This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=624215#x8127542
The world is going to hell in a hand cart.
Every one of us can remember a time when we were younger when there were more birds, insects, plants, space.
The causes are well-documented.
I flew to the Bregaglia this summer. I'm a bit ashamed of that now and won't do it again.
Will you?
Why?
The world is going to hell in a hand cart.
Every one of us can remember a time when we were younger when there were more birds, insects, plants, space.
The causes are well-documented.
I flew to the Bregaglia this summer. I'm a bit ashamed of that now and won't do it again.
Will you?
Why?
1
1
In reply to JJL:
If it's within Europe I'd look at train, but with fares as they are it's not a cheap option, so ultimately I suppose it's the size of my wallet that dictates whether I fly or not.
If it's overseas, for instance when I want to see my family in South Africa, it's the only feasible option.
If it's within Europe I'd look at train, but with fares as they are it's not a cheap option, so ultimately I suppose it's the size of my wallet that dictates whether I fly or not.
If it's overseas, for instance when I want to see my family in South Africa, it's the only feasible option.
In reply to JJL:
If I ever want to go overseas or see family then its the only sensible option.
Its nice where I live though to look up at a clear blue sky and never see a vapour trail.
If I ever want to go overseas or see family then its the only sensible option.
Its nice where I live though to look up at a clear blue sky and never see a vapour trail.
1
In reply to JJL:
I've never flown for environmental reasons, but I'm wavering a little bit, as I try and think of the impact of everything I do, and have been through a really challenging couple of years, and the fact that a lot of people don't seem to think of the environmental impact of what they do, is making me think that a trip to Iceland to recharge could be just the thing to help me bounce back refreshed and all that, and I'll go back to trying to be green(er) again.
I've never flown for environmental reasons, but I'm wavering a little bit, as I try and think of the impact of everything I do, and have been through a really challenging couple of years, and the fact that a lot of people don't seem to think of the environmental impact of what they do, is making me think that a trip to Iceland to recharge could be just the thing to help me bounce back refreshed and all that, and I'll go back to trying to be green(er) again.
Post edited at 21:11
1
2
In reply to Timmd:
Do it. Iceland is ace! Don't fly anymore, or own a passport, but if I did it would be to there. On the other hand, Bill Tilman sailed there.
Do it. Iceland is ace! Don't fly anymore, or own a passport, but if I did it would be to there. On the other hand, Bill Tilman sailed there.
1
In reply to Timmd:
The plane will fly whether you are on it or not...go.
Real change has to come from government.
The plane will fly whether you are on it or not...go.
Real change has to come from government.
2
9
16
6
In reply to phja:
I don't think so - I think planes fly because people buy tickets for flights - wouldn't a 50% reduction in ticket buying eventually lead to a 50% reduction flights? But what do I know oh-ho-ho....
But still, "go", I agree. I've never regretted going (anywhere).
> The plane will fly whether you are on it or not...go.
I don't think so - I think planes fly because people buy tickets for flights - wouldn't a 50% reduction in ticket buying eventually lead to a 50% reduction flights? But what do I know oh-ho-ho....
But still, "go", I agree. I've never regretted going (anywhere).
2
In reply to drmarten:
Have you ever thought to try and calculate your carbon footprint?
(Just wondering)
> I fly as often as I can with absolutely zero need for justification.
Have you ever thought to try and calculate your carbon footprint?
(Just wondering)
Post edited at 21:30
2
2
In reply to JJL:
If it's Europe, which it usually is - and we do go on a pretty regular basis - then we drive.
It means we can take whatever we want, go at our own timescales, and also it's a nice way to see places en route.
Not sure how efficient that is compared to flying or a train regarding carbon footprint though?
When it comes to outside Europe, then it's a plane.
If it's Europe, which it usually is - and we do go on a pretty regular basis - then we drive.
It means we can take whatever we want, go at our own timescales, and also it's a nice way to see places en route.
Not sure how efficient that is compared to flying or a train regarding carbon footprint though?
When it comes to outside Europe, then it's a plane.
In reply to Goucho:
It's usually said that one seat on a fairly full flight is roughly equivalent in carbon terms to that person driving, alone, an average family car to their destination instead. Not absolutely terrible, IOW. Where it becomes an issue is long-haul flying, where you really wouldn't drive that far.
Trains vary - an empty train is worse than an empty car, and some modern higher-speed diesel trains (e.g. Voyagers) are actually not much better than a car. Road coach is probably the best because the speed is lower and people are more crammed in.
