You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I’m going to stick my neck out and say the environmental component of this is virtue signalling? What consumes the least carbon, shipping bike launches round the place, or having disparate sets of people converge on one location? I’d have thought it’s the latter.
Or, not having a junket at all?
Good to see organisations taking a lead.
I think if we take it as read that press junkets are going to happen (if not because I’m sure the manufacturers would rather launch their latest enduro rig in the Dolomites in summer than in the Pennines in the drizzle), then this is a good move.
Cyclist mag tried to do a similar thing with their ride trips but were more or less defeated by the difficulty of taking bikes on British trains and Eurostar.
A quick google suggests that a container ship is 3g of co2 per tonne per km. Its about 20,000km by ship to Taiwan. So that’s 60kg of co2 to shift a tonne. Lets say a boxed bike is 25kg you get 40 in a tonne. So that’s 1.5kg to ship a bike to the uk from Taiwan.
A flight to venice to ride in the Dolomites is 233kg each way. 466kg in total.
I bet it’s a lot lower, but the key difference is where it’s released. Planes produce lots of water vapour at high altitude, where it sits for a very long time acting as a blanket in addition to the vast quantities of CO2 that are released.
Sounds like a good position to take...the cynic in me thinks they aren't getting the invites and making it a 'good news' thing. The optimist in me reckons this is a very good move and should be encouraged for more to adopt this.
Suspect it won't be simple or easy as bike launches do tend to generate a lot of content, so that appears to be getting cut (although not read the article, have they got a freelancer nearby that can attend and provide copy, perhaps?).
Suspect it won’t be simple or easy as bike launches do tend to generate a lot of content,
I suspect that the majority of the content is either cut and paste from the press pack, or output from a q&a session, which could as easily be held over zoom. Very little seems to constitute what I would consider review material.
A quick google suggests that a container ship is 3g of co2 per tonne per km. Its about 20,000km by ship to Taiwan. So that’s 60kg of co2 to shift a tonne. Lets say a boxed bike is 25kg you get 40 in a tonne. So that’s 1.5kg to ship a bike to the uk from Taiwan.
That's nice. But I'll bet a lot of those bikes being sent out and back for test rides for mags who don't travel to the central location will be going by DHL or UPS
By the time it arrives on a container ship itll already be last months news going into next month's mag.
The article suggests that the demo bikes should just be part of that countries allocation. Yes of course if you move 10 people and 50 bikes to each country then the balance would shift.
I think the article is quite honest. They say part of reason is the cost of having a journalist out of the office for 3 days to ride the same bike on the same terrain as every other journalist. So for that 3 days of journalist time they get some low grade non unique content
Again some googling finds this. Co2 per kilometre per passenger
https://ourworldindata.org/travel-carbon-footprint
I think my shipping figure might be too low. Although this source agrees. Other have it higher. But not high enough to change the answer
https://www.co2everything.com/co2e-of/freight-shipping
They say part of reason is the cost of having a journalist out of the office for 3 days to ride the same bike on the same terrain as every other journalist. So for that 3 days of journalist time they get some low grade non unique content
I’m sure @Mark would have a view on this, but I can see how they could say ‘we can neither justify the staff time nor the CO2 for this’?
It might be me and how many seasons of new bikes I've been into cycling for but........I couldn't give a flying **** about a journalist telling me about a new bike they've jetting off to see - no matter how many tonnes of CO2 the flying took to get the 'scoop'.
Someone with a good eye going around a trade show to do me a summary of anything of proper note from many many brands might be more worth it, maybe.
I suppose the real question has to be, what value does a journalist attending a manufacturer organised junket add to their review that an 'at home' review wouldn't have?
Free travel and perks? Might skew how positively they write the bikes up (even subconsciously).
Really these things are for the benefit of the people selling bikes, they can control the event, select the terrain/routes etc, and maybe influence the journalists a bit more. It's about controlling the arena and circumstances under which certain reviewers form opinions on their products.
If Road.cc do actually start a change here, and others follow suit in not flying to 'review' bikes and if the big brand's marketing departments are still keen on press junkets then maybe they need to start looking at the cost of booking up train tickets.
I would be more convinced if they quit the business rather than try to bugger the planet by getting us to produce more carbon by buying new things. In fact how much less carbon would there be if the internet closed?
Keep flying, the planet is greening.
