So we all know that air travel is a huge factor in greenhouse gas emissions:
For a long trip, like a transatlantic flight on an average-size plane, each passenger is responsible for sending .39 pounds of CO2 per mile into the atmosphere, according to the World Resources Institute’s Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative. By that measure, flying direct from Denver to London and back puts about 3,600 pounds of CO2 into the atmosphere, equivalent to driving a Toyota Prius hybrid 10,000 miles.
But what are the alternatives?
The best way to reduce air travel emissions is, of course, not to fly. If a train is available and efficient, it’s always a better option, according to Jennifer Hattam, green lifestyles expert for the Sierra Club. She also recommends limiting shorter vacations to spots close to home, while saving flying for longer journeys. Another tip: Horde all your vacation days to take one long holiday instead of several shorter vacations throughout the year, involving flying.
Great. I love the Oregon coast, and I suppose I could go by train, but it wouldn’t be all that convenient or enjoyable. Not terribly expensive, though, about US$70/each. 20 gallons of gas @ US$3/gallon is cheaper, of course.
Traveling as far as Portland is only $28 for an adult, each way, not so bad, especially if you like traveling by rail and don’t need a car at the other end (in Portland you can get away with that).
How ’bout NYC? How about US$942 for 4, assuming expenses along the way, and 4 days travel time? A sleeper adds at least $600 to the fare. Oh for the shinkansen . . . lessee, Google maps makes it to be 2854 miles, so the latest and greatest Japanese trains would do it in <gulp> 8 hours. Even with a few stops added in (Chicago and Pittsburgh are part of the Amtrak routing), less than 24 hours would be amazing.
But what if I do want to take that mega-jaunt to the Old World? I suppose all but the most doctrinaire enviros would let me fly there. No train service that I am aware of (imagine a trans-oceanic rail line . . . ).
So travel by sea, perhaps? I could spend 13 days in an interior cabin from Galveston to Barcelona for $800, I guess: that’s passage for one. This trip is going the wrong way, but you’d see a lot of the world. Cruise ship repositionings are another way to get a good deal, as ships are moved between markets. And if money were no object, this would rule. Still not inexpensive.
As noted a few days ago, I think one of the biggest changes from the end of the fossil fuel era will be the world getting larger again. The elimination of distance for people, their ideas, and products has been the goal of much of the innovation of the last 2 centuries. It will take some more innovation to get back to speed of sound travel without using the aviation technologies of today.