It's usually said that one seat on a fairly full flight is roughly equivalent in carbon terms to that person driving, alone, an average family car to their destination instead. Not absolutely terrible, IOW. Where it becomes an issue is long-haul flying, where you really wouldn't drive that far.
Trains vary - an empty train is worse than an empty car, and some modern higher-speed diesel trains (e.g. Voyagers) are actually not much better than a car. Road coach is probably the best because the speed is lower and people are more crammed in.
In reply to JJL:
I don't give it a second thought. With all the industrial crap being pumped out, all the cars and lorries on the road, often making pointless journeys and all the aircraft up there my flying or not flying does not make any meaningful difference at all. I know someone will come on piously telling me that every little helps but frankly not enough for me to forgo my fun and sit miserably in my hairshirt while everyone else is partying like crazy.
I don't give it a second thought. With all the industrial crap being pumped out, all the cars and lorries on the road, often making pointless journeys and all the aircraft up there my flying or not flying does not make any meaningful difference at all. I know someone will come on piously telling me that every little helps but frankly not enough for me to forgo my fun and sit miserably in my hairshirt while everyone else is partying like crazy.
15
In reply to Wiley Coyote:
I suppose that's been my subliminal view.
What's the point of carbon conservation - some other bugger will burn it anyway?
We're doomed, so why should I short-change myself just to enable someone else to benefit?
It's liek the prisoners' dilemma, except with a time axis - and as a species we have a disproportionate (thought entirely understandable) bias towards the present.
I suppose that's been my subliminal view.
What's the point of carbon conservation - some other bugger will burn it anyway?
We're doomed, so why should I short-change myself just to enable someone else to benefit?
It's liek the prisoners' dilemma, except with a time axis - and as a species we have a disproportionate (thought entirely understandable) bias towards the present.
In reply to JJL:
Disagree with this.
The people cranking out industrial pollution are saying "what's the point cutting down our carbon emissions when people are flying short haul across Europe for citybreaks once a month". The Chinese can reasonably ask why they shouldn't build enough power stations to support their population if we don't even care enough sacrifice our second holidays. At some point somebody actually has to care enough to take a lead, and stick with that lead until it becomes an example.
I'm not perfect - I try to limit myself to one return trip a year rather than cutting it out entirely - but this stuff scares the crap out of me when it becomes something that no-one is going to do anything about until someone else does something about it first.
Disagree with this.
The people cranking out industrial pollution are saying "what's the point cutting down our carbon emissions when people are flying short haul across Europe for citybreaks once a month". The Chinese can reasonably ask why they shouldn't build enough power stations to support their population if we don't even care enough sacrifice our second holidays. At some point somebody actually has to care enough to take a lead, and stick with that lead until it becomes an example.
I'm not perfect - I try to limit myself to one return trip a year rather than cutting it out entirely - but this stuff scares the crap out of me when it becomes something that no-one is going to do anything about until someone else does something about it first.
2
In reply to JJL:
It's only the same as the vegetarian argument. Stop eating meat and you're not saving any animals. Don't let that bacon go to waste
It's only the same as the vegetarian argument. Stop eating meat and you're not saving any animals. Don't let that bacon go to waste
1
In reply to JJL:
No
I don't want to go there.
> I flew to the Bregaglia this summer. I'm a bit ashamed of that now and won't do it again.
> Will you?
No
> Why?
I don't want to go there.
6
In reply to Wiley Coyote:
won't some of that pollution be from the construction of the various means of travel. Raw materials travelling round the globe, then small components etc.. back and forth, until eventually you have your boeing. The volume of raw materials used to build a runway etc.. ?
I see the bigger problem being a lack of use of technology, people still want face to face for business, but it could easily be avoided.
> I don't give it a second thought. With all the industrial crap being pumped out, all the cars and lorries on the road,
won't some of that pollution be from the construction of the various means of travel. Raw materials travelling round the globe, then small components etc.. back and forth, until eventually you have your boeing. The volume of raw materials used to build a runway etc.. ?
I see the bigger problem being a lack of use of technology, people still want face to face for business, but it could easily be avoided.
Post edited at 08:05
In reply to summo:
Our company has loads of VC and other communication options, that are very underused, but people will still fly down to London or midlands offices for a meeting that lasts less than a morning.
> (In reply to Wiley Coyote)
>
>
> I see the bigger problem being a lack of use of technology, people still want face to face for business, but it could easily be avoided.
>
>
> I see the bigger problem being a lack of use of technology, people still want face to face for business, but it could easily be avoided.
