Cut greenhouse gas emissions from air travel and live according to your values while still enjoying life, connecting with family & growing professionally.
One of the hardest descions my wife and I had to make was to forego flying unless it was a family necessity or annual CCL conference in Wash DC. And now even the latter is under consideration for elimination. Isn't that what retirement is for? Travel and see the world. But we do have memories similar to Jim's when we lived in Idaho Falls and would take off and drive to Yellowstone and the Sawtooths. Fabulous backcountry and truly great outdoors.
Great question: “What is retirement for?” There is another angle of having time to explore your values and align your actions with your values when there is no “company”, no “client”, no “boss”… handing out assignments and judging your actions.
I’ve found a lot of folks in my age bracket and older feel entitled to their over seas trips, reasoning that they’ve worked hard and looked forward to this in retirement. I get that. I also get that they have grandchildren. People also have a fear of missing out which drives them, along with a keeping-up-with-the jones’ attitude. You’re consider un-cool or worse if traveling abroad isn’t on your to-do list. Lack of humility in our species underlies the climate crisis. Maybe not a helpful comment, but I’ll end with sharing a new book out this week by Dr. Katherine Wilkinson, titled Climate Wayfinding. A woman with a proven track record of getting folks off the side-lines and working on climate solutions.
Less air travel is an easy choice for me. At 6’7” tall, flying is uncomfortable in the increasingly limited seating space, especially for long duration flights. In addition, I have no need to fly anywhere other than the very occasional distant vacation locale. I’ve learned to enjoy staycations more and tend toward enjoying opportunities more local during needed time off from work.
Andrea and I are taking fewer car trips than we used to, and combine errands into those fewer trips. I bought a scooter a while ago that gets around 100 mpg and use that for my commute to work and for other nearby places.
Travel is a big contributor to climate change, but it’s one area that, for many of us, lends itself well for adopting new patterns for getting around.
This post dropped just as I was reading an article about the new Airbus A350... designed to reduce fuel consumption by 25% (and therefore reducing commensurate CO2 emissions), but they also used less aluminum in construction (aluminum smelting is VERY energy-intensive). So if we can be intentional about choosing travel patterns, minimize flying AND encourage airlines to improve their bottom lines with greater fuel efficiency, we could be part of some solutions.
I agree that not all aircraft or routes have the same emissions per mile.
Choosing the lowest emission flights is a meaningful step when you do have to fly. As long as it is not viewed as somehow eliminating the emissions.
I do know people that prioritize the lowest emission flights when choosing their airline and route instead of the lowest price or most convenient time. This is one of the strengths of screening flights on Google Flights where Google uses the Travel Impact Model (TIM) to show you the emissions from the specific flight you are choosing for each leg of your trip when you do have to fly.
One note on the aluminum. I agree that production of aluminum is energy intensive. However, the aluminum reduction comes with an increase use of carbon-fiber. This is a net positive for the life-cycle analysis, but simply not as significant as it might seam if it is implied that they simply "removed" 25% of the aluminum. Here's an article on carbon fiber environmental impacts (which are broader than climate impacts) https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00170-024-13241-3
One of the hardest descions my wife and I had to make was to forego flying unless it was a family necessity or annual CCL conference in Wash DC. And now even the latter is under consideration for elimination. Isn't that what retirement is for? Travel and see the world. But we do have memories similar to Jim's when we lived in Idaho Falls and would take off and drive to Yellowstone and the Sawtooths. Fabulous backcountry and truly great outdoors.
Great question: “What is retirement for?” There is another angle of having time to explore your values and align your actions with your values when there is no “company”, no “client”, no “boss”… handing out assignments and judging your actions.
I’ve found a lot of folks in my age bracket and older feel entitled to their over seas trips, reasoning that they’ve worked hard and looked forward to this in retirement. I get that. I also get that they have grandchildren. People also have a fear of missing out which drives them, along with a keeping-up-with-the jones’ attitude. You’re consider un-cool or worse if traveling abroad isn’t on your to-do list. Lack of humility in our species underlies the climate crisis. Maybe not a helpful comment, but I’ll end with sharing a new book out this week by Dr. Katherine Wilkinson, titled Climate Wayfinding. A woman with a proven track record of getting folks off the side-lines and working on climate solutions.
Less air travel is an easy choice for me. At 6’7” tall, flying is uncomfortable in the increasingly limited seating space, especially for long duration flights. In addition, I have no need to fly anywhere other than the very occasional distant vacation locale. I’ve learned to enjoy staycations more and tend toward enjoying opportunities more local during needed time off from work.
Andrea and I are taking fewer car trips than we used to, and combine errands into those fewer trips. I bought a scooter a while ago that gets around 100 mpg and use that for my commute to work and for other nearby places.
Travel is a big contributor to climate change, but it’s one area that, for many of us, lends itself well for adopting new patterns for getting around.
This post dropped just as I was reading an article about the new Airbus A350... designed to reduce fuel consumption by 25% (and therefore reducing commensurate CO2 emissions), but they also used less aluminum in construction (aluminum smelting is VERY energy-intensive). So if we can be intentional about choosing travel patterns, minimize flying AND encourage airlines to improve their bottom lines with greater fuel efficiency, we could be part of some solutions.
I agree that not all aircraft or routes have the same emissions per mile.
Choosing the lowest emission flights is a meaningful step when you do have to fly. As long as it is not viewed as somehow eliminating the emissions.
I do know people that prioritize the lowest emission flights when choosing their airline and route instead of the lowest price or most convenient time. This is one of the strengths of screening flights on Google Flights where Google uses the Travel Impact Model (TIM) to show you the emissions from the specific flight you are choosing for each leg of your trip when you do have to fly.
https://www.google.com/travel/flights/
One note on the aluminum. I agree that production of aluminum is energy intensive. However, the aluminum reduction comes with an increase use of carbon-fiber. This is a net positive for the life-cycle analysis, but simply not as significant as it might seam if it is implied that they simply "removed" 25% of the aluminum. Here's an article on carbon fiber environmental impacts (which are broader than climate impacts) https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00170-024-13241-3