Harry
CibbuanoAre Australians travellers ruining the planet?
August 26th 2008 02:38
Category: The Mental Suggestion Box
Adele Horin wrote an article in the Sydney Morning Herald that lamented the fact that travelling Australians might be destroying the planet with greenhouse emissions - based solely on the fact that Australia is so damn far away, so the flights use up too much fuel.
First, she writes that Australians have an unquenchable thirst for travel:
I've been to dinner parties like that. Let me tell you, the travel talk is a good deal more interesting than the real estate shop talk, though I suppose the absolute worst is talking about real estate in other countries, as you travel. "Oooh, 3 bedroom beachside cottage in Barcelona! Smashing!"
Horin figures that on one round trip to London, you've done your quota of greenhouse gases for two years. Sounds substantial, doesn't it?
But are the numbers really correct? I don't know, and I suspect that the issue is far too cloudy to answer definitively. The Wired Blog looks at it a different way and finds that it's not that alarming at all:
In case you are worried about your greenhouse gas emissions, though, your best bet is probably just to stay in Sydney. Sounds boring right? Well, luckily, Sydney Diary has a great reputation for bringing you fun, free and special events happening in the Harbour City.
First, she writes that Australians have an unquenchable thirst for travel:
"Travel is the Australian birthright. First the young went to Europe, then ordinary families discovered Bali, and then retirees got into the act, visiting children and grandchildren dispersed by globalisation and adventure. It is no accident the best guidebooks to the world, Lonely Planet, emanate from offices in Melbourne; nor that for decades, at dinner parties across the nation, only real estate talk interrupted the narratives of trips taken or trips planned."
"The habit of flying, I have discovered since Begbie propelled me out of wilful ignorance into research mode, is about the worst impact a single person can exert on the fragile environment. A jet is not the brilliant means of transporting us quickly to pleasurable destinations. It is a toxic flying machine."
Horin figures that on one round trip to London, you've done your quota of greenhouse gases for two years. Sounds substantial, doesn't it?
But are the numbers really correct? I don't know, and I suspect that the issue is far too cloudy to answer definitively. The Wired Blog looks at it a different way and finds that it's not that alarming at all:
"All that air travel accounts for just 1 percent of Australia's total greenhouse gas emissions. Compare that to 1.5 percent worldwide and 3.5 percent in the U.S. and you wonder if Aussies are doing that much damage. And flying is still less polluting, overall, than driving - 10 percent of Australia's GHG emissions come from cars; that figure is 14 percent worldwide."
In case you are worried about your greenhouse gas emissions, though, your best bet is probably just to stay in Sydney. Sounds boring right? Well, luckily, Sydney Diary has a great reputation for bringing you fun, free and special events happening in the Harbour City.
| 43 |
| Vote |
Shared on
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Louie
Climate Forum
Climate Red
randomthoughts
Phil's Wellness Tips
Comment by Anonymous
On that note, it's only the business travelers who are mucking up the environment! Some of them are back and forth every week between London, New York and Singapore.
Those of us who fly twice a year aren't really hurting much. And if a jet is not brilliant means of transportation, then what shall we chose? Transporter beam?
(I only post, because today I met the most lovely Australian couple here in Honduras. They were lost on a corner, and I gave them directions to the hotel, and they said "Thanks mate!" about 10 times)