Our company has loads of VC and other communication options, that are very underused, but people will still fly down to London or midlands offices for a meeting that lasts less than a morning.
In reply to Jim C:
In the days of only telephone stuff I can understand people saying they miss the face to face, but now you have video, plus it's costs and margin wasted on fares, hotels, subsistence etc.. they are nice jollies and folk simply won't admit they are a perk, not a necessity.
In the days of only telephone stuff I can understand people saying they miss the face to face, but now you have video, plus it's costs and margin wasted on fares, hotels, subsistence etc.. they are nice jollies and folk simply won't admit they are a perk, not a necessity.
In reply to summo:
In my experience it's a bit of both. Teleconferencing and desktop sharing we use very heavily at work. Videoconf has always struck me as a solution looking for a problem; we *can* use it (it's built into Lync) but we never actually do. And collaborative working can work very well with people in the same room.
What I think is needed is to look at commuting and its effectiveness, and stop giving people discounts for travelling 5 days a week, say. In reality, with many office type jobs, a couple of days a week in the office is sufficient. While call centre workers and the likes could work fully remotely.
Travel broadens the mind and has many benefits, as can have one off meetings in person (but only some of them) - it's the daily grind that is a very big part of the issue.
In my experience it's a bit of both. Teleconferencing and desktop sharing we use very heavily at work. Videoconf has always struck me as a solution looking for a problem; we *can* use it (it's built into Lync) but we never actually do. And collaborative working can work very well with people in the same room.
What I think is needed is to look at commuting and its effectiveness, and stop giving people discounts for travelling 5 days a week, say. In reality, with many office type jobs, a couple of days a week in the office is sufficient. While call centre workers and the likes could work fully remotely.
Travel broadens the mind and has many benefits, as can have one off meetings in person (but only some of them) - it's the daily grind that is a very big part of the issue.
Post edited at 08:17
3
In reply to JJL:
People who agonise over their carbon footprint have no idea how many aircraft, cars, trucks, trains and ships are cruising around the world churning out pollutants.
Have a look at this: http://www.flightradar24.com/29.44,-48.93/3
The USA is quiet as I post but wait until the East wakes up and then have a look at the traffic.
People who agonise over their carbon footprint have no idea how many aircraft, cars, trucks, trains and ships are cruising around the world churning out pollutants.
Have a look at this: http://www.flightradar24.com/29.44,-48.93/3
The USA is quiet as I post but wait until the East wakes up and then have a look at the traffic.
In reply to JJL:
The melting of the perma-frost is estimated to release a quantity of methane into the atmosphere equal to all the green-house effect gasses produced by human activity. It's probably too late to do much about it so I think I'll just enjoy flying to overseas destinations whilst I can !
The melting of the perma-frost is estimated to release a quantity of methane into the atmosphere equal to all the green-house effect gasses produced by human activity. It's probably too late to do much about it so I think I'll just enjoy flying to overseas destinations whilst I can !
In reply to Deviant:
According to a recent New Scientist that theory is scaremongering bull!
Chris
> The melting of the perma-frost is estimated to release a quantity of methane into the atmosphere equal to all the green-house effect gasses produced by human activity. It's probably too late to do much about it so I think I'll just enjoy flying to overseas destinations whilst I can !
According to a recent New Scientist that theory is scaremongering bull!
Chris
1
In reply to Chris Craggs:
To many, the whole concept of Global Warming is too ! I guess you believe the opinion that suits you best, cross your fingers and hope everything turns out right on the night !
> According to a recent New Scientist that theory is scaremongering bull!
> Chris
To many, the whole concept of Global Warming is too ! I guess you believe the opinion that suits you best, cross your fingers and hope everything turns out right on the night !
1
In reply to JJL:
I do fly commercially a few times a year, usually short haul to Europe. Living right out on the periphery of Europe as we do the train just isn't practical or affordable in most cases which is a shame. This year I've even resorted to taking an internal flight because I couldn't make the journey by train (Stanstead to Edinburgh after work, arriving same day) which is just ridiculous.
I also fly for fun most weeks but that's mostly solar powered.
jk
I do fly commercially a few times a year, usually short haul to Europe. Living right out on the periphery of Europe as we do the train just isn't practical or affordable in most cases which is a shame. This year I've even resorted to taking an internal flight because I couldn't make the journey by train (Stanstead to Edinburgh after work, arriving same day) which is just ridiculous.