Good on them. Bikes don't even need 'launches' imo.
I doubt the environment comes any where in to the decision.
I bet it’s more a how can we save money.
Be honest, I doubt anyone has turned down a business trip to some part of the world to try a new product. You know your getting a few days out of the office with a company pampering you
Again I might be cynical but the recent Sea Otter classic. That’s just a love in for all people mtb cycling industry. Loads of vids on YT ‘this is an awesome new bike, with wheels and a frame, it’s brilliant’ but they haven’t ridden it at all ! They could have stayed at home!
Would be interested on STW view on this
"Be honest, I doubt anyone has turned down a business trip to some part of the world to try a new product"
I have. Plenty of marginal need trips available if you want to be sold to, not convinced it's all as urgent as that though.
Have also ridden to European trade shows many times to get some riding in as well as reducing flying.
Asia is a bit difficult to reach any other way but we're all better at working remotely now and working with staff based out there.
Now let's talk about the brands who fly ambassadors to 4 or 5 locations around the world each year for the sake of content.. as low priority as launches imo and when the press aren't flying and are working around it those exotic location features might look a bit different to them. Local locations work fine. Quality of content is not all location dependant.
(if not because I’m sure the manufacturers would rather launch their latest enduro rig in the Dolomites in summer than in the Pennines in the drizzle)
TBH, i'd prefer a review written after riding round the Pennines for a few days, with the bike left over newspapers in the journos hallway, dripping it's life blood out after (another) bone jarring ride over shit roads full of farm muck and potholes in the pouring rain.
"The bike seals seem to have been made from some water soluble jelly, not one of the bearings still rotates freely, i've had 11 punctures in 100 kms thanks to the paper thin tyres and cheap lightweight tubes (that i've spent an hour looking at over the past 3 days), ride is bonejarring and unsuitable for british roads"
As opposed to swooping round immaculate tarmac in bright sunshine and learning absolutely eff all about the bike.
A quick google suggests that a container ship is 3g of co2 per tonne per km. Its about 20,000km by ship to Taiwan. So that’s 60kg of co2 to shift a tonne. Lets say a boxed bike is 25kg you get 40 in a tonne. So that’s 1.5kg to ship a bike to the uk from Taiwan.
I don't think it can work like that. A decent journalist needs a few days riding, and then a few days writing to create a review of a bike. Lets say 2 weeks end to end. Then you need to make sure all the journalists at different mags have had time to do that so they can hit an embargo date (if you don't do this, the reviewers are incentivised just to get their review out first, significantly degrading the quality of review). So maybe a month from getting bikes in the hands of journalists to reviews live on a site.
Bike companies can't afford to have the bikes just sitting in a container in a warehouse whilst this happens - there's a lot of money wrapped up in the stock. So even if you're not flying the journalists somewhere, I think you'd have to have some method to get the bikes to the journalists that's a month quicker than shipping them, so they'd be likely to be air-freighted. Still less impact than flying people (especially because the junket bikes are flown from the factory today), but not as little impact as shipping them may have
the bottom line is for a lot of people, the environment impact just isn't a big deal. There's some overlap between those who care about the environment and bicycles (because bikes can be a good, low-carbon way of moving around) but a lot of poeple (and probably brands) have no interest in that side of things, and just want a shiny toy to help them waste their time with a grin
Be honest, I doubt anyone has turned down a business trip to some part of the world to try a new product
Amusingly I did just that a few weeks back - major outdoors brand launching new range on semi-exotic Med island over two days. It would have been no fewer than three separate flights with a travel time of ten to twelve hours each way. It was both environmentally reprehensible and a major hassle. It felt like someone hadn't thought very hard about what they were doing.
Media launches look great from the outside, but trust me, the reality tends to be a combination of exhausting travel schedules sandwiching intense indoctrination sessions albeit in a nice place with good food, usually. It's not a holiday. You're not spending time with mates. It's work. Journalists aren't completely stupid, just because someone flies you to an exotic location, doesn't mean you automatically think the brand and the product are great.
And mostly everything they can tell you on a trip, could usually be communicated remotely. The one thing these things are good for is spending time with people from brands / networking, but that's about it. I'm all for product-based media events being canned. All too often it feels like they're mostly happening so the brand's marketing team can justify their existence and go somewhere nice for a few days. Kudos to road.cc for taking a stand.
