolly. My husband flies a lot for business, believe me it’s not a jolly at all.

suzied Sun 05-Jan-20 08:47:04

Eating less meat does affect carbon emissions( in response to the poster who claimed it doesn’t)
Plant-based diet can fight climate change - UN www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49238749

farview Sun 05-Jan-20 09:20:28

.agree with you suzied..

Yehbutnobut Sun 05-Jan-20 09:23:53

It is immoral to fly unless you have to.

JenniferEccles Sun 05-Jan-20 09:31:14

Whatever our views air travel of course isn’t going away.

I believe the third runway at Heathrow has finally been given the go ahead, but when work will start is anyone’s guess.

In a few years I am sure there will be plans to expand Gatwick too.

annsixty Sun 05-Jan-20 09:38:09

I have two sets of friends who fly for pleasure at least 4 times a year of which at least two will be long haul.
One couple fly to Australia next Monday to join a cruise.
They have been back less than a month from another cruise.I have never got into a discussion with either couple about it, but they both have GC and one couple have GGC with another expected.
Do you think they think about the future for them, probably not.
Both H’s have large cars, both women have medium size cars , they are all in use daily.
However, their money, their choice.
I think we all justify what we do.
I don’t fly as I have a fear of flying, just once in the past 10 years, would I fly more if this wasn’t the case, I just don’t know.

Eglantine21 Sun 05-Jan-20 10:33:25

Well, carbon is an element. It can’t be manufactured or increased. The amount of carbon that the earth holds is exactly the same as it was billions of years ago. When it was in the atmosphere the earth was much warmer and other species flourished. As it became locked in fossilisation the earth cooled and allowed the evolution of mammals.

Every living organism absorbs carbon and excretes it as CO2. It is the building block of life. On a daily basis the amount of carbon animals excrete is actually slightly less than they take in. What is retained builds the animals body.

When the animal dies the carbon that is locked in their body returns to global carbon amount.

This is the closed cycle. When the earth teamed with life, when buffalo herds roamed America (as close to cows as you can get) the amount of CO2 didn’t increase.

We need to eat less meat because intensive farming methods use fossil fuel. Not because cows (or any other living creature) are the problem.

GrannyGravy13 Sun 05-Jan-20 11:02:30

Family scattered around the globe, combined with places we promised ourselves we would visit once retired mean we shall continue to fly.

Tourism is the lifeblood of some third world countries, in some areas supporting whole communities. In Africa tourism funds ecological reserves and helps to protect endangered wildlife.

Climate on Earth has always changed species evolve, there is so much more to this than “flying”

We recycle everything possible, do not waste food, grow vegetables, salads and fruits. I am careful to buy local produce and likewise with clothes try whenever possible to buy ethically.

Alexa Sun 05-Jan-20 11:08:51

Aeroplanes use a lot of fossil fuel and contribute a lot to climate change. Those still flying for pleasure or personal gain are selfish or ignorant or both.

Pantglas2 Sun 05-Jan-20 11:11:45

When planes stop flying, so will I. What’s the justification for F1 races burning astronomical amounts of fuel? Again, when they stop that, I’ll stop flying.

Callistemon Sun 05-Jan-20 11:15:50

I do gain personal pleasure from visiting my family.

When people worldwise stop driving petrol and diesel cars I may consider stopping flying to visit them.

I fact, I will because I'd be about 120 by then.

PamelaJ1 Sun 05-Jan-20 11:56:54

Apparently a medium dog has the same carbon footprint as a Toyota Land Cruiser.( other makes are available).
In the times today next to a photo of Greta cuddling a black lab.
I don’t have a dog, all of you who are castigating those of us who fly, do you have one?

JenniferEccles Sun 05-Jan-20 12:04:47

Of course this all brings us back to the question of climate change and whether human activity is to blame or not.

The fact has been pointed out many times that our climate has changed over many centuries from cool to warm long before humans could be blamed,and that it is solar activity causing the variations.

That’s not to say we shouldn’t do our bit of course.

Urmstongran Sun 05-Jan-20 12:09:13

Wasn’t the late David Bellamy vilified because he didn’t believe climate change was man-made? I think so. I recall he said once he made his views known the BBC work dried up.

SueDonim Sun 05-Jan-20 12:56:26

Yehbutnobut who exactly is going to be the judge of whether someone ‘has’ to fly?

And Alexa who will decide what is ‘flying for pleasure or personal gain’ and what is flying for necessity?

JenniferEccles Sun 05-Jan-20 13:17:52

Yes he was Urm poor chap.

Mind you man made climate change is almost a religion these days isn’t it?

We question it at our peril!

Daisymae Sun 05-Jan-20 13:19:40

I think that we are beyond discussing whether human activity contributes towards climate change. Yes it has always fluctuated but the speed is unprecedented, caused by human activity. Scientists have a general consensus in this at least.

Yehbutnobut Sun 05-Jan-20 14:16:39

SueD well certainly not those who think they are ‘entitled’ to do whatever they want.

Yehbutnobut Sun 05-Jan-20 14:17:40

JE I think you have that arse about tit. We ignore it at our peril.,

M0nica Sun 05-Jan-20 20:16:09

jennifereccles What does it matter what causes global warming? That is irrelevant. The fact is that whatever way the climate goes human activity hastens the warming effect if the climate is warming and slows the cooling, if it is cooling

Since the mid 18th century world population has increased by a factor of 8. Until the 18th century the main source of power was human or animal. Since then everything has become mechanisedand trillions and trillions of tonnes of oil, gas and coal that held carbon dioxide in safe store have been extracted and the stored carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere. Billions of acres of woodland, and jungle has been burnt or cleared to form fields and farms to provide feed for the voracious meat producing industry. The number of large farmed cattle has probably increased 100 times. The animals themselves have also increased in size.

Do you really belive that with an 8 fold increase of population and probably at least a 100 times increase of, both farmed animals and energy consumed per person. The huge destruction of tree cover and increase of arable fields and growth in ruminant herds, can occur on a planet like ours and have no effect on the climate?

You must believe that there is some magic hole somewhere, that sucks up all the extra carbon dioxide and methane we have produced and balances the loss of woodland cover by issuing some magic elixor at night that controls everything.

The fact is, whatever the natural climate trajectory if what we are doing is making the problem worse. It makes sense to do what we can to ameliorate it.