I also fly for fun most weeks but that's mostly solar powered.
jk
In reply to Rigid Raider:
Completely the opposite, most of the people I know who agonize over their carbon footprint know only too well how f****d we are. Knowing it doesn't mean they want to be part of it.
jk
> People who agonise over their carbon footprint have no idea how many aircraft, cars, trucks, trains and ships are cruising around the world churning out pollutants.
Completely the opposite, most of the people I know who agonize over their carbon footprint know only too well how f****d we are. Knowing it doesn't mean they want to be part of it.
jk
In reply to Deviant:
There are many ways scientists are already looking to deal with global warming and past challenges always resulted in (often unexpected) solutions... humanity is pretty ingenious...I think carbon footprints, well intended as they are, will turn out to be a red herring as more urgent alternative action will be required by the time governments agree to act in the way they will need to. There are many equal level predictable threats out there such as the results of political unrest (especially if involving nuclear or bio weapons), destruction of the rain forest and very much related issues of drinking water supply. Then there are unpredictable ones...asteroids, super volcanos, super tsunamis, virulent flu. Awreness is inevitable as we are intelligent but the futility of despair is also obvious (regret for and campaign against globalised damage is a better outlet)
A good laymans coverage around some possible solutions for global warming was produced by the ever optimistic Freakanomics team... the attacks in response were fierce and this is their pretty reasonable response: to those
http://freakonomics.com/2009/10/18/global-warming-in-superfreakonomics-the-...
There are many ways scientists are already looking to deal with global warming and past challenges always resulted in (often unexpected) solutions... humanity is pretty ingenious...I think carbon footprints, well intended as they are, will turn out to be a red herring as more urgent alternative action will be required by the time governments agree to act in the way they will need to. There are many equal level predictable threats out there such as the results of political unrest (especially if involving nuclear or bio weapons), destruction of the rain forest and very much related issues of drinking water supply. Then there are unpredictable ones...asteroids, super volcanos, super tsunamis, virulent flu. Awreness is inevitable as we are intelligent but the futility of despair is also obvious (regret for and campaign against globalised damage is a better outlet)
A good laymans coverage around some possible solutions for global warming was produced by the ever optimistic Freakanomics team... the attacks in response were fierce and this is their pretty reasonable response: to those
http://freakonomics.com/2009/10/18/global-warming-in-superfreakonomics-the-...
Post edited at 09:06
In reply to JJL:
Planes are just a cinema in the sky to me. If I didn't fly I wouldn't have seen Wolf of Wall Street , American Sniper or Captain Philips.
Planes are just a cinema in the sky to me. If I didn't fly I wouldn't have seen Wolf of Wall Street , American Sniper or Captain Philips.
1
1
In reply to Deviant:
Yes, that, or try to keep up-to-date with the current theories,
Chris
> To many, the whole concept of Global Warming is too ! I guess you believe the opinion that suits you best, cross your fingers and hope everything turns out right on the night !
Yes, that, or try to keep up-to-date with the current theories,
Chris
2
1
In reply to JJL:
Not disputing that. Just pointing out that doing something like living in the england and doing a road trip to scotland is not necessarily any greener than flying abroad.
Not disputing that. Just pointing out that doing something like living in the england and doing a road trip to scotland is not necessarily any greener than flying abroad.
In reply to Neil Williams:
Would agree home working etc., but that's obsession with many work places, if you can't see your staff they can't be working. Which prove just how useless their managers must be, if they can't tell from a person's output if they are active or not, when home working.
Lots of tech is invented before the real use is discovered. VC is under used, but then so is email, how much stuff is still posted, so much obsession with Saturday post, 2 deliveries etc..
Would agree home working etc., but that's obsession with many work places, if you can't see your staff they can't be working. Which prove just how useless their managers must be, if they can't tell from a person's output if they are active or not, when home working.
Lots of tech is invented before the real use is discovered. VC is under used, but then so is email, how much stuff is still posted, so much obsession with Saturday post, 2 deliveries etc..
1
In reply to Deviant:
I guess it falls into two camps, those who see the changes in the past 2 decades and those with their head in sand.
It's not a question of what suits you best, it would be better for everyone on the planet for there were to be no global warming / climate change. There are very few winners, if any in the long run. People might make some money selling products that mitigate etc.. but then they still need to live in a rapidly changing world.
> To many, the whole concept of Global Warming is too ! I guess you believe the opinion that suits you best, cross your fingers and hope everything turns out right on the night !
I guess it falls into two camps, those who see the changes in the past 2 decades and those with their head in sand.
It's not a question of what suits you best, it would be better for everyone on the planet for there were to be no global warming / climate change. There are very few winners, if any in the long run. People might make some money selling products that mitigate etc.. but then they still need to live in a rapidly changing world.