Well done to them.
Road.cc would certainly have been getting the invites, as quite a prominent road cycling platform.
Offroad.cc (also included in this) isn't top tier MTB media, and appears to rely on a variety of contributors - some amateur, who may have appreciated the odd exotic "jolly" more than a jaded professional hack like BWD 😉
I don't know to what extent STW also fits that model these days, but it'll be interesting to see if they follow suit.
I know the editors at Pinkbike have been quite upfront in the past about just wanting brands to send them the bikes to ride on their familiar local trails - to produce a more useful appraisal. And they do seem to achieve this, but I'm not sure whether they are still flying to those launches or not.
Trade shows and product launches should maybe be considered separately. As an example, Sea Otter might be slightly different as it's a lot of brands displaying, not just a single product launch. Environmentally, a bit more efficient. Much of the communication between vendors and journalists can, of course, be done electronically but I wonder if that might miss some "off the record" stuff.
Much of the communication between vendors and journalists can, of course, be done electronically but I wonder if that might miss some “off the record” stuff.
Not convinced. Comes back to I would prefer a review of the bike in UK conditions rather than a sale persons saying how fantastic their bike is no manufacturer is going to say 'our bike isnt quite as good as theirs over there'
“Be honest, I doubt anyone has turned down a business trip to some part of the world to try a new product”
Yep, I've made it quite clear I don't / won't fly out to the office(s) we're working with.
Bike companies can’t afford to have the bikes just sitting in a container in a warehouse whilst this happens – there’s a lot of money wrapped up in the stock. So even if you’re not flying the journalists somewhere, I think you’d have to have some method to get the bikes to the journalists that’s a month quicker than shipping them, so they’d be likely to be air-freighted. Still less impact than flying people (especially because the junket bikes are flown from the factory today), but not as little impact as shipping them may have
I suppose part of the problem is the worldwide nature of it. It wouldn't be too difficult to do a launch in individual countries and invite just the local media. Whereas I assume that when they launch a bike in the Dolomites the company is actually there for a few weeks with a different set of journos every couple of days.
Shipping the bikes to the journos would be far more carbon efficient because they can take a few days over it. A van full of 20 bikes being driven to 5 destinations around Europe is still far more efficient than flying in 100 journos in batches to 20.
Within the margin of "depends on the car or plane" it's roughly the same carbon footprint to fly 1000 miles on a full flight as it is to drive it solo in a car). So even if the van is about half as efficient as the car it's still ~10x more efficient than moving 20 people by plane.
Re STW, I recall Mark did a no-fly biking holiday to an accommodation in France (which by the way looked a lot of faff, but fair enough). But then, not long after, I’m sure there was a video article/promotion about him using a certain brand of tyres around the trails in Whistler. This may all be a daydream, but I remember at the time trying to square the two features together.
Edit, here. Flying to Whistler to test tyres?
According to this only about 10% of the UK population has no concerns about climate change and 75% are making adjustments
If course that’s self reported and tells us nothing about actions in the real world. But in this case it’s about the actions of journalists and the media. Rather than end consumers that matter.
My wife is really pretty invested in tackling climate change. She says that peer pressure between businesses is a one way emissions are being reduced. Some companies will seek out suppliers that can meet certain environmental standards.
I wonder if another compromise, for bike launches, would be coordinated launches. So 5 manafacturers launch in the Alpes on successive days in different locations.
The ideal of course, for the journalists, is that 5 companies launch in the same resort. They have a week to season jump between bikes and adjust set ups. But I’m not sure the manufacturers would like that
On a side note i do miss the comparative reviews in the magazine. I just learn so much more.
a review of the bike in UK conditions
"Everything has seized"
On a tangent, I thought the Mud Camp articles were great...
Re STW, I recall Mark did a no-fly biking holiday to an accommodation in France (which by the way looked a lot of faff, but fair enough). But then, not long after, I’m sure there was a video article/promotion about him using a certain brand of tyres around the trails in Whistler. This may all be a daydream, but I remember at the time trying to square the two features together.
It's one of those areas where no-ne can go from old habits to future-perfect in one go. We can all make reductions, some might go all out but some might have to compromise - work, family, etc. We can have principles despite the conflicts, just need to be aware of potential hypocrisy in how you put it across?
But I’m not sure the manufacturers would like that
Who wants to get all the journos from the popular mags on Friday, after 4 days of rides and presentations?