In reply to Thickhead:
That's lovely. Where I live some days look like the Battle of Britain overhead. I recall with fondness the Eyjafjallajökull eruption...
> Its nice where I live though to look up at a clear blue sky and never see a vapour trail.
That's lovely. Where I live some days look like the Battle of Britain overhead. I recall with fondness the Eyjafjallajökull eruption...
In reply to summo:
Videoconferencing is totally pointless; it really doesn't help to see a set of passport sized mugshots of your colleagues. Screen sharing (of presentations, demos etc) is the actual useful use-case. Video calling has been a solution looking for a problem since the 1980s.
A more immersive videoconferencing setup with big screens might be useful, but that removes the home-working aspect.
Videoconferencing is totally pointless; it really doesn't help to see a set of passport sized mugshots of your colleagues. Screen sharing (of presentations, demos etc) is the actual useful use-case. Video calling has been a solution looking for a problem since the 1980s.
A more immersive videoconferencing setup with big screens might be useful, but that removes the home-working aspect.
1
In reply to summo:
Not an awful lot of important paperwork is posted to me. The post for me now consists mostly of deliveries of physical items I need rather than things that could be sent electronically. Saturday post, well, for many it saves a pickup run to the depot.
> Lots of tech is invented before the real use is discovered. VC is under used, but then so is email, how much stuff is still posted, so much obsession with Saturday post, 2 deliveries etc..
Not an awful lot of important paperwork is posted to me. The post for me now consists mostly of deliveries of physical items I need rather than things that could be sent electronically. Saturday post, well, for many it saves a pickup run to the depot.
In reply to Chris Craggs:
A theory is not the Gospel truth !
The latest theories will inevitably be superceded by others and when the truth finally emerges it will probably be too late !
> Yes, that, or try to keep up-to-date with the current theories,
> Chris
A theory is not the Gospel truth !
The latest theories will inevitably be superceded by others and when the truth finally emerges it will probably be too late !
1
In reply to JJL:
For me the solution to global warming is the increased use of technology rather than what some people would prefer which is a return to the stone age.
Look, for example, at nuclear fusion research. The money put into this is very "token", if governments really took this and other green technologies seriously and gave some "real" money, maybe we'd get somewhere.
In fact, the technology to produce a 100% green world already exists if only governments and companies took it seriously. In fact the only place i can think of where green tech doesn't exist is air and sea transport.
For me the solution to global warming is the increased use of technology rather than what some people would prefer which is a return to the stone age.
Look, for example, at nuclear fusion research. The money put into this is very "token", if governments really took this and other green technologies seriously and gave some "real" money, maybe we'd get somewhere.
In fact, the technology to produce a 100% green world already exists if only governments and companies took it seriously. In fact the only place i can think of where green tech doesn't exist is air and sea transport.
Post edited at 10:34
In reply to Neil Williams:
For the record I use international videoconferencing all the time and find it much more effective than use of the phone. I use a second screen and sometimes a third (with print-outs as required) for any shared info. Meeting people in person you are going to work closely with in an international relationship is almost essential but thereafter I dont need to fly a third of the way round the world many times a year (like we used to).
For the record I use international videoconferencing all the time and find it much more effective than use of the phone. I use a second screen and sometimes a third (with print-outs as required) for any shared info. Meeting people in person you are going to work closely with in an international relationship is almost essential but thereafter I dont need to fly a third of the way round the world many times a year (like we used to).
1
In reply to Deviant:
That's right.
Inevitably superseded - really?
Chris
> A theory is not the Gospel truth !
That's right.
> The latest theories will inevitably be superceded by others and when the truth finally emerges it will probably be too late !
Inevitably superseded - really?
Chris
1
In reply to phja:
I think there's a specific problem with air travel. It's difficult to come up with a fuel other than kerosene with the required density of energy. Most of the alternatives that would work for cars, trains etc are just too heavy and short range.
The only even theoretically viable solution would be biofuels which I suspect wouldn't be very popular even with green activists since they would (a) be produced from GMOs, and (b) require intensive production in algal ponds the size of Brazil.
> In fact, the technology to produce a 100% green world already exists if only governments and companies took it seriously. In fact the only place i can think of where green tech doesn't exist is air and sea transport.
I think there's a specific problem with air travel. It's difficult to come up with a fuel other than kerosene with the required density of energy. Most of the alternatives that would work for cars, trains etc are just too heavy and short range.