Also a lot of opportunity for back to back comparisons on brand new material, or comparing Scotts new downhill weapon with Specialiseds new enduro sledge.
I recall Mark did a no-fly biking holiday to an accommodation in France (which by the way looked a lot of faff, but fair enough).
I've done no fly cycling trips from the UK to Spain (3 times, different locations) and Sweden to Spain and Italy (errrr, 5 times i think). And also no fly ski/board trips to France and Italy (And northern Sweden/Norway, which is a pain to drive!). Mostly with just the ex, but sometimes picking someone up on the way, so 3 or 4 up for a lot of the journey (or once, 11 up!).
It's never actually been a faff. Except getting 11 peoples passports together in one place at one time.
I believe rockhopper was referring to a train-based biking trip to the Alps.
Driving (rather than flying) there is very do-able - and actually the preferred option for me.
Yeah, train based requires some finessing and luck.
But thankfully (as i'm not in the UK) it's actually now quite reasonable, cost wise!
A flight to venice to ride in the Dolomites is 233kg each way. 466kg in total.
Unless road.cc are taking the corporate jet that needs dividing by a factor of 100 for a typical flight. So not a massive difference to shipping via container.
Yeah, train based requires some finessing and luck.
It shouldn't though, and I gather a lot of the problems are in the UK (where we're quite capable of scoring some own goals, e.g. the Highland Explorers that apparently aren't used on the right WHL services) and Eurostar.
The ideal of course, for the journalists, is that 5 companies launch in the same resort. They have a week to season jump between bikes and adjust set ups. But I’m not sure the manufacturers would like that
I suppose that's what Sea Otter or Crankworx week are /could be.
A lot of stuff gets launched at them but probably isn't available to ride for another few months so they'd need to bring forward their launches a few months (or delay them into the new year)
The article suggests that the demo bikes should just be part of that countries allocation. Yes of course if you move 10 people and 50 bikes to each country then the balance would shift.
I wonder how much it costs to fly and put up all the journos for a few days? If you didn't have to fly ST, MBUK, MBR, etc etc to Finale or wherever, how many demo bikes could you send to various trail center bike shops for customers to try? Must be about a grand per person, which must be about the actual ex-factory cost of a mid range bike (i.e. what it would actually cost Trek or someone to build a bike and write it off, not including marketing, admin etc)
@tonyf1 - half a tonne of CO2 per person is about right for an average london to mid-europe return flight estimate.
If you divided that 466kg flight footprint estimate by 100 you'd have the CO2 output of a car driving about 30km.
Media launches look great from the outside, but trust me, the reality tends to be a combination of exhausting travel schedules sandwiching intense indoctrination sessions albeit in a nice place with good food, usually. It’s not a holiday. You’re not spending time with mates. It’s work.
Does road.cc actually pay any journalist enough to make this worth their while? Kudos to them for opting out I suppose, but their content seems to be written by mostly side-hustlers who probably couldn't drop the day job for such a jaunt anyway.
You are right just checked calculator again and it’s per person not per plane. I’m shocked how much CO2 it actual is.
For an average person in the UK the carbon footprint boils down to:
25% - heating your house
25% - driving your car
25% - going on holiday abroad
25% - eating meat
And we emit about 4x the sustainable amount ......
Numbers are simplified slightly, obviously a UK holiday, vegan diet, riding a bike, and a passivehaus aren't absolutely zero, but they're near enough for comparison and the current amounts equal about ~1000kg-1500kg per use. Consumption of plastic tat (and bikes) isn't a really big number in the scheme of things.
I think we need to do for CO2 what traffic light labels were supposed to do for sugar in food. Your forecourt diesel receipt, boarding pass, supermarket receipt, gas bill etc should say what percentage of the recommended annual allowance that purchase just contributed. Would people still fly or drive as much if they were handed a piece of paper that said that the tank of fuel they just bought was 10% of what they could sustainably use, or the flight to Ibiza for a stag weekend was 30%?
Apparently we don't need to go as far as a vegan diet to significantly reduce our carbon footprint?
WRT holidays, 90% of the carbon footprint is from the flights there, even for something like a skiing holiday.
Cycling by train is a faff, but using it lets the companies know that there is demand for it, and it is much more fun that going by air or driving.