The only even theoretically viable solution would be biofuels which I suspect wouldn't be very popular even with green activists since they would (a) be produced from GMOs, and (b) require intensive production in algal ponds the size of Brazil.
In reply to Deviant:
Most of the solutions discussed in the freakonomics web link are pretty fast acting albeit not magic bullets. Its better to not create the problem in the first place, but 'too late' in the way some people mean is just so much guff. It will be too late for some people and some habitats but the damage by deforestation and war is much larger at the moment and much more urgent in my view.
I was taught by clever honest people that the world would have run out of oil by now and yet the current reserves are close to a hundred years at current use and in addition we have alternative methods of producing oil if the price starts to go much over $100 a barrel again.
Most of the solutions discussed in the freakonomics web link are pretty fast acting albeit not magic bullets. Its better to not create the problem in the first place, but 'too late' in the way some people mean is just so much guff. It will be too late for some people and some habitats but the damage by deforestation and war is much larger at the moment and much more urgent in my view.
I was taught by clever honest people that the world would have run out of oil by now and yet the current reserves are close to a hundred years at current use and in addition we have alternative methods of producing oil if the price starts to go much over $100 a barrel again.
Post edited at 10:44
In reply to JJL:
I think the only hope is technology and government. Private companies will do what gets profits and so will not develop green tech unless they sense the wind turning.
I believe the hydrogen economy is one worth going for big time and i think it's an exciting prospect.
While air travel is bad and shipping even worse i think the world would be fine if they are the only carbon producing areas of the economy. We can ofset these emissions with tree planting etc. The easiest place to start is cars and power stations...we have to do this soon.
I think the only hope is technology and government. Private companies will do what gets profits and so will not develop green tech unless they sense the wind turning.
I believe the hydrogen economy is one worth going for big time and i think it's an exciting prospect.
While air travel is bad and shipping even worse i think the world would be fine if they are the only carbon producing areas of the economy. We can ofset these emissions with tree planting etc. The easiest place to start is cars and power stations...we have to do this soon.
In reply to Deviant:
You really need to do some reading on what constitutes and differentiates theory, opinion, fact, and hypothesis.
You really need to do some reading on what constitutes and differentiates theory, opinion, fact, and hypothesis.
1
In reply to Dave Garnett:
If we accept aviation is here to stay and it probably is unless something really dramatic happens then you're right, biofuels are probably the only realistic energy storage solution for low carbon long haul flight.
jk
> I think there's a specific problem with air travel. It's difficult to come up with a fuel other than kerosene with the required density of energy. Most of the alternatives that would work for cars, trains etc are just too heavy and short range.
> The only even theoretically viable solution would be biofuels which I suspect wouldn't be very popular even with green activists since they would (a) be produced from GMOs, and (b) require intensive production in algal ponds the size of Brazil.
> The only even theoretically viable solution would be biofuels which I suspect wouldn't be very popular even with green activists since they would (a) be produced from GMOs, and (b) require intensive production in algal ponds the size of Brazil.
If we accept aviation is here to stay and it probably is unless something really dramatic happens then you're right, biofuels are probably the only realistic energy storage solution for low carbon long haul flight.
jk
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:
Is that arguing for or against air travel?
Either way, they'll crop up on ITV2 eventually.
> If I didn't fly I wouldn't have seen Wolf of Wall Street , American Sniper or Captain Philips.
Is that arguing for or against air travel?
Either way, they'll crop up on ITV2 eventually.
1
In reply to phja:
https://www.google.com/search?q=offset+carbon+tree+planting+myth&ie=utf-8&o...
It's a common myth, but it's just that, a myth.
But if you fancy a laugh in the offset myth have a read of...
http://cheatneutral.com/
https://www.google.com/search?q=offset+carbon+tree+planting+myth&ie=utf-8&o...
It's a common myth, but it's just that, a myth.
But if you fancy a laugh in the offset myth have a read of...
http://cheatneutral.com/
Post edited at 11:55
In reply to Timmd:
Iceland is amazing, but it will break your wallet. If it makes you feel better about your carbon foot print, Iceland's electricity is almost entirely Geothermal, a tenuous benefit mind.
Iceland is amazing, but it will break your wallet. If it makes you feel better about your carbon foot print, Iceland's electricity is almost entirely Geothermal, a tenuous benefit mind.
In reply to phja:
Green technology is a major factor in aviation. The drop in oil prices will sadly curtail the advances slightly, but the Aerospace industry as a whole always look to make savings on fuel consumption any way they can. Granted this is profit driven, but I recon that is what is needed to drive green technology. It won't happen until it is absolutely too late or unless there is money to be made/saved.
> I think the only hope is technology and government. Private companies will do what gets profits and so will not develop green tech unless they sense the wind turning.
Green technology is a major factor in aviation. The drop in oil prices will sadly curtail the advances slightly, but the Aerospace industry as a whole always look to make savings on fuel consumption any way they can. Granted this is profit driven, but I recon that is what is needed to drive green technology. It won't happen until it is absolutely too late or unless there is money to be made/saved.
In reply to JayPee630:
As an economist, I probably do !
> You really need to do some reading on what constitutes and differentiates theory, opinion, fact, and hypothesis.
As an economist, I probably do !
1
In reply to Removed UserBwox:
I doubt they will, ITV2 seems to stuck in a perpetual loop of only showing the Bourne Trilogy
> Either way, they'll crop up on ITV2 eventually.
I doubt they will, ITV2 seems to stuck in a perpetual loop of only showing the Bourne Trilogy
1
In reply to Timarzi:
Gliding in a very flat part of the world, the launch does use a bit of fuel but after that it's all about the thermals.
jk
> Solar powered flying? What is that?
Gliding in a very flat part of the world, the launch does use a bit of fuel but after that it's all about the thermals.
jk
In reply to JJL:
I fly when I can, I don't really find myself justifying it from an environmental perspective but I can be pretty sure that if I were to try and calculate my impact on the environment I would find my lifestyle is pretty enviro friendly and I can make a few guilt free flights.
For a start, I have an old yet fairly well maintained and efficient car that doesn't get used a great deal because I cycle around a lot. I don't buy much in the way of new stuff like TVs gadgets and computers; I haven't even got a TV and my stereo is a mix of old and second hand parts, much of my leisure gear is old or second hand. My house is relatively well insulated with a modern efficient boiler and is heated minimally and I have energy efficient lighting so my combined fuel bills (a good measure of energy use) as ~£400 pa. Also, my house furnishings are quite old (I think the living room carpet is probably older than me) so the production energy/year of use is now pretty small.
I think the only reasonable way I could improve this would be to have a few more people living in the house to share the heating and possibly get a bike that would take panniers so I could use the bike for more utilitarian uses.
I've flown a fair bit within Europe but I'm thinking about a long haul trip sometime soon.
I fly when I can, I don't really find myself justifying it from an environmental perspective but I can be pretty sure that if I were to try and calculate my impact on the environment I would find my lifestyle is pretty enviro friendly and I can make a few guilt free flights.
For a start, I have an old yet fairly well maintained and efficient car that doesn't get used a great deal because I cycle around a lot. I don't buy much in the way of new stuff like TVs gadgets and computers; I haven't even got a TV and my stereo is a mix of old and second hand parts, much of my leisure gear is old or second hand. My house is relatively well insulated with a modern efficient boiler and is heated minimally and I have energy efficient lighting so my combined fuel bills (a good measure of energy use) as ~£400 pa. Also, my house furnishings are quite old (I think the living room carpet is probably older than me) so the production energy/year of use is now pretty small.
I think the only reasonable way I could improve this would be to have a few more people living in the house to share the heating and possibly get a bike that would take panniers so I could use the bike for more utilitarian uses.
I've flown a fair bit within Europe but I'm thinking about a long haul trip sometime soon.
In reply to JJL:
https://www.capgemini.com/blog/sustainability-blog/2012/09/tea-bags-and-jet...
You may find that interesting
https://www.capgemini.com/blog/sustainability-blog/2012/09/tea-bags-and-jet...
You may find that interesting
In reply to jkarran:
OK. I will think about it. I was worried I was missing out on some fun I hadn't heard of.
OK. I will think about it. I was worried I was missing out on some fun I hadn't heard of.
In reply to Wiley Coyote:
I guess it's about what helps you to sleep at night, or feel at peace, rather than wearing a hair shirt. Ever since I could walk I've been going out on walks, and have always loved being outside, and I feel like I'm 'a part of' the natural world, apparently that's usual if children are able to go outside and experience nature before age 6 or 7 - according to a Forest Schools trainer I know, which is what happened with me when I was developing (due to my childhood home being within smelling distance of the Peak District on certain days).
Incidentally China seems to be making big steps towards become less carbon reliant, and the-bigger-picture way of looking at things seems to be that people thinking of their carbon footprints is only a short term phase, until the systems upon which society relies to function eventually move away from fossil fuels for their energy.