Cycling by train is a faff, but using it lets the companies know that there is demand for it, and it is much more fun that going by air or driving.
Problem is that it’s the classic ‘assessing demand for a bridge by counting the number of swimmers’ scenario, isn’t it? Because it’s a faff, most people are put off at the planning stages.
@thisisnotaspoon There’s decent evidence for local travel that if people feel they have choices, they will choose appropriately. However, if they think they’re going to get killed because there’s no safe cycling infra, and if the buses are slow and unreliable due to the amount of traffic, and expensive due to misguided political decisions, then they’ll drive.
75% of flights, by uk citizens, are taken by 15% of the population. In the 2014 survey about had the population hadn’t flown in the previous year
https://fullfact.org/economy/do-15-people-take-70-flights/
We eat less meat than we use to. I’d say it was by far the easiest adaptation we’ve made. In general i think we eat better. Because we’ve had to think differently
Off to make a tofu curry. Which actually is less good than chicken. I’ll have to hope my vegetable side can compensate
Apparently we don’t need to go as far as a vegan diet to significantly reduce our carbon footprint?
Yea, about half to 2/3 the reduction is in going veggie. Meat production is by far the biggest contributor of CO2 in diets, followed by dairy and eggs. Simply because the amount of feed required to give the animals to produce meat (or dairy) is a magnitude higher than it's own nutritional value. Most of the worlds soy production isn't to make Tofu and weird tasting coffee, it's cattle feed because despite what the packaging implies, there isn't enough grass in the UK to support the amount of cow we eat.
WRT holidays, 90% of the carbon footprint is from the flights there, even for something like a skiing holiday.
Yep, and it's not a case of not going on holidays, just consider it the luxury it should be. A once in a lifetime backpacking trip to Thailand, great. Three times a year skiiing, the Maldives and a weekend break to Budapest is more of a problem.
Ah, now we should be able to get the sleeper from London to Budapest…
@ratherbeintobago - yes people do get put off, but if we don't use it at all, it'll get even worse.
Having said that, apart from the faff of having to pick up printed tickets it has got easier to take a bike on the train in the years I've been doing it. Just waiting for Eurostar to start taking fully assembled bike to Paris again.
Question but I don't know if there is an answer.
Which is worse for the world? All flying, engine powered of course, or meat eating? No ifs, buts or compromises.
I would say that as meat eating is a natural thing and flying is pure luxury, the latter should go first.
Of course the real problem is people but we are not allowed to mention that.
Lets take the idea that we shouldn't need to go by plane (darn good one) and extend it to trains as well. Why do we need to go anywhere by powered transport? Much better for the environment.
Which is worse for the world? All flying, engine powered of course, or meat eating? No ifs, buts or compromises.
I would say that as meat eating is a natural thing and flying is pure luxury, the latter should go first.
From a climate change standpoint, as I said it's practically a dead heat.
The natural argument doesn't really stack up unless you're a Christian fundamentalist going for the "god gave us dominion over animals" bible quote. Several major world religions don't eat meat. And has there ever been a study to suggest eating meat is good for you?
From my previous post, I'm picking keeping my house warm (17.5C to be precise).
Lets take the idea that we shouldn’t need to go by plane (darn good one) and extend it to trains as well. Why do we need to go anywhere by powered transport? Much better for the environment.
Congratulations, you just figured out "15 minute cities".
It's not necessary though. There's nothing wrong with having a carbon footprint, as long as it's a sustainable one.
sus·tain·a·bil·i·ty
[səˌstānəˈbilədē]
noun
the ability to be maintained at a certain rate or level:
"the sustainability of economic growth" · "the long-term sustainability of the project"
avoidance of the depletion of natural resources in order to maintain an ecological balance:
"the pursuit of global environmental sustainability" · "the ecological sustainability of the planet"
I wonder how much it costs to fly and put up all the journos for a few days? If you didn’t have to fly ST, MBUK, MBR, etc etc to Finale or wherever,
Considerably cheaper and easier on logistics than boxing up a dozen test bikes and shipping them to each country where the various magazines in each country then have to fight over who gets it first, where it gets sent next, what happens if/when one of the journos rides it into a tree and bends the wheels, what to do when it gets lost in transit...
Far easier to have everyone in one place at the same time, share the same bikes on the same trails, have the same demos from [manufacturer], the same sales spiel, mechanics, support etc on hand.
Yes, there should absolutely be rules / guidance / support to get to said launches without flying and across Europe it shouldn't be that difficult to do train journeys. Being in the UK with our uniquely shit rail system does require more effort but an Interrail ticket to include Eurostar is pretty straightforward. It's just that as soon as you mention going to mainland Europe, everyone immediately thinks "Ryanair".
Both the Verbier by train and tyres in Whistler trips were personal holidays paid for by my wife and I. The content produced was a bi product of those holidays. I’m not sure if that makes it any better or not. It’s the same carbon foot print either way.
Hannah’s sea otter trip was off the back of flying to spend some time with her American husband. Again, not sure if that alters the equation.
I'm going to Morzine in June. Again, a holiday. Will likely get content out of it. Take a test bike to review in the mountains.
I guess I’m kind of waiting my turn here. When billionaires have junked their private jets and oil companies stop being given licences to open new oil fields then I think maybe it’s my turn next to stop travelling for fun and/or work.
let’s get the big stuff that makes a real difference sorted first.
I’m not proposing we all do nothing of course- just making a broader point. Solar and EVs and a **** load of insulation in the house have been part of our home life for some years now. I guess what I’m personally trying to be is not perfect but definitely better.
the Verbier holiday was one of the best holidays I’ve ever had. The travel was amazing. It did cost over twice what it would have cost if we’d just got a flight and transfer from Manchester. That’s a major problem of course. Doing better is often the most expensive option.
I guess I’m kind of waiting my turn here. When billionaires have junked their private jets and oil companies stop being given licences to open new oil fields then I think maybe it’s my turn next to stop travelling for fun and/or work.
I can see your point, but oil companies will keep getting it out the ground (remarkably efficiently and in a few cases carbon neutrally*), as long as Ryan Air keep buying Jet-A1, and Ryan Air will keep buying Jet-A1 as long as people fly to Morzine, etc, etc. If Shell turned around tomorrow and said they were shutting down all production. Ryan Air would still be flying, they'd just get it from BP, Total, Aramco, whoever would sell it to them.
a **** load of insulation in the house
Is the same argument reversed.
Rhetorical question then, why did you decide to insulate your house before Shell stopped getting gas out the ground? Because it makes no sense to think about it like that.
*Norway have built refineries powered by hydro electricity, there's currently an ongoing project to power North Sea operations electrically from wind turbines rather than onboard gas turbines. But you know that's piss in the wind compared to the emissions from actually burning the product.
Having just returned from a trip wher i flew 15000 miles and drove 3000 its a bit hypocritical but flying is a huge pollutter. So is eating meat and so is having kids and pets. Cars also a huge issue
Its not one thing or the other that needs doing. Its everything
Environmental collapse has started. Its too late for half measures
Quote
Which is worse for the world? All flying, engine powered of course, or meat eating? No ifs, buts or compromises.
I would say that as meat eating is a natural thing and flying is pure luxury, the latter should go first.
Quote
In a world sense it has to be food. Simply because 80% of the worlds population has never been on a plane. As i said above, for me eating less meat has been basically no effort. I don’t feel I’m missing out. If i never flew again i think i would be.
And don’t forget banking; or rather where your money is invested by the banks when you save, have your wages paid, keep the money for your direct debits or credit card payments. Changing to an ethical bank has more positive effect on the environment than swapping to an EV or going vegan. And it’s a lot simpler.
I believe someone already mentioned the internet; let’s not forget the electricity usage of server farms for social media including strava, and forums.
Very easy to become overwhelmed but little changes all help.
"When billionaires have junked their private jets and oil companies stop being given licences to open new oil fields then I think maybe it’s my turn next to stop travelling for fun and/or work.
let’s get the big stuff that makes a real difference sorted first."
I get the point about proportions and effect but if we all wait for those fks to change first we're in deep trouble. Game over.
There's more of us than there are of them.
Changing to an ethical bank has more positive effect on the environment than swapping to an EV or going vegan.
Tried that, and then the Crystal Methodist happened 🤦♂️
I guess I’m kind of waiting my turn here. When billionaires have junked their private jets and oil companies stop being given licences to open new oil fields then I think maybe it’s my turn next to stop travelling for fun and/or work.