Any hair-shirt-ness is hopefully just an intermediary phase (or else we're screwed, I reckon).
> I don't give it a second thought. With all the industrial crap being pumped out, all the cars and lorries on the road, often making pointless journeys and all the aircraft up there my flying or not flying does not make any meaningful difference at all. I know someone will come on piously telling me that every little helps but frankly not enough for me to forgo my fun and sit miserably in my hairshirt while everyone else is partying like crazy.
I guess it's about what helps you to sleep at night, or feel at peace, rather than wearing a hair shirt. Ever since I could walk I've been going out on walks, and have always loved being outside, and I feel like I'm 'a part of' the natural world, apparently that's usual if children are able to go outside and experience nature before age 6 or 7 - according to a Forest Schools trainer I know, which is what happened with me when I was developing (due to my childhood home being within smelling distance of the Peak District on certain days).
Incidentally China seems to be making big steps towards become less carbon reliant, and the-bigger-picture way of looking at things seems to be that people thinking of their carbon footprints is only a short term phase, until the systems upon which society relies to function eventually move away from fossil fuels for their energy.
Any hair-shirt-ness is hopefully just an intermediary phase (or else we're screwed, I reckon).
Post edited at 14:26
In reply to jkarran:
I have looked at it. I thought you meant hang gliding. I think I will give proper gliding a go. At least until I can afford a plane (don't tell Roke). Any tips? I've got as far as finding the British Gliding Association.
I have looked at it. I thought you meant hang gliding. I think I will give proper gliding a go. At least until I can afford a plane (don't tell Roke). Any tips? I've got as far as finding the British Gliding Association.
In reply to JJL:
Talking of flights, it looks like i'm going to get to fly BA1 from London City to NY. Been wanting to try this flight out
It's an Airbus A318 with just 40 business seats on it. Lands at Shannon and you clear US immigration there, then fly to JFK and sail straight through. Coming home it's direct. I love London City airport, so easy and small. Inflight entertainment is an ipad...not sure how good that is for dosing in front of a movie. Still nearest thing I will ever get to flying in a private jet.
Talking of flights, it looks like i'm going to get to fly BA1 from London City to NY. Been wanting to try this flight out
It's an Airbus A318 with just 40 business seats on it. Lands at Shannon and you clear US immigration there, then fly to JFK and sail straight through. Coming home it's direct. I love London City airport, so easy and small. Inflight entertainment is an ipad...not sure how good that is for dosing in front of a movie. Still nearest thing I will ever get to flying in a private jet.
In reply to Timarzi:
The BGA will have a list of your local clubs. I joined the closest which suits me as I'm lazy but it's worth checking they have plenty of instructors, scheduled flying days a reasonable sized fleet of 2 seat gliders and fly year round. Winter can be good for training, it's generally less busy.
I'd go check a couple of local clubs out on a flying day, meet some folk, have a look around then take trial membership of the one that has the location/dates/prices/set-up you like best and make good use of it.
A club that has and regularly uses their winch will prove much cheaper for training with a launch costing a few quid rather than £20 or 30. Training is basically all about take off, circuit and landing which the winch is perfect for. Sixty or so flights to go solo seems a reasonable estimate, it is quite variable though. A club with a ridge site will likely allow for longer flights during the winter months, not essential but worth a thought. That said, longer flights also mean longer queues for club aircraft, less launches per day.
It's a club activity, you're expected to turn up and help out at at least one end of the day unpacking or repacking hangars. People that routinely turn up late and leave early tend to get overlooked when gliders and launches are being allocated.
jk
The BGA will have a list of your local clubs. I joined the closest which suits me as I'm lazy but it's worth checking they have plenty of instructors, scheduled flying days a reasonable sized fleet of 2 seat gliders and fly year round. Winter can be good for training, it's generally less busy.
I'd go check a couple of local clubs out on a flying day, meet some folk, have a look around then take trial membership of the one that has the location/dates/prices/set-up you like best and make good use of it.
A club that has and regularly uses their winch will prove much cheaper for training with a launch costing a few quid rather than £20 or 30. Training is basically all about take off, circuit and landing which the winch is perfect for. Sixty or so flights to go solo seems a reasonable estimate, it is quite variable though. A club with a ridge site will likely allow for longer flights during the winter months, not essential but worth a thought. That said, longer flights also mean longer queues for club aircraft, less launches per day.
It's a club activity, you're expected to turn up and help out at at least one end of the day unpacking or repacking hangars. People that routinely turn up late and leave early tend to get overlooked when gliders and launches are being allocated.
jk
1
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...