You will be waiting a long time and the planet will burn
I'm not sure all meat is as bad as is being made out. Using this as a source https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local
Cows and pigs are bad, but chicken is producing around 1kg co2 per portion (180g), which is around the same as driving 4 miles in an average car.
Of course the real problem is people but we are not allowed to mention that.
Oh right. Have you had a knock on the door since posting this?
Anyway, I haven't given anything up but am significantly reducing polluting activities. Daughter is veggie so we all eat less meat, and I haven't flown anywhere for a couple of years. Skiing is by train or car, and we're taking the ferry to Spain this summer.
fwiw when I started feeling differently about flying to ride or climb it had a knock-on effect on other areas of life. I really miss the Alps. So if I go to the Alps less I feel like I want to make that count by being consistent - I eat way less red meat and I found I really like veg and I feel better for it, and don't often eat meat when eating out now. And there's commercial fishing .. etc. I think lockdown and exploring Wales has helped with Alpine withdrawal. Wales is so beautiful and I can ride to Chepstow in about 2.5 hours from home, the ease of the journey adds to the appeal.
It also inspired a (road) ride from the ferry port in France at Caen down to the Alps last summer. Took just over 4 days and when I first saw the Ecrins it was like seeing them the first time, felt so much more worthwhile for the journey there. Something clicked, about the journey:destination value ratio. Haven't figured out an MTB ride there yet but tbh the uplift Alps MTB thing isn't what I'm so into these days so it's easier to say all this. Could do a bikepacking trip via European Bike Express any year though so no problem.
Skiing is quickly becoming one of the most environmentally damaging hobbies, especially in Germany, Italy and Austria. So much snow is now created to keep resorts going whilst glaciers are shrinking at record levels.
I'll hold up my hands, I'm an Aerospace research engineer, so do have bias, but I'm also very pro-environment.
Many of the figures used to compare various means of transporting things are extremely skewed. Fuel use on aircraft is considered only on passenger capacity and always ignores cargo weight. Sea shipping assumes point to point, but in reality, there's a substantial head and tail on that journey which contributes highly to impact and often isn't even close to being as significant for air travel. Ferry travel assumes ideal sea conditions, which is rarely the case.
In general, Air travel is around 8-10 times worse than sea travel, (not the 80*someone posted earlier - simple math can tell you this) for cargo, around 5-7 times worse than sea travel for people and for rail, is highly dependent on grid mix, but usually 5-10 times more, the upper figure being for France with it's highly electrified network and nuclear power....
What's often ignored for Air travel is that it also supports substantial agricultural trade and allows vast amounts of agricultural products to be grown in more suitable places and then flown before spoiling. This is often shipped in the belly of passenger aircraft. Not using greenhouses, making use of already existing flights, etc all help to reduce impact. You could say we should just eat seasonally, but that's another argument.
On a per passenger basis, Air travel will have reduced its impact by almost 50% by 2030 and by almost 80% by 2050. The issue is the continual growth of the market. Currently everything that can be done by aerosapce is being done, but it's hard. Safe, reliable, lightweight cutting edge technology must be developed before it can be incorporated.
Surprisingly, you could, at a stroke, reduce aircraft emissions by between 10 and 15% by homologating the ATC network. Continuous descent and ascent vectors would dramatically improve efficiency.
What’s often ignored for Air travel is that it also supports substantial agricultural trade and allows vast amounts of agricultural products to be grown in more suitable places and then flown before spoiling.
Is that more or less carbon intensive than heated polytunnels etc?
Sea shipping assumes point to point, but in reality, there’s a substantial head and tail on that journey which contributes highly to impact
But it's not always point to point because the boat doesn't go to point A then to B and drop everything off, then go back to point C for more stuff like a taxi. It is like a bus in which stuff comes on and off at different locations. Well, more like a delivery driver (cos that's what it is) with a flexible route that optimises pickups and drop-offs. So the fuel used to bring your washing machine from Shanghai to Southampton is also bringing a laptop from Taipei to Akra or whatever.
I’ll hold my hand and say that i used a figure for shipping that was too low. Not that it changed the balance of the argument in that case
My sister has worked with airbus. I’m not in the all flying is evil camp.
There seems to be 2 problems with flying
It’s an easy way to go a long way. In co2 emissions terms it’s about that same as 2 people sharing a petrol car. But there is no way I’d drive to Greece for the week
The other problem is contrails. These contribute significantly to the climate impact